In the intensifying Gaza crisis, the U.S. faces a sobering reality: its influence as a mediator may be slipping. Despite attempts to de-escalate the situation, violence continues to mount, suggesting Washington’s long-standing approach is losing traction. Experts argue that America’s unwavering support for Israel could be backfiring, undercutting its credibility as a neutral mediator and fueling regional resentment.
Historically, the U.S. has championed peace efforts in the Middle East, guiding landmark agreements like the Oslo Accords. However, this reputation for mediation has grown increasingly complicated, as the U.S. struggles to balance its alliance with Israel against calls for a more even-handed approach. Sheikh Mohammed Bin Abdulrahman Al-Thani, Qatar’s Prime Minister, captured this dilemma, saying, “How can mediation succeed when one side assassinates a negotiator?” His words underscore the growing belief that U.S. bias may be doing more harm than good.
The U.S.’s commitment to Israel has translated into significant military and diplomatic support, but critics claim this overprotection fuels a security obsession that leaves little room for compromise. With Israel potentially planning an incursion into Lebanon, many question whether Washington’s strategy of deterrence and defense can foster the trust needed for a real solution. “Absolute security is a myth,” say observers, noting that Israel’s relentless drive for total security – emboldened by U.S. support – is stalling peace efforts.
Meanwhile, China is emerging as a diplomatic alternative, promoting “principle-driven power” over militarized influence. Unlike the U.S., China’s Middle East interventions focus on building alliances without aligning against a particular adversary. Its recent efforts in brokering peace talks between Iran and Saudi Arabia, and in engaging Palestinian groups, show an approach based on development and stability rather than confrontation.
Amid this power shift, analysts suggest that Washington and Beijing should consider cooperation rather than rivalry. Zhou Yiqi of the Shanghai Institutes for International Studies stresses that America’