The National Interest Foundation Newsletter

Issue 261, November 15, 2024

Welcome to our NIF Newsletter. In this week’s edition, we delve into Israel’s failure to comply with U.S. humanitarian access demands in Gaza, provide analysis on President-elect Trump’s picks for new administration positions and their potential policy implications, and examine the convening of world leaders for the COP29 climate change conference but with big names missing.

Editor: Bassam Tarbush

---

Israel Fails to Comply with U.S. Humanitarian Access Demands in Gaza

Israel Fails to Comply with U.S. Humanitarian Access Demands in Gaza

By Daniel Imbornoni

Earlier this week, a group of international aid organizations came out saying that Israel has failed to meet with a series of U.S. demands intended to improve humanitarian access in Gaza. Despite this finding, the U.S. government has expressed that it will continue to maintain military aid to Israel – which has been decried as yet another instance of American nonfeasance in its Israeli foreign policy. The absence of concrete and meaningful policy consequences even in light of the evaluation from impartial entities is regrettable, and has prompted humanitarian groups to call for a reduction and reassessment of U.S. military support. Equally as troubling, Israel’s failure to comply with the measures has resulted in a further deterioration of the already dire humanitarian crisis in Gaza, and has pushed parts of the territory closer to famine.

A month ago, the Biden administration sent a letter to the Israeli government stating that they had 30 days to boost access to humanitarian aid, or risk cuts to military assistance. The letter was signed by U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken and U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, and was originally privately sent to the Israeli government, but was soon leaked by journalists. The document began by referencing another letter sent by the United States back in April that would require the U.S. to continually assess the Israeli government’s adherence to humanitarian standards in Gaza. These statements were then followed by an expanded description of the scale of the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, where it was noted that Israel’s numerous evacuation orders have forced an estimated 1.7 million people into a narrow coastal strip in Deir Al Balah. The extreme overcrowding that has happened as a result has created conditions that are a hotbed for deadly diseases. Those attempting to deliver humanitarian aid have also documented how Israel has frequently obstructed and delayed this process. It was further specified that at least 90% of humanitarian movements have been denied or impeded by the Israeli government, which has repeatedly imposed excessive restrictions and the arbitrary exercise of purported “security measures” that have prevented aid and humanitarian workers from reaching those in desperate need.

Since March, the amount of aid to Gaza has dropped by more than 50%, with September having the lowest quantity of assistance received during the past year. As such, it was demanded that Israel take immediate action to reverse the downward course of humanitarian efforts in Gaza, with a failure to do so threatening a decrease in U.S. military aid. The letter sent to Israel even included a detailed list of specific actions that needed to be undertaken in order to meet this requirement, while also outlining concerns regarding the potential approval of a UNRWA ban and the increased devastation that this would cause. Despite this and in a blatantly defiant manner, the Israeli government recently did in fact initiate the aforementioned ban, demonstrating that it lacks a fear of repercussions from the United States since the latter has yet to follow through on its threats of punishment and accountability for continuous Israeli violations. The demands laid out in the letter may have posed more significance if it were not for the fact that it concerned Israeli behavior that has been pervasive since the onset of the Gaza War, if not long before. To many observers, it is unsurprising that U.S. officials have failed to enforce their threats of consequences for Israel’s actions, as the use of the word “may” in the letter was indicative of this likelihood.

Humanitarian organizations have addressed, in great detail, the menacing scale of the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, with widespread famine imminently approaching. These entities have called upon the United States to issue an immediate determination regarding Israeli violation of National Security Memorandum-20 and Section 620I of the Foreign Assistance Act – the laws that the U.S. would be failing to abide by should they continue to provide military aid to Israel in light of evidence of humanitarian obstructions. While the U.S. State Department claims that Israel has made sufficient progress that would no longer warrant a disruption to military assistance, humanitarian groups have shown otherwise. Aid workers on the ground have attested to Israel’s failure to meet requirements, and have borne witness to the catastrophe that has transpired as a result.

Civilians in Gaza continue to suffer due to Israel’s inhumane policies coupled with the U.S. government’s inaction and unwillingness to punish Israel for its abusive behavior. Tens of thousands of innocent civilians have been killed, and for the nearly 2 million others that have been forcibly displaced, the Israeli hindrance of aid has created unimaginable suffering and hardship. This will only continue unless appropriate measures are taken to hold Israel accountable and put an end to any complicity in its war crimes and human rights violations.

