Brfly

US Condemns Israel's Ben-Gvir Amid Gaza Sanctions

· news

The Hollow Condemnation of Itamar Ben-Gvir

The recent video posted by Israeli national security minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, in which he taunts detained activists from a Gaza-bound aid flotilla, has sparked global outrage. However, US Ambassador to Israel Tom Nides joined the chorus of condemnation while overlooking his own government’s sanctions on the flotilla organisers just a day prior.

This incident is merely one example of a long-standing pattern of double standards displayed by the US towards Israel and its Palestinian subjects. Countries like Italy, France, the Netherlands, and Canada have summoned Israeli ambassadors over Ben-Gvir’s video, while the US remains silent. This disparity speaks volumes about Washington’s priorities.

Critics argue that Nides’ condemnation of Ben-Gvir rings hollow in light of the recent sanctions imposed on the flotilla organisers. Michael Omer-Man from the DAWN advocacy group notes: “We see a significant difference between the US and other Western countries, which respect international law and human rights.” He added that freedom of navigation in international waters is a fundamental concept of international law.

The US has been accused of perpetuating impunity for Israeli abuses against Palestinian detainees and their supporters from abroad. The recent sanctions on the flotilla organisers only underscore this point. Annelle Sheline, a research fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, observed: “Israel knows that as long as it has the unconditional support of the US, it will face no real consequences.” This sentiment is echoed by Omer-Man, who believes the US and Israel are increasingly out of step with the international community.

The sanctions on the flotilla organisers also raise questions about Nides’ motivations behind his condemnation of Ben-Gvir. Is this genuine outrage or a public relations stunt aimed at salvaging what little international credibility the Israeli government has left? Analysts believe the latter is more likely, given the fact that it’s election season in Israel and officials are scrambling to appear as “stately” actors.

The US administration under Donald Trump emboldened Israel’s far right through its policies. The lifting of sanctions on violent Israeli settlers, combined with the imposition of sanctions on Palestinian civil society organisations and rights groups, paints a stark picture of Washington’s priorities. Sheline noted: “Weak gestures from the Trump administration are insignificant when weighed against the billions of dollars in military aid they continued to provide to Israel.”

The latest developments underscore a harsh reality: the US is no longer seen as a credible player in promoting human rights and international law. Its actions – or lack thereof – have been met with growing skepticism by the global community, who see through the hollow condemnations of officials like Nides while sanctions are simultaneously imposed on those who dare challenge Israel’s status quo.

As the situation in Gaza continues to deteriorate, it’s clear that Washington needs to re-evaluate its policies and what it truly means to support peace and stability in the region. Until then, the world will continue to see the US as a willing enabler of Israeli abuses against Palestinians – no matter how loud its condemnations may be.

Ben-Gvir’s antics are but a symptom of a larger problem: a US policy that has long fostered impunity and emboldened Israel’s far right. As Sheline observed, “Israel knows that as long as it has the unconditional support of the US, it will face no real consequences.” This reality must be confronted by policymakers in Washington if they hope to salvage what little credibility their country has left on the world stage.

The stakes are high, and the clock is ticking. Will the US finally take a stand against Israeli abuses, or will it continue down the path of silence and complicity? Only time will tell, but one thing is certain: the world will be watching with bated breath as this saga unfolds.

Reader Views

  • CS
    Correspondent S. Tan · field correspondent

    The timing of Tom Nides' condemnation of Itamar Ben-Gvir's antics raises more questions than it answers. What's striking is the US administration's inconsistent application of international law, allowing Israel to continue pushing boundaries with impunity. Meanwhile, the recent sanctions on flotilla organisers further reinforce the notion that Washington's backing is contingent on Israel's actions. The silence from the State Department on these developments is deafening, and it's high time for a more nuanced assessment of what constitutes "support" – whether it be military aid or diplomatic cover-up.

  • CM
    Columnist M. Reid · opinion columnist

    The US condemnation of Itamar Ben-Gvir is indeed hollow when viewed in the context of Washington's own support for Israel's aggressive policies towards Gaza. However, what's equally concerning is the broader implications of this double standard. By maintaining its unconditional backing of Israel, the US inadvertently emboldens Netanyahu's government to disregard international law with impunity. But we must also acknowledge that a more nuanced approach may be needed: simply condemning Ben-Gvir won't suffice; Washington should use its leverage to push for concrete policy changes from Tel Aviv and hold Israel accountable for its actions in Gaza.

  • AD
    Analyst D. Park · policy analyst

    The US condemnation of Itamar Ben-Gvir's antics rings hollow when juxtaposed with the recent sanctions on Gaza flotilla organisers. But what's even more striking is how these actions underscore a broader crisis of accountability in the Israel-US relationship. The Quincy Institute's Annelle Sheline astutely notes that as long as the US provides unwavering support to Israel, Tel Aviv will continue to disregard international law with impunity. A crucial question arises: can Washington's diplomatic leverage be leveraged to extract meaningful concessions from Israel on issues like Palestinian prisoner rights and naval blockade policy?

Related