| Dear friend, The calls for a ceasefire seem similar. Protests around the world are urging Israelis and Palestinians to de-escalate the latest stage of their conflict that began with the cross-border assault by Hamas earlier this month and continued with the retaliatory bombings of Gaza by Israel. A ceasefire would prevent more killing and the spread of the conflict to other parts of the region. Meanwhile, some U.S. and European protestors are urging a ceasefire in the Russian war in Ukraine — to stop the killing and prevent the spread of the conflict. The difference, however, is that Ukraine is fighting against Russian occupiers, just as Palestinians have fought against Israeli occupiers. A ceasefire in Israel would prevent a ground assault by the Israeli army in Gaza. A ceasefire in Ukraine would reward Russia for its ground assault in Ukraine. In my World Beat column this week, I look at the differences between these two calls for ceasefire — but more importantly, at the limits of U.S. influence in both cases. “In both Ukraine and Israel, the United States currently wields a measure of influence because of the military (and non-military) assistance it provides,” I write. “This assistance can occasionally fool the Pentagon and the State Department into thinking that they can determine outcomes on the ground in both regions. That’s not surprising, given the arrogance of American power. What is surprising, however, is that the left, which is so often mindful of the limitations of U.S. power, sometimes makes the same mistake.” Also on this issue in Foreign Policy In Focus this week, Dan La Botz calls on the left to support both Ukrainians and Palestinians. Walden Bello seeks to understand the conditions that have given rise to Hamas and its support in Gaza. Tatyana Ivanova explores the interests of Russian President Vladimir Putin in the conflict in Israel. And Lawrence Wittner argues on behalf of stronger global institutions committed to principles of the rule of law in order to prevent the spread of anarchic violence. Finally, Daniel Volman weighs in on the Biden administration’s response to the coup in Niger and what it means for U.S. counterinsurgency strategy in Africa. John Feffer
Director, FPIF | 