When President Biden hung up, he had finally delivered the threat he had been refusing to make for months: Israel had to change course, he told Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, or the United States would.
But as the conversation ended on Thursday, aides to Mr. Biden said, the president had reason to hope that the message had gotten through and that he would not have to carry out his threat after all.
During the conversation, Mr. Biden outlined some specific commitments he wanted Israel to make to avoid losing support in the war against Hamas. Rather than push back, according to people briefed on the call, Mr. Netanyahu promised to announce more humanitarian aid for Gaza within hours and signaled that he would respond to Mr. Biden’s other requests in the coming days.
Mr. Netanyahu’s government followed later that night, approving the opening of a key port and another land crossing for food and other supplies. The White House expects Israel to soon issue new military procedures to avoid killing civilians and aid workers, and administration officials will be watching closely this weekend when Israeli negotiators join CIA Director William J. Burns , and Egyptian and Qatari mediators in Cairo again to broker a temporary ceasefire.
Whether it will be enough to avert the rift Mr. Biden never wanted in the first place remains uncertain. Administration officials insisted the president’s threat was not idle and that he was “very tough,” as one described him, in making his comments to Mr. Netanyahu. At the same time, officials said, Mr. Biden did not specifically threaten to limit or cut off U.S. arms supplies during the conversation, as some Democrats have urged him to do, nor did he set a deadline for Israeli action. The “or else” remained vague and undefined.
“Biden put Netanyahu to the test,” said Aaron David Miller, a longtime Middle East peace negotiator now at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. The president “doesn’t want to fight and gave him a test that he can pass, certainly on humanitarian aid and maybe on negotiations with Hamas. US redlines have a way of turning pink. The only question is: Does Netanyahu want to fight?”
At least some in Israel suspect it does not. Just as Mr. Biden can now tell anxious members of his own party that he is taking the stronger line they pushed him to take, Mr. Netanyahu may be able to use the heat from Washington to make changes that would otherwise be political problematic for him. .
“Signaling a potential shift in US policy toward Israel, President Biden has given Prime Minister Netanyahu the power to overcome right-wing radicals in his administration and secure her approval for a significant increase in humanitarian aid to Gaza,” Michael said. B. Oren, a former deputy minister under Mr. Netanyahu and Israel’s ambassador to the United States.
None of this means the two sides are certain to avoid a climactic clash. Their respective perspectives, goals, and political pressures regarding the war against Hamas differ significantly. Mr. Biden is ready to end the war as soon as possible, while Mr. Netanyahu has an interest in prolonging it. So many moments that looked like turning points in the last six months have turned out to be illusory.
But the hope in the White House is that the president may have bought himself some room to maneuver. On Friday, officials hailed Israel’s initial announcements of humanitarian aid as evidence that Mr. Biden was able to deliver.
“We have seen some welcome announcements from the Israelis,” John F. Kirby, the White House national security spokesman, told reporters on a briefing call. “They have acted on the president’s requests arising from that call. You start to see it for yourself.”
Even so, Mr Kirby was careful not to declare victory. “These were just announcements,” he said. “We have to see results. We need to see sustainable deliverables here over time. It’s not enough to just announce it, but they’ve moved on to some of the very specific requests that the president has made.”
In his only public comments after the call, Mr. Biden did little to clarify his thinking. Asked by reporters before he boarded Marine One for a trip to Baltimore if he had threatened to cut off military aid if Israel did not respond to his concerns, the president said simply: “I asked them to do what they’re doing.” But he scoffed at the idea that he might leave Israel. “Is that a serious question?” he said.
Some Republican critics accused him of doing just that. “The president’s ultimatums should go to Hamas, not Israel,” said President Mike Johnson. he wrote on social media. “Hamas has resisted a ceasefire, caused needless bloodshed and refuses to release Israeli and American hostages. Biden must not undermine our ally in the midst of an existential threat by making our support conditional.”
On the other side of the aisle, at least some Democrats were not convinced that Mr. Biden had gone far enough. Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia praised the president for persuading the Israelis to facilitate more humanitarian aid. “But this was an obvious fix that should have happened months ago,” he said in a statement.
“The current approach is not working,” he added. The Biden administration should “prioritize the transfer of defensive weapons in all arms sales to Israel, while withholding bombs and other offensive weapons that can kill and injure civilians and aid workers.”
Mr Biden’s threat to Mr Netanyahu was prompted by the killing of seven World Central Kitchen workers this week, which Mr Kirby said had left the president “shaken”. Israel forwarded the results of its investigation to the United States on Friday and removed or reprimanded five military personnel involved in the attack, but neither move satisfied critics who called for an independent investigation. Mr Kirby said US officials would “consider it carefully” before passing judgment on the Israeli investigation.
“This incident and the call between Biden and Bibi may represent a major shift in the order of priorities, with civilian protection and humanitarian aid rising higher,” said Brian Katoulis, senior fellow at the Middle East Institute, a Washington think tank. , using Mr. Netanyahu’s nickname. “But it remains to be seen what effect this will have. We’ll have to see how this all plays out in the coming weeks.”
The extent of American influence in Israel’s conduct of the war is complex. Mr Biden has repeatedly defended Israel’s right to respond to the Hamas terror attack that killed around 1,200 people on October 7. But with the reported death toll in Gaza exceeding 32,000, Mr Biden has in recent weeks increasingly complained that Israel’s military operation has been “over the top”, as he once called it.
He has particularly warned Israel not to send troops to the southern Gaza city of Rafah, where more than a million refugees are taking refuge from the war, with no credible plan to protect civilians. Mr Netanyahu has defiantly defied Mr Biden in public, saying he planned to move against Rafa to go after Hamas leaders regardless of American pressure. But nearly two months have passed and he has yet to do so, pending further consultations with the Americans.
Khaled Elgindy, a former adviser to Palestinian leaders in previous peace talks with Israelis, said Mr. Biden’s shift was notable if delayed. “The tone of the president’s statement is certainly more terse and stern than what we’ve heard in the past,” he said. The connection between US policy and Israeli changes “is very different from what we regularly hear” from Biden administration officials about not telling a sovereign state what to do.
“Well, it looks like we’re telling them what to do now,” Mr Elgindy said. “That said, it’s not clear exactly what the ‘or else’ will be. Will they really stop military aid? I have my doubts. Could they allow a more forceful ceasefire resolution’ at the UN Security Council? “Probably.”
Frank Lowenstein, a former special envoy for Middle East peace under President Barack Obama, said the killing of the World Central Kitchen workers caused a visceral reaction in Mr. Biden.
“Biden was clearly angry enough to get Bibi’s attention,” he said. “But the jury is still out on whether anything has changed for us or the Israelis. At this point, it’s still mostly rhetoric. Bibi’s political pendulum has temporarily shifted from harassing extremists in his coalition to appeasing Biden.”
But the moves announced so far, Mr. Lowenstein added, “are really babies that will not materially change the horrific conditions for civilians in Gaza. And it would be typical of Bibi to announce the minimum steps needed to avoid major consequences, and then to slow down the roll after the heat has died down.”
