On March 29, The Washington Post reported that the United States signed off on the transfer of billions of dollars’ worth of bombs and aircraft to Israel, despite publicly voicing concerns about a looming Israeli ground incursion into the overcrowded Gaza town of Rafah.
Around 1,800 MK84 2,000-pound bombs and 500 MK82 500-pound bombs were among the armaments in the handover, unnamed Pentagon and White House officials told the newspaper. Additionally, the State Department reportedly authorized the transfer of 25 F-35A aircraft and engines valued at around $2.5 billion. The transfers had originally been approved by Congress years ago as more than $3 billion in yearly military assistance pledged to the longtime ally, so did not require a new notification.
The use of U.S.-supplied bombs added to the rising death toll in Gaza, which by the end of March had topped 32,000, as per the latest figures provided by Palestinian health officials.
West Jerusalem is seeking to completely eradicate the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas, which staged an incursion from the enclave into southern Israel last October, killing around 1,200 people and capturing scores of hostages.
Last year, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) allegedly used the 2,000-pound bunker-buster bombs in strikes on Gaza’s Jabalia refugee camp and around the Al-Shati refugee camp. The Jabalia bombings alone are believed to have claimed more than 100 lives. Later, the UN slammed Israel’s actions as “disproportionate attacks that could amount to war crimes.”
Washington insists that Israel has granted the United States “credible and reliable written assurances” that any military aid provided has been used without breaching international law. “We have not found them to be in violation,” State Department spokesman Matthew Miller told the press on March 25.
However, tensions between Washington and the Jewish state were increasingly evident last week when the U.S. permitted a resolution urging for an immediate cease-fire to pass in the UN Security Council, rather than vetoing it. In turn, Israel canceled the planned visit of a high-level delegation to the U.S.
The delegation was supposed to discuss the planned Israeli military operation against Rafah, a city in the south of Gaza where more than 1.4 million of the enclave’s total population is currently taking refuge. The UN has warned that the offensive would lead to massive loss of life, and even the White House has publicly discouraged Israel from the attack.
Israel has “no choice” but to send troops into the overcrowded Palestinian city, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told U.S. lawmakers on March 27, reiterating that the remaining Hamas strongholds must be completely gotten rid of.
Axios reported on March 29 that Israel was also considering establishing a multinational military force in Gaza to take charge of local security, as per government sources. According to the report, the idea came from Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, who voiced it during his visit to Washington last week.
The proposal envisions a contingent of troops from Arab countries being deployed to Gaza for a limited transition period. Notably, this force would be charged with escorting and helping facilitate humanitarian aid deliveries, and generally maintaining law and order in the enclave. These troops are also expected to help create an alternative governing body in Gaza, one of the sources said.
Gallant reportedly asked Washington to back the initiative during his meetings with U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, Secretary of State Antony Blinken, and National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan.
Israeli officials have also reportedly been discussing the proposal in recent weeks with representatives from at least three Arab countries, one of which is Egypt.
“There is progress in promoting this initiative both in terms of the willingness of the Biden administration to discuss it and in terms of the openness of Arab countries to the idea,” one of the sources said.
Nonetheless, an unnamed Arab official from one of the countries reportedly involved in the talks said it is unlikely that foreign troops would be deployed to the region until hostilities cease. A U.S. official added that the move would require an official invitation from the Palestinian Authority in Gaza and would only come should a two-state solution materialize. This, the source noted, makes the initiative unlikely in the near future due to Israel’s resistance in recognizing Palestine as a separate state.
Netanyahu has repeatedly rejected the idea of creating a Palestinian state after the war, and lambasted the UN Security Council resolution demanding an immediate cease-fire in Gaza, saying that the move imperiled Israel’s efforts to free the Israelis held by Hamas.
In a video posted on social media on March 25, Michigan’s Republican Congressman Tim Walberg contentiously stated that Washington should not waste money on humanitarian aid for civilians in Gaza or Ukraine, and instead should concentrate on supporting Israel’s and Kyiv’s war efforts to attain “quick” victories.
Furthermore, the congressman criticized Joe Biden’s policies, telling a small audience that the U.S. should spend Gaza aid money on supporting Israel, which he labeled Washington’s “greatest ally, arguably, anywhere in the world.”
“We shouldn’t be spending a dime on humanitarian aid. It should be like Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Get it over quick,” Walberg could be heard saying.
“The same should be in Ukraine. Defeat Putin quickly. Instead [of] 80% in Ukraine being used for humanitarian purposes, it should be 80-100% to wipe out Russian forces,” he added, per a CNN transcript.
After the statements went viral, Walberg claimed that his words were misreported and misinterpreted, arguing that he was merely speaking metaphorically and did not champion the actual use of nuclear weapons.
“In a shortened clip, I used a metaphor to convey the need for both Israel and Ukraine to win their wars as swiftly as possible, without putting American troops in harm’s way,” Walberg said in a statement posted on X (formerly Twitter) on March 31.
“The use of this metaphor, along with the removal of context, distorted my message, but I fully stand by these beliefs and stand by our allies,” he added, arguing that the quicker these conflicts end, the “fewer innocent lives will be caught in the crossfire.”