Trump’s Picks for New Administration Positions and Potential Policy Implications

Trump’s Picks for New Administration Positions and Potential Policy Implications

By NIF Staff

Over the past week, the new incoming U.S. government has begun to take shape, with President-elect Trump announcing many of his picks for top cabinet and administration positions. Trump’s second administration looks to be a marked shift from his first, featuring an array of Trump loyalists, policy hardliners, and controversial nominees with questionable credentials. Some of the picks that have raised eyebrows in particular include Matt Gaetz for Attorney General, Congresswoman Elise Stefanik for U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee for U.S. Ambassador to Israel, television presenter Pete Hegseth for U.S. Secretary of Defense, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. for U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services. Trump has also designated a role for tech multibillionaire Elon Musk and former Republican presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy as part of a new presidential advisory commission. All told, analysts have expressed concern over the potential policy implications stemming from a variety of these nominations.

Former Arkansas Governor and Southern Baptist Minister Mike Huckabee has been nominated by Trump to be the U.S. Ambassador to Israel. Huckabee hosts a namesake program on the Trinity Broadcasting Network (TBN), and has led visits to Israel before. His nomination for the position has been understandably criticized given that he is a staunch supporter of Israel and a fierce defender of its extremist government. Huckabee has made inflammatory statements in the past like “there’s really no such thing as a Palestinian,” while also praising unlawful Israeli settlements and the prospect of West Bank annexation. He has commented that there is no such thing as an illegal Israeli occupation taking place, and even recently expressed that he does not support a ceasefire in the ongoing Gaza War. Huckabee’s selection as the nominee has led observers to rightly question how he could serve as an impartial broker for peace in light of all of this, especially at a time of heightened tensions and hostilities in the Middle East. Furthermore, Trump’s selection for Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, is a real estate developer and donor. Back in May, when the Biden administration paused some of its bomb shipments to Israel, Witkoff led fundraisers for Trump and garnered sizable financial support from pro-Israel donors. Picking a real estate developer may have been intentional, and for some, in poor taste, drawing parallels to Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner who in the past described the “very valuable” potential of Gaza’s “waterfront property.”

Trump has selected Congresswoman Elise Stefanik as the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations. She is one of his most outspoken allies, defending him during his two impeachments, supplementing his claims regarding the 2020 election, and has fiercely supported his 2024 presidential comeback. Stefanik is well-known as a vocal defender of Israel, which came to the fore after her role in Congress’ questioning of college presidents following accusations of antisemitism on campuses in December of last year. It has been argued that her skill set may not translate well to the United Nations, where carefully crafted negotiations take precedence over outspoken support and defense. Stefanik will also have to represent the U.S. amidst a time of growing international pressure under a president who is known to have frequently contradicted his international representatives. Her domestically-oriented political background may be representative of Trump’s disinterest in participating in cooperative U.N. missions worldwide, a possible sign of a further retreat from the United States’ leadership role and a focus instead on Trump’s America First policies.

Regarding the pick of U.S. Senator Marco Rubio for Secretary of State, Rubio echoes many of Trump’s foreign policy stances. He shares his skepticism for Ukrainian support and a hawkish attitude towards China and Iran due to the ongoing economic competition with China and the aggressive actions undertaken by both governments in their respective regions. Trump has called Rubio “a strong advocate for our nation, a true friend to our allies, and a fearless warrior who will never back down to our adversaries.” Rubio will have a huge task ahead of him in coordinating and exacting Trump’s efforts to restore peace around the globe amidst ongoing regional conflicts and the threat of potential heightened tensions with China.

Trump’s choice for U.S. Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, an Army National Guard veteran and Fox & Friends co-host, has stunned members of the Pentagon and put into question his capabilities for the office. Hegseth could potentially bring significant reforms to the military, as he is well known for his skepticism regarding women in combat roles and has advocated for pardoning service members charged with war crimes. He would likely serve Trump as a loyalist, which should be unsurprising, as many recall the five men who served this post under Trump in his first term. Some have speculated that this pick could lead to a significant politicization of the military and might have unprecedented repercussions regarding the reputation of the United States’ armed forces abroad.

