The US and its allies shared a brief moment of optimism on Wednesday as they unveiled a three-week cease-fire proposal to halt the violence between Israel and Hezbollah.
It didn’t last long.
Hours after introducing the proposal – amid positive signals from Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations – the US came crashing up against opposition from a leader who has repeatedly dashed US hopes to ease the turmoil in the Middle East: Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his government.
“There will be no cease-fire,” Foreign Minister Israel Katz wrote on X. Soon after, Netanyahu landed in New York and said Israel would keep up its fight against Hezbollah. While in flight, his office released a photo that purported to show him ordering a strike on a Hezbollah commander.
The symbolism of that image could not have been any more potent. Yet despite the rejections, White House spokesman John Kirby insisted that there were still “active discussions” with the Israelis about the cease-fire.
“It’s not clear to us that from a practical perspective, that there isn’t cause for us to continue to have these conversations with the Israelis,” Kirby said.
The contradictory messaging – the US insisting Israel is considering its proposal, and Israel insisting it’s not – further perpetuated a trend that’s come to define the conflict and raised fresh questions about the US strategy to try to end it.
Israel’s rejection bore strong echoes of a dialog that revolved around the bid for a cease-fire to halt the fighting between Israel and Hamas in the Gaza Strip nearly a year after the militant group’s Oct. 7 attack.
Repeatedly, the US has said Israel was onboard with its plan and an accord was close, only for Netanyahu and his government to say they don’t see a cease-fire coming anytime soon.
Experts, analysts and government officials argue that for whatever the flaws of the strategy, the Biden administration has no choice but to continue. They suggested that the three-week cease-fire plan for Lebanon, with its dozen signatories along with the EU, may have been meant as a signal to Israel.
“I see this as critical US leadership maximally leveraging diplomatic alliances to sharpen Israeli understanding and appreciation of the costs of proceeding unilaterally,” said Mara Rudman, who worked on Middle East issues during the Clinton and Obama administrations. “It will be heard and perhaps needs to sink in.”
Before unveiling the cease-fire, the US, France and others marshaled a broad coalition to try and push the process forward. But now both US and French officials appear to be effectively ignoring Netanyahu’s rejection in the hope that he will come around.
Speaking in Ottawa on Thursday, French President Emmanuel Macron said Netanyahu would be making a mistake by rejecting the Lebanon plan because it would make him responsible for “an escalation far beyond that which no one would be able to control.”
That doesn’t account for the pressure Netanyahu is coming under at home. Tens of thousands of Israelis have been displaced from areas near the Lebanese border and are clamoring to return. But even Israel appeared to acknowledge it had overstepped. Later Thursday, Netanyahu’s office expressed appreciation for the Biden administration’s efforts and “indispensable” role.
The statement acknowledged that the US was seeking to promote a cease-fire, but stopped short of endorsing this arrangement.
Two diplomats familiar with the Biden administration approach said the impression other nations get is that the US has been repeatedly embarrassed by Israel. The diplomats, who asked not to be identified discussing private assessments, said the US sacrificed its own standing when an ally such as Israel so blatantly flouts its wishes.
The impatience with Biden’s approach may be growing. On Thursday, Senator Tim Kaine, a Virginia Democrat, said he would vote to oppose offensive weapons to Israel. He called them “an accelerant to ongoing hostilities.”
The Biden administration has had to walk a fine line between likely Democratic voters with sympathies on either side of the conflict, particularly given the razor-thin margins in swing states expected to decide the presidential election.
The US seems to believe that “merely expressing the expectation that a deal is imminent or within reach – that this will put pressure on Netanyahu,” said Khaled Elgindy, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute. “It’s like they’re trying to manifest a cease-fire into being without actually applying real pressure or using any of the vast leverage at their disposal.”
