Israel committed genocide during its war on Gaza
Afrasianet - Dr. Mazen Al Najjar - After the Gaza genocide, the partisan consensus over U.S.-Israeli relations is crumbling. As the legal debate has expanded, the political underpinnings of unconditional U.S. military support for Israel have entered its most serious crisis in decades.
There is a generational American divide over Israel. The divide was most pronounced on the left and also developed on the right. Public opinion polls show a steady decline in support for Israel even among the most pro-Israel evangelicals. Israel's war on Gaza, the horrific images of destruction, genocide, and the deaths of thousands of children, alienated Americans. Half of Republicans, under the age of 50, have a negative view of Israel. But the most notable shift has occurred within the Democratic Party.
Recently, Vice President J.D. Vance stated that Israel is "currently losing the battle of American public opinion," and that he knows "beyond a shadow of a shadow" that Israeli government figures are paying influencers to manipulate public opinion, directing U.S. policy to continue the war against Iran, personally attacking him, tarnishing his image and accusing him of anti-Semitism.
The American thinker Dan Steinbock notes that U.S. support for Israel has been based for decades on one of Washington's strongest partisan assumptions: military aid is an unchangeable strategic necessity. But Gaza has greatly weakened that consensus. Observers now see military aid to Israel as a misguided strategy and a politicized goal.
"Legal initiatives accusing U.S. officials of collusion and failure to prevent Israeli abuses have shifted the debate from politics to international courts and institutions and historical accountability".
________________
The collapse of the partisan consensus on Israel
in the context of changing voters and demographics, humanitarian concerns over Gaza, and the unprovoked conflict with Iran, more than 100 House Democrats have supported an amendment that would block billions of dollars in aid to Israel, in an unprecedented departure from previous voting patterns.
Officially, the House Democratic leadership (most notably Hakeem Jeffries) has called for a "comprehensive reset" of U.S.-Israeli relations. Senate efforts to restrict arms transfers have received significant Democratic support, reflecting growing concern about harm to civilians, international law, and Washington's responsibility.
Republicans have also become less united. While most Republican lawmakers remain supportive of Israel, figures in the "America Great Again" (MAGA) movement, influenced by opposition to foreign intervention, the "America First" principle, and the rejection of foreign aid, have become increasingly skeptical of open commitments.
Growing opposition within the movement to the U.S. arms transfers has shown a deep ideological divide over foreign interventions. Former Georgia congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene resigned in January 2026 after a sharp rift with Trump.
While part of the Republican base supports Trump's foreign policy, a growing faction — backed by prominent figures such as Tucker Carlson, Candice Owens, and Rep. Thomas Massie — is openly opposed to the continued unconditional arms shipments.
The result, according to Steinbock, is a new political landscape: traditional pro-Israel Democrats, evangelical conservatives, progressive Democrats, libertarian Republicans, and anti-interventionist conservatives approach the issue in different ways. The debate is no longer limited to "pro-Israel vs. anti-Israel," but about the possibility of reconciling strategic interests, domestic law, international obligations, and humanitarian considerations under current politics.
From political controversy to legal challenges
Legal initiatives accusing U.S. officials of collusion and failure to prevent Israeli abuses have shifted the debate from politics to international courts and institutions and historical accountability.
The most prominent U.S. case was the "Defense of Children – Palestine vs. Biden" case, filed by Palestinian organizations, Gazans, and Palestinian Americans against President Biden, Secretary of State Antony Blinken, and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, for "collusion and failure to prevent the ongoing genocide against Gaza."
Along with human rights organizations, Josh Paul, who resigned from the State Department, and Jewish Voice for Peace have strengthened the case over arms shipments to Israel. International lawyer William Schapas led a group of researchers in the field of genocide and the Holocaust.
Prosecutors have confirmed that there has been genocide, or grave threat of genocide, against Palestinians in Gaza. They argued that America was violating its obligations under international law to prevent and not be complicit in genocide.
These U.S. failures were seen as contributing to the undermining of "established and extended norms of international law," including the Convention on the Prevention of Genocide and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
The U.S. court dismissed Palestine v. Biden and others, ruling that "with the reasonableness of Israel's conduct amounting to genocide," U.S. foreign policy is a matter for the courts. In a written decision, Justice Jeffrey White cited a preliminary ruling by the International Court of Justice that found Israel's behavior in Gaza to amount to genocide and ordered it to stop killing and injuring Palestinians.
Other initiatives have included legal and advocacy campaigns launched by Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN), warning U.S. officials that continued assistance after learning of abuses raises questions of collusion and assistance. The organization called on the ICC to investigate Biden, Blinken and Austin for violating articles 25(3)(c) and 25(3)(d) of the Rome Statute.
The crimes included specific offences in the arrest warrants issued by the court for Benjamin Netanyahu and his former defense minister, Yoav Gallant. The organization's memorandum expanded the scope of "consequential liability" to include U.S. officials.
