“The resulting pier mission did not go well.
It involved 1,000 U.S. troops, delivered only a fraction of the promised aid at a cost of nearly $230 million, and was from the start beset by bad luck and miscalculations, including fire, bad weather and dangers on shore from the fighting between Israel and Hamas.”
…
“The U.S. military aimed to ramp up to as many as 150 trucks a day of aid coming off the pier.
But because the pier was only operational for a total of 20 days, the military says it moved a total of only 19.4 million pounds of aid into Gaza. That would be about 480 trucks of aid delivered in total from the pier, based on estimates by the World Food Programme from earlier this year of weight carried by a truck.
The United Nations says about 500 truckloads of aid are needed daily to address the needs of Palestinians in Gaza.
Just days after the first shipments of aid rolled off the pier in Gaza, crowds overwhelmed trucks and took some of it.
Israel’s killings of seven World Central Kitchen workers in April and its use of an area near the pier as it staged a hostage rescue recovery mission in June also dented the confidence of aid organizations, on whom the U.S. was relying to carry the supplies from the shore and distribute to residents.
A senior U.S. defense official acknowledged that aid delivery “proved to be perhaps more challenging than the planners anticipated.”
One former official said Kurilla had raised distribution as a concern early on.
“General Kurilla was also very clear about that: ‘I can do my piece of this, and I can do distribution if you task me to do it,'” the former official said.
“But that was explicitly scoped out of what the task was. And so we were reliant on these international organizations.”
Current and former U.S. officials told Reuters that the United Nations and aid organizations themselves were always cool to the pier.
At a closed-door meeting of U.S. officials and aid organizations in Cyprus in March, Sigrid Kaag, the U.N. humanitarian and reconstruction coordinator for Gaza, offered tacit support for Biden’s pier project.
But Kaag stressed the UN preference was for “land, land, land,” according to two people familiar with the discussions.
The United Nations declined to comment on the meeting. It referred to a briefing on Monday where a spokesperson for the organization said that the U.N. appreciated every way of getting aid into Gaza, including the pier, but more access through land routes is needed.
The underlying concern for aid organizations was that Biden, under pressure from fellow Democrats over Israel’s killing of civilians in Gaza, was pushing a solution that would at best be a temporary fix and at worst would take pressure off Netanyahu’s government to open up land routes into Gaza.
Dave Harden, a former USAID mission director to the West Bank and Gaza, described the pier project as “humanitarian theater.”
“It did relieve the pressure, unfortunately, on having the (land border) crossings work more effectively.””
https://www.reuters.com/world/how-bidens-gaza-pier-project-unraveled-2024-07-25/
“Senior White House figures privately told Israel that the U.S. would support its decision to ramp up military pressure against Hezbollah — even as the Biden administration publicly urged the Israeli government in recent weeks to curtail its strikes, according to American and Israeli officials.
Presidential adviser Amos Hochstein and Brett McGurk, the White House coordinator for the Middle East, told top Israeli officials in recent weeks that the U.S. agreed with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s broad strategy to shift Israel’s military focus to the north against Hezbollah in order to convince the group to engage in diplomatic talks to end the conflict, the officials told POLITICO.
Not everyone in the administration was on board with Israel’s shift, despite support inside the White House, the officials said. The decision to focus on Hezbollah sparked division within the U.S. government, drawing opposition from people inside the Pentagon, State Department and intelligence community who believed Israel’s move against the Iran-backed militia could drag American forces into yet another Middle East conflict.”
“A diplomatic solution, perhaps one in which Hezbollah agrees to remove its positions close to Lebanon’s southern border, is certainly possible. That would allow Israelis to move back to their homes in the north. Whatever the outcome, however, Israel will likely not be able to eliminate Hezbollah, just as it has failed at eliminating Hamas. And continued aggression could lead to more extreme outcomes in the future.”
“Eliminating the Jewish state is more important to them than their own lives. As you can see in the idea of a suicide bomber and the behavior of Palestinian leadership. Note that Gaza was never built as a home. No matter how much aid the international community..has been pouring into Gaza”
“U.S. officials have in the past said that Israel and Hamas were in disagreement over just a handful of implementation issues, including the timing of a swap of Palestinian prisoners in Israeli custody and Israeli hostages held by Hamas.
Another flashpoint in the negotiations includes the status of the Philadelphi corridor, a buffer zone between the Gaza Strip and Egypt. Israel has pushed to control the area in recent weeks as a security measure to deter future attacks into its territory from Hamas. The senior administration official said that the issue has been discussed with Egypt as part of recent talks and said it is “moving in the right way.”
Some Middle East analysts argued that Hamas’ reaction may not be a large setback in the grand scheme of peace talks. Aaron David Miller, a former U.S. negotiator on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, said in an interview that “nobody expected” a deal or anything remotely close to it coming out of this week’s cease-fire talks in Doha.
A bit more time, he added, might even be helpful, as neither side in his view is ready to close on a permanent cease-fire.
“At best, you’re talking about phase one, six weeks, because no one is prepared to go beyond that,” said Miller, who is now a fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
The region is still bracing for greater conflict, including a potential attack from Iran. And Israel ordered civilians today to evacuate areas in Gaza that had previously been considered to be “civilian safe zones,” alleging that Hamas militants were firing rockets from the civilian areas to fire rockets.
Trita Parsi, executive vice president at the Quincy Institute think tank in Washington, said pressure is likely to build inside Iran to take action “if it takes too long and it becomes increasingly clear that this is an exercise to hold off attacks and retaliation, rather than actually securing a cease-fire.””