Okay, it seems there are some voters that are angry that Biden has not done enough for Gaza, and maybe some are gonna vote Green, whose candidate says the same.
Now, clearly the US has sent aid, and Biden has tried very hard to mediate a cease fire.
But what exactly, could he do more to ensure a cease fire?
I asked this same question in P&E, and no one had an answer.
Note that Biden does not control how much aid goes to Israel, that is Congress.
Right now, the answer is nothing. The US could, if we didn’t have a seriously dysfunctional government, provide the positive or negative incentive for Israel to consider more options, but even then not easily. Israel is in a state of war and for the nonce is saying they won’t stop. The tactics are bad but past wars have always had Israel stop from outside pressure. They’d control the middle east from Cairo to Damascus if they hadn’t been pulled back in the past. Not any better control than they have over Gaza though. There’s no solution that doesn’t include massive investment and cooperation by the other nations surrounding Israel. I think a lot of them are interested in doing that but it’s a political minefield to try.
Biden can do absolutely nothing. Those few tools a president has in normal situations (sanctions, refusing to provide weapons, the UN) are unavailable against Israel. Any criticism, no matter how justified, is met with resounding anger from both sides of the aisle, and a ton of money flowing to one’s opponents from AIPAC.
Aside from the threat of impeachment, what prevents a US president from indeed cutting off aid and weapons to Israel? It all comes down to him surviving a vote in the Senate and I don’t think 2/3 would vote to remove Biden or someone else from office for that.
I would guess the answer would be the US stopping all weapon shipments (of any sort) to Israel.
That would probably cause the Biden administration no end of problems but that is the leverage.
Throwing Israel into the mix can do surprising things to the behavior of congress. Tons of bribes campaign funding will be thrown at politicians and the media. Biden is weak right now and an act like that could easily throw the election to Trump who would do whatever the opposite of what Biden does no matter what makes sense even to a nutbag like him.
To answer the OP, while Biden couldn’t have restrained Israel from waging war in Gaza, he could have at least not gone out of his way to provide additional support, like extra bombs, etc. to Israel. He could have verbally condemned Israel and also provided aid to Gaza alone without giving extra aid to Israel. That, IMHO, is the most the pro-Palestine crowd could have expected a US president to do.
Could he, though, without agreement by Congress? It’s Congress who votes the funding.
My understanding was that it was a matter of settled law that the Executive could not not spend money appropriated by Congress. Could be wrong though, or only half-right.
I think this goes to the never ending battle between the executive and the legislature. The legislature says do “X” but the executive needs to actually do it and there are a lot of ways the executive can mess with that. Also, the president is the Commander-in-Chief which gives them a lot of leeway on military matters.
Also, I think the executive is the primary route all things international take. The legislature has some role (e.g. passing treaties) but the president is the one driving that ship.
Of the armed forces. Not of the funding.
I suppose Biden has limited powers to send in the Marines without Congressional agreement. But I think pretty much everybody’s agreed that that would be a bad idea.
But if congress agrees to fund the manufacture of one million bombs can they tell the president how those bombs must be used?
It’s the impoundment issue: can the Prez refuse to spend money authorized by Congress, for a specific purpose?
Tricky Dick used to do that when he disagreed with Congress’s spending priorities. Congress passed the Impoundment Act, which said the the Prez could not refuse to spend money, unless Congress in turn allowed it.
Guess who violated the act while in office? DJT, when he refused to send aid to Ukraine.
As Commander in Chief, Biden could have NOT ordered U.S. aircraft carriers to the Eastern Mediterrean as he did.
(I am happy that he did, but he obviously didn’t have to).
I suppose it depends on how one interprets the phrase “can do”. Personally, I have no clear idea of exactly what the consequences of such actions would be for the current Biden administration, or for the chances of a Harris administration next year.
But I think it’s kind of a moot point, because it’s not Biden personally who set up the decades-long political reality of the US constantly backing (and supplying weaponry for) almost all Israel’s military actions, and constantly failing to push back against Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians in any meaningful way.
I don’t take issue with anybody’s personal choice to cast some kind of protest vote against the status quo because they feel it’s the morally right thing to do. But I do think it’s rather unrealistic for anybody to expect any individual political leader to suddenly break out of a heavily entrenched status quo just because the crisis of oppression has suddenly become a lot worse.
It wasn’t any individual President who got us into this situation of permanent entanglement with all of Israel’s worst choices, and it won’t be any individual President who gets us out of it. So I think, at any rate; I would be delighted to be proved wrong on that.
Words are often just as important as actions, if not even more so.
Biden may have his hands tied by legislation and bureaucracy in terms of what he can do to limit Israel’s war. But he is totally unlimited in what his mouth can say. Biden could have verbally castigated Israel again and again, loudly and in public (while still allowing the usual US-Israel supplies to go by under the radar.) That perception could have won him a lot of pro-Palestine votes.
Biden has gone to the UN and gotten at least two ceasefires. Weapons? That is part of the budget- The House has authorized the aid, the Senate approved it, and the president signed it- as part of a big huge budget package, over which the president has no line item veto. So, no, the president has no lawful authority to countermand an aid package passed by the House.
The US Constitution. Again, Aid packages are part of the budget- the House makes the budget,the Senate approved it, and the president signed it- as part of a big huge budget package, over which the president has no line item veto. So, no, the president has no lawful authority to countermand an aid package passed by the House.
Cant do it.
Biden did get an aid package to Gaza in the budget. Again, the House does the budget, not the President.
No, he could not- except temporarily- which Biden did do once.
Right. Biden does have the authority to temporarily stop the shipment- which he did once.
And lost him the Jewish vote. Note that the US did back two UN ceasefire agreements.
But even if Biden went on a daily rant- Netanyahu would ignore him anyway. So, all it would do is lose him votes.
I do feel sorry for the palestinian people- Netanyahu doesnt give a crap about them, and neither does Hamas. The only people who seem to care are US college students and progressives.
Why not?
The courts seem really keen on a unitary executive and are not likely to stop him.
Impeachment is a near impossibility these days.
So what happens if the president slow-rolls aid to Israel?
Note: I am NOT saying this should be done. Just curious why it can’t be done?
The Office does not have the constitutional authority to do so.
see this post-
Now, do you mean Biden can go rogue, and go outside the law? Joe Biden can not do that, It is not in his nature, and Yeah, he’d be impeached (but likely not convicted) and the Courts would overrule him.
Trump violated the emoluments clause in the constitution. Supreme law of the land.
What happened with that? (Spoiler: Nothing whatsoever)
Put another way, what would congress do if the president just ignored that bit? A lot of bloviating I suspect but nothing more.