More recently, the organization and its partners challenged the Trump administration's actions targeting the activities of the International Criminal Court. Genocide scholar William Schapas and other legal experts have supported arguments that non-Rome State states bear responsibility if they knowingly facilitate atrocities. Legal interpretations remain the subject of media debate (albeit growing in popularity).
"After mass atrocities, the scrutiny of accountability was not limited to examining the actors in the battle, but also involved political leaders, administrators, financiers, and institutions that enable military campaigns".
________________
The Biden government's responsibility
Opponents of the Biden administration argue that responsibility is not limited to the president. They point to the decision-making circle, which includes armaments, diplomatic protection, intelligence coordination, and political messaging.
During her failed presidential campaign, Vice President Kamala Harris highlighted her willingness to take executive responsibility and support Israel's continued armament.
Despite acknowledging a "humanitarian catastrophe" in Gaza, she stated that she would not change Biden's policy, nor would she stop arming Israel.
Secretary of State Antony Blinken's role was crucial, as he was Biden's right-hand man in the Middle East and led (often unsuccessful) diplomatic efforts in the region. His department is tasked with diplomatic relations, arms proclaims, and the enforcement of human rights with foreign aid.
Steinbock monitors the reliance of U.S. military support on Biden's subordinates who failed to alert to the terms of the use of weapons provided to Israel, ignoring foreign policy standards, U.S. law, and international obligations, including Bonnie Jenkins, the undersecretary of state for armaments and international security, and Stanley Brown, assistant secretary of state for political and military affairs, who coordinates the State Department and defense on arms transfers, and monitors the Defense Trade Control Directorate.
The Pentagon played a vital role, involving Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin and senior officials because the department manages military assistance and security cooperation.
Military support for Israel relied on senior officials such as Amanda Dory, the department's undersecretary for policy, who provided strategic direction for international arms sales; and Mike Miller, director of the Defense Security Cooperation Agency.
Another official included National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, who advised the president on the implications of strategic arms transfers and ensured coordination between defense, diplomacy and intelligence. U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Linda Thomas-Greenfield played a prominent role on the U.N. Security Council, vetoing seven resolutions calling for an immediate ceasefire, humanitarian aid, and restrictions on Israel's attacks against civilians. The media face of a government has been more willing to send weapons of mass destruction than to end atrocities.
Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, despite her quiet appearance, has vowed that America can provide massive military aid to both Ukraine and Israel, allowing for a continued flow of weapons in both wars. Iran has warned of sanctions if it is found to be involved in Hamas's attack on Israel.
Trade Minister Gina Raimondo oversaw exports of dual-use technology. CIA Director William Burns and Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines have been closely linked to the Biden administration's actions on Gaza.
So, in addition to the top three and six members of the Biden administration, the network of officials subsequently includes about 6 executive heads and 10 ministers.
The legal question is not whether every official who supported political decisions bears the same responsibility, but whether individuals who knowingly pursued, facilitated, or advocated policies that allegedly contributed to illegal acts and mass atrocities should face discredited political and legal consequences.
Historically, after mass atrocities, scrutiny of accountability has not only studied the actors in the battle, but also involved political and administrative leaders, financiers, and institutions that enable military campaigns.
"The Trump administration's second administration has shifted the debate over Gaza from the issue of military support to a broader confrontation over the limits of executive power, international law, and America's responsibility for the behavior of its allies".
________________
Mass atrocities.. crimes with impunity!
Steinbock monitors the engagement of senior Biden administration officials, after the end of their term, in academia, advisory boards, and political institutions, boasting about their great achievements in the Biden administration.
With his presidency ending on January 20, 2025, Biden has been writing his memoir about the White House. Thanks to an agreement with the Creative Artists Agency, one of Hollywood's giants, he hopes to seize future opportunities. He has appeared in public a few times, as his treatment for prostate cancer continues.
After Vice President Kamala Harris was a resonant with Biden on Gaza, she moved with her family to Los Angeles. She also signed a contract with the Creative Artists Agency to focus on public speaking and publishing.
Former Secretary of State Blinken has joined the political and academic circles. He has signed a contract to publish his memoirs with the Crown, providing "candid" and "rare" flashes about Russia's invasion of Ukraine and the war in Gaza. Blinken is likely hoping for a new Democratic position in the future, or a return to lucrative private sector consulting.
Former Defense Secretary Austin returned to defense policy and consulting. Prior to joining the Biden administration, he paid millions for defense companies and worked with Blinken at Pine Island Capital Partners, a private investment firm that invests in defense companies.
He returned to the Carnegie Endowment in the summer of 2025 to co-founded a consulting firm, Clarion Strategies, with former NATO officials. As CEO and co-founder, he became a beneficiary of the global defense industry.
