Biden mobilizes, again, to calm Mideast even as he wrangles with Netanyahu

When President Joe Biden assembled a coalition of countries to help Israel thwart an Iranian aerial onslaught in April, the White House had high hopes the mission might reap something of a twofer from Israel.

First, the demonstrated value of international partners might dissuade Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu from pursuing the increasingly go-it-alone course he was taking in Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza, officials suggested.

And second, Mr. Biden’s willingness to deploy significant military resources for Israel’s defense – and his “no daylight” public support for Israel – might result in a reciprocal willingness to achieve the president’s priorities of avoiding a wider war in the Middle East and bringing the Gaza war to a close.

But now, as the White House works around the clock once again to avoid a sharp escalation in the Middle East and a wider war that no party seems to want, there is also deep frustration with Mr. Netanyahu and faltering trust in his willingness to cooperate on quieting the region.

Instead of just “taking the win,” as Mr. Biden advised after Iran’s coordinated attack was successfully rebuffed, Mr. Netanyahu has pursued a course that has heightened tensions to the brink of war. Moreover, that course has stymied Mr. Biden’s demands that a cease-fire be reached in Gaza this month.

With Iran and Hezbollah, Tehran’s well-armed proxy in Lebanon, promising retaliation for last week’s assassinations of Hamas political leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran and Hezbollah military commander Fouad Shukur in Beirut, Israelis are living with the threat of a devastating attack coming at any moment.

In response to the daily assertions that retaliation is coming, the Israeli government has advised the United States that any targeting of civilians will be met with a “disproportionate” response, U.S. officials have said.

Public versus private

In this tense climate, the U.S. is not wavering from its full support for Israeli security, and is positioning additional military assets in the region and coordinating with the coalition of countries that sprang to Israel’s defense in April.

But privately U.S. officials express frustration that, as they see it, Israel has been taking actions with the effect of undermining U.S. goals – while knowing the U.S. will come to its defense if those actions provoke a military response.

Indeed, Mr. Biden’s exasperation with Mr. Netanyahu exploded in a recent phone call between the two, when the president reportedly shouted at the Israeli prime minister and told him in heated undiplomatic terms to stop misleading him.

In this context, the Biden administration’s nonstop diplomatic efforts might seem doomed.

But diplomacy does still have a chance, some regional analysts say: Not solely or perhaps even primarily as a manifestation of U.S. power in the region, but because no one, least of all Iran, wants to trigger a costly war.

“All the indications are that no one – not Iran, not Hezbollah, not Israel – wants a devastating and unpredictable war right now,” says Hanin Ghaddar, Friedmann fellow in Middle East affairs at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

“If Iran ends up responding in a way that Israel can tolerate,” she adds, “then I think there is still room for a bigger role for diplomacy.”

Others say the U.S. must press forward with diplomacy to avert escalation – with the long-term goal being to allow the U.S. to reduce its Middle East footprint.

“Policymakers in Washington should do everything possible to prevent the outbreak of a full-scale regional war” in the Middle East, says Michael DiMino, a former CIA counterterrorism officer who is now a fellow at Defense Priorities, a Washington think tank promoting restraint in U.S. foreign policy.

Such a conflict “would not serve the security interests of the United States, Israel, or the world,” he says.

Diplomacy’s impact?

No one thinks Iran and Hezbollah can be dissuaded from taking some retaliatory action in response to the assassinations. But days have gone by without Iranian missiles or attack drones flying – after Secretary of State Antony Blinken told his G7 counterparts Sunday to expect the retaliation within 48 hours. And that suggests to some administration officials and experts that intense diplomatic contacts and back-channel communications with Iran are slowing and modifying the response.

At an emergency meeting Wednesday of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, Iran’s acting Foreign Minister Ali Bagheri Kani said his country would respond to Mr. Haniyeh’s killing on its territory at “the right time” and in an “appropriate” manner.

And in a speech Tuesday commemorating Mr. Shukur, Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah said his organization is “committed to responding” to the recent assassinations. Insisting “it will come,” he also asserted that “Israel’s week-long wait is part of the punishment.”

But Ms. Ghaddar says there are good reasons to think every party involved wants to avoid an unpredictable escalation right now.

“Iran cannot afford a war,” she says, underscoring the country’s weak economy, a government still in formation after recent elections, and a national priority of protecting an advancing nuclear program.

Hezbollah, she adds, is keen to end what she calls the “daily” erosion of its military officer corps in Israeli attacks.

“They are desperate to stop the bleeding,” she says. “So I would think they will go with a response that will be enough to tell their people they avenged these deaths,” she adds, “but one that will still leave room for diplomacy to get to a cease-fire.”

Noting further that Mr. Nasrallah has said Hezbollah would act alone if it had to, she says, “Especially in light of Israel’s preemptive actions, they don’t have the luxury of delaying it [retaliation] much longer.”

As for Israel, she says, “Despite the boldness we’ve seen recently, they don’t want a wider war either.

“They’ve been at war for 10 months now,” she adds, “so they want to restock and rest up before they would go into Lebanon” after Hezbollah.

A focus on Gaza

Even amid the nervous waiting game, U.S. officials continue to insist that a Gaza cease-fire remains just inches away, as Mr. Blinken said again this week.

Speaking with reporters Wednesday, White House national security spokesman John Kirby said that despite rising tensions, the parties to the cease-fire negotiations “are as close as we think we have ever been” to a deal.

Mr. Kirby refused to comment on recent reports of Mr. Biden’s frustrations with Mr. Netanyahu or White House suspicions that the Israeli leader is playing on the president’s loyalties to Israel while offering nothing in return.

But he did venture to cast the blame for the lack of a cease-fire in Gaza on both Hamas and Israel, despite White House insistence months ago that Israel was fully on board.

“The deal hasn’t been accepted,” Mr. Kirby said, “because neither side has signed up to it.”