Another of Trump’s picks that has particularly raised eyebrows across Washington has been Matt Gaetz for Attorney General. Both Democrats and some Republicans have voiced deep concern. Gaetz is considered a highly controversial pick for several reasons, including his staunch loyalty to Trump. Last October, Gaetz filed a motion to oust Kevin McCarthy as U.S. House Speaker, which passed, leading to anger among many House Republicans. Another area of concern is that beginning in late 2020, the Department of Justice opened an investigation into Gaetz over sex trafficking. Gaetz has always denied wrongdoing, and the case ended without any charges filed in February 2023. However, in June of this year, the House Ethics Committee announced that it had begun investigating Gaetz on accusations of drug use, child sex trafficking, and bribery. A report from the House Ethics Committee was set to be voted on, but since Gaetz resigned from the U.S. House of Representatives, it is unclear if the report can still be released.

Republican Representative Max Miller from Ohio said, “Gaetz has a better shot at having dinner with Queen Elizabeth II than being confirmed by the Senate.” John Bolton, a Republican who served as the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations under George W. Bush and National Security Advisor during Trump’s first term, said Gaetz “doesn’t have the character.” Some Republicans say they trust Trump’s judgment and will support his decision; others have expressed hesitation but are willing to hear Gaetz out during a hearing before the Senate. It is clear that if Gaetz faces a vote, it will be a challenge given that the Republicans only have a 53 to 47 majority in the Senate. This tight margin to get Gaetz appointed is likely a significant reason that Trump is seeking recess appointments for his confirmation process, allowing Trump’s nominations to avoid needing a vote before the Senate. Trump says recess appointments would enable him to get his cabinet up and running as fast as possible. The president-elect has voiced his desire for major reform at the Department of Justice, and Gaetz is seen as someone who can get it done and will remain loyal to him.

Trump has also tapped Kristi Noem, a Republican currently serving as South Dakota governor, as Secretary of Homeland Security. Her pick is likely due to her tough stance on immigration. She has referred to the southern border as a “warzone” and after Trump was elected, posted on X that, “President Trump will deport the most dangerous illegal aliens first — the murderers, rapists, and other criminals that Harris and Biden let into the country.” It has been theorized that she was probably also chosen for her loyalty to Trump. Noem supported Trump’s efforts to file lawsuits regarding the 2020 election. During the 2024 campaign trail, she was even thought of as a possible VP pick for Trump, but that appeared to fall through over her tough stance on abortion and after controversy arose when it was revealed in her memoir that she shot and killed her dog. As head of Homeland Security, Noem would oversee the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agencies. Her cooperation would be necessary if Trump is serious about his plans for what he has called “mass deportations.” Noem would also have oversight over the Secret Service, which is likely another consideration for Trump, given that he faced two assassination attempts on the 2024 campaign trail. The first attempt in Pennsylvania is considered one of the biggest failures of the Secret Service since the shooter got a clear sight on Trump. Ultimately, Noem’s nomination is a clear signal that Trump will take a stricter stance on immigration, including the use of federal agencies to seal off the border and an increase in deportations.

President-elect Trump’s picks for his new administration positions show his desire for a loyal cabinet and group of officials, and consist of public supporters who have aided him in his campaign to return to the White House. His picks also indicate his policy goals, including steadfast support for Israel, toughening the U.S. stance towards China, reforming the Justice Department, and restricting immigration. Trump told Joe Rogan on his podcast that picking “bad, disloyal people” was his “biggest mistake” during his first term. Given the Republican trifecta of the presidency, House, and Senate that Trump will be working with for the first half of his term, Republican in-fighting will likely be one of the biggest challenges to his administration. The first test of Republican unity behind Trump will be if the President-elect is allowed his preferred cabinet, including his most controversial nominees.

World Leaders Convene for COP29 Climate Change Conference with Big Names Missing

World Leaders Convene for COP29 Climate Change Conference with Big Names Missing

By Jake Spiller

With 2024 projected to be the warmest year on record, much of the world’s attention should be fixated on this year’s United Nations Climate Change Conference, known as COP29. The event is being hosted in the Azerbaijani capital city of Baku, with the conference running from November 11th until the 22nd, but notably, fewer top leaders from the world’s largest economies – the biggest polluters – are attending this year’s climate conference. Participants are seeking to ensure the aim of limiting global temperature rise to 1.5°C, as set by the 2015 Paris Agreement. A key topic of discussion will include financial considerations, mainly how wealthier developed nations will compensate developing countries that face a greater risk from the negative effects of climate change and have less capacity to rapidly transition to clean energy sources. Casting a significant shadow over COP29 is the failure of the international order to bring an end to devastating ongoing conflicts in Gaza, Sudan, and Ukraine, in addition to the recent election of former U.S. President Trump to a second term in the White House – which has elicited deep uncertainty about the future of global climate action.

Trump’s election has raised concerns over the future of the United States’ commitments to its transition to green energy and efforts to limit its carbon footprint. President-elect Trump has been vocal about increasing American fossil fuel production, repeatedly vowing to “drill, baby, drill.” He withdrew the United States from the Paris Climate Treaty during his first term in 2017, while upon taking office in 2021, Biden recommitted the United States to the agreement. With Trump returning to the Oval Office in January, The New York Times has reported that his transition team has already prepared executive orders to withdraw from it for a second time. The decision does not enjoy universal support in the American energy industry, as earlier this week at COP29, Exxon’s CEO publicly stated that Trump should not withdraw from the Paris Agreement and must instead remain committed to addressing climate change. Additionally, Anatol Feygin, the Vice President of Cheniere Energy – an American liquefied natural gas (LNG) company headquartered in Texas – also came out in support of remaining a part of the climate accords. It is important to note that a U.S. withdrawal will not single-handedly end the agreement, as no country followed the American exit in 2017. However, on Wednesday, Argentina’s negotiating team was ordered home from the conference. The country’s president, Javier Milei, elected in late 2023, has been described as a right-wing political figure who has made his positive views on Trump known and has even referred to climate change as a “socialist lie.” Argentina’s actions have drawn concern that South America’s second-largest economy could follow the path of the United States. Furthermore, experts speculate that if the U.S. takes a step back from the issue of climate change, it will open a void for other countries to fill the vacuum in the race for green energy, particularly China, which is already the world’s largest producer of renewable energy. Given that many developing countries view the climate crisis as an existential threat, in this scenario they will likely only grow closer to China rather than the United States regarding this issue.

Notably, this year’s climate conference will see many significant world leaders not attending in person, including U.S. President Biden, French President Macron, EU Commission President Von der Leyen, Chinese President Xi, and Indian Prime Minister Modi. In response to this lack of world leadership, climate scientist Bill Hare told AP News, “It’s symptomatic of the lack of political will to act…There’s no sense of urgency.” One reason could be that global leaders are rushing to prepare for Trump’s incoming administration. At the same time, only a day after the recent U.S. election, Germany’s governing coalition – an advocate of renewable energy – collapsed, causing further uncertainty about Europe’s future commitments. One of the possible reasons for the absence of various prominent global figures is also the upcoming G20 summit on the other side of the world in Brazil, which will overlap with COP29 next week. Some of the major heads of government who did speak however at the COP29 conference include Turkish President Erdoğan and U.K. Prime Minister Starmer. The latter talked about the impressive progress his country has made, such as staying on target to limit warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius and the sharp reduction in gas emissions thanks to the removal of coal from electricity generation.

The conference’s financial hopes include a demand for an annual $1.3 trillion to finance the green energy transition and adapt to rising temperatures. This is up from the current $100 billion commitment set in 2009. The G77, a coalition of 134 developing countries and China, put forward the new demand. These nations believe that it is the responsibility of the developed world, which has contributed to the vast majority of pollution responsible for global warming, to cover the costs. Significantly, for this latest iteration of the climate conference, every nation that is a party to the Paris Agreement must update their nationally determined contributions (NDCs) – their plans to combat climate change by reducing carbon emissions – by February of next year. How much and the manner in which the finances are disrupted will impact the degree to which ambitious nations that rely on outside support can be with their future climate plans.

Even with clean and renewable energy usage on the rise, it is clear that countries will need to pursue more aggressive climate goals if they hope to limit rising global average temperatures. The question of financial responsibility will need to be worked out so that developing nations can plan for their transition to clean energy and prepare for the worsening impacts of climate change. If President-elect Trump follows through on his promise to again withdraw the United States from global efforts aimed at achieving net zero and the transition to clean energy, it will be a massive setback for the worldwide community and would only strengthen China’s position as the leader in renewable energy.