Jake Sullivan, a former national security adviser, joined Harvard's Kennedy School as the first Kissinger Chair Professor of Governance and World Order. After the Gaza genocide, Sullivan studies international affairs and global strategy.
Linda Thomas-Greenfield is a senior consultant at APCO Global Consulting. For decades, controversies over APCO have included: propaganda campaigns for tobacco companies, lobbying foreign governments with poor human rights records, ties to Israeli military companies, and investigations into espionage of journalists.
Gina Raimondo, former Secretary of Commerce, joined the Council on Foreign Relations as a Distinguished Fellow and co-chaired the Economic Security Task Force.
After her role in arms transfers to Israel and the Gaza genocide, Bonnie Jenkins is a visiting professor of international affairs at George Washington University. Stanley Brown, an expert on security assistance, weapons destruction, and international security operations, continues what he started during the Gaza annihilation. Janet Yellen, William Burns, and former officials have moved into advisory, institutional or private sector positions.
Proponents see these transitions as a natural democratic deliberation between government, academia, and political institutions. Critics see it as a structural problem, with officials involved in controversial foreign policy decisions facing no consequences and continuing to operate within elite networks. The transition of positions between the White House and the private sector exacerbates the problem.
According to Steinbock, the broader problem is not personal but institutional. If officials designing or implementing problematic policies are not seriously reviewed, subsequent administrations will often see that reputational costs are surpassed and that the legal risks are minimal.
"The central question remains: Will the policies of the current war become temporary exceptions or permanent precedents? If massive civilian harm, unbridled armament, collective punishment, and undermining of institutional accountability become politically acceptable, the consequences will go beyond Gaza".
________________
Trump's escalation. Gaza and International Criminal Court and Collusion
The Trump administration's second administration has shifted the debate over Gaza from the issue of military support to a broader confrontation over the limits of executive power, international law, and America's responsibility for the behavior of its allies. Opponents argue that President Donald Trump, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Secretary of Defense Pete Higgseth, U.N. Ambassador Mike Waltz, and Treasury Secretary Scott Biscent have bypassed Biden's policies by rejecting legal restrictions on U.S. and Israeli movements.
The Trump administration has supported positions that opponents see as facilitating possible war crimes in Gaza, crimes against humanity, or forced displacement.
Interestingly, Trump's proposal for U.S. control of Gaza and the resettlement of its Palestinian population, a plan that would lead to serious violations of international humanitarian law, while his supporters presented it as a reconstruction and security initiative.
While the Trump administration has pursued policies hostile to international accountability mechanisms, the confrontation with the ICC has become a central issue. Trump issued Executive Order (No. 14203) imposing sanctions and restrictions on ICC officials conducting investigations against U.S. and Israeli officials, arguing that the court acted unlawfully against the sovereignty of America and its allies.
Attacking the ICC while protecting Israeli officials accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity threatens to undermine international accountability mechanisms.
In Iran and the Middle East, the Trump administration has adopted a strategy of "maximum pressure," reimposing sanctions and waging two wars with Israel in 2025 and 2026 that have yet to end. Opponents warn of the consequences of policies of escalation and the threat of a crushing response, the expansion of regional war, infliction of severe harm on civilians, and participation in war crimes and mass atrocities.
Steinbock argues that the basic legal argument against the administration is not to hold every official who has personally committed crimes accountable, but rather that senior decision-makers could be politically and legally held accountable if they authorize, facilitate, or knowingly protect violations of international humanitarian law.
"The historical question: Will these policies be remembered as necessary exercises of state power, or as a precedent for a great power to steadily exempt itself and its allies from the rules it purports to defend?".
________________
Credibility collapse
The central question remains: Will the current war policies become temporary exceptions or permanent precedents? If massive civilian harm, unbridled armament, collective punishment, and the vile accountability of institutions become politically acceptable, the consequences will extend beyond Gaza.
Historically, America has promoted international legal standards with "strategic" exceptions. The Gaza debate reveals this contradiction more clearly than in previous conflicts, because Washington is at the same time a military resource, a supposed diplomatic protector, and a global advocate of a "rules-based order."
Therefore, Steinbock concludes, the fundamental issue is the collapse of American institutional credibility, as a result of the fatal gap between Washington's stated values and current events. There is no return to the status quo ante before Gaza.
________________
Mazen Al , Najjar - Researcher in History and Sociology.
Dr. Mazen Al-Najjar is an academic specializing in industrial management and production systems, and a writer, researcher, and translator in the fields of thought, history, and sociology, with a special interest in settlement studies, the Old Testament, American studies, and biblical (Old Testament). He has been practicing writing, translation, and academic and journalistic editing, in Arabic and English, since 1980. He has co-founded and produced a number of intellectual and academic journals, and participated in the scientific review and evaluation of a number of them. He has published hundreds of articles, studies, book presentations, and reports in newspapers, websites, and magazines on a weekly or daily basis.
________________
