The Tartan

Editorials featured in the Forum section are solely the opinions of their individual authors.

On May 10, Antony Blinken, the current Secretary of State under the Biden administration, made a presentation to Congress with the purpose of informing the representatives on the ongoing conflict with Israel in the Middle Eastern region of Gaza. Within this speech, he was tasked with summarizing the Department of State’s recent investigation on Israel’s use of the United State’s weaponry, developed by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), a subsection of the U.S. State Department that manages foreign aid to other countries. The climax of this presentation occurred when Blinken stated, “We do not currently assess that the Israeli government is prohibiting or otherwise restricting the transport or delivery of U.S. humanitarian assistance.” This statement runs in direct opposition with the USAID assessment he was expected to be summarizing. Released to Blinken and the State Department’s Refugees Bureau late April, this report depicted an contradicting view of the ongoing Israel-Hamas conflict in Gaza to that of the Secretary of State’s: one of significant and deliberate noncombatant suffering propelled by Israel’s government hindering the delivery of both food and humanitarian aid to Palestinian civilians. 

The assessment:

Within the 17 page assessment presented to Antony Blinken for him to address to Congress and the White House, produced mainly through the USAID but also consisted of the contribution of seven different bureaus within the State Department, 11 instances of violation of international humanitarian law were distinctly mentioned. As found within the USAID memo, Israel engaged in “repeatedly striking protected sites and civilian infrastructure,” “unconscionably high levels of civilian harm to military advantage,” and “killing humanitarian workers and journalists at an unprecedented rate,” as well as destroying agricultural structures, bombing hospitals, and consistently turning away trucks sent to supply both food and medicine. Despite these clear and direct statements of war crimes, both Blinken and President Biden refused to recognize that the Israeli government was breaking international law, despite the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling thus. As President Biden stated, “Contrary to allegations against Israel made by the International Court of Justice, what’s happening in Gaza is not genocide. We reject that.” Secretary Blinken was clearly provided with results presented through trustworthy and reliable organizations who made statements and evidence supporting “serious concern over non-compliance” of Israel with international humanitarian law during their siege of Gaza in the ongoing war. 

The result of Israel’s actions and paired lack of consequence within their relationship with the United States, is dire. According to ProPublica, the news source that initially leaked the USAID memo, there had been a reported stockpile of lifesaving food 30 miles from the border that would have fed 1.5 million Palestinians for five months but was blocked by Israeli forces from crossing over the border. This information was shared to Blinken at the same time the head of the United Nations World Food Program stated that Northern Gaza has entered “full-blown famine,” with nearly half of the Palestinians in the region struggling with hunger, a proportion that has increased since the late May report. This is, as USAID concludes, “one of the worst humanitarian catastrophes in the world.”

Why didn’t Blinken report on the findings?:

This past February, President Biden enacted a new requirement onto Antony Blinken, dubbed “National Security Memorandum on Safeguards and Accountability With Respect to Transferred Defense Articles and Defense Services,” or NSM-20 for short, which required the Secretary of State to “obtain credible and reliable written assurances” from recipients of U.S. weaponry that they were abiding by international humanitarian law and present his finding to the White House and Congress. This assignment, at least as presented by the president, was created to both limit civilian suffering through the use of U.S. arms overseas and provide more meaningful oversight over the purchasers of this weaponry. According to ProPublica, if a country was proven to violate International Humanitarian Law using U.S. weaponry, the U.S. would be obligated to cut off weapon shipments to this foreign actor.

As mentioned above, the United States Agency for International Development as well as seven independent bureaus found that Israel, using U.S. weapons and funding, were most likely violating International Humanitarian Law. As a result, the USAID officials wrote that because of Israel’s behavior, the U.S. should pause additional arms sales to the country. 

According to the Council on Foreign Relations, the U.S. has given the Israel’s government approximately $12.5 billion in military aid since the start of the Israel-Hamas war on Oct. 7, with $8.7 billion coming from a supplemental appropriations act in April. This statistic is excluding the additional $8.7 billion aid package that the United States has just given Israel on Sept. 26 as a response to both the violence with Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon, according to Reuters. If Blinken had been truthful with this address to Congress and properly expressed the opinion of the USAID, this most recent aid package to Israel would be hindered, delayed, or potentially not given at all. According to the Times of Israel, since Oct. 7, the U.S. has shipped more than 50,000 tons of weaponry which the Israeli military says has been “crucial for sustaining” the Israel Defense Force’s “operational capabilities during the ongoing war.” For this war to continue, for the United States to continue supporting Israel in its weaponry and siege  against Gaza, Blinken would have to present the case to Congress that Israel was not committing war crimes and breaking humanitarian law with United States weapons. Therefore, despite the direct evidence provided to him that states otherwise, Antony Blinken did just that. 

What Will Happen Now? There are a range of responses to the ProPublica leak exposing Antony Blinken’s lies. The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the nation’s largest Muslim advocacy organization, has called for Blinken’s resignation. As quoted in Al Jazeera, “When a senior American official lies to Congress in the middle of genocide so that the government can keep funding that genocide, he is deliberately flouting the law and prolonging the suffering of millions of innocent people who desperately need our government to stop funding their slaughter,” CAIR National Executive Director Nihad Awad said in a statement. Within the State Department itself, the figureheads and bureaus seem split. Reuters reported that the minority dissenting opinion of the results of the USAID assessment helps provide a more dynamic understanding of the interior politics of the Biden administration, stating, “The submissions to the memo provide the most extensive picture to date of the divisions inside the State Department over whether Israel might be violating international humanitarian law in Gaza.” As of this writing to this article, despite public outrage, there has been no public statement nor action that has occurred as a result of this information leaking condemning Antony Blinken for his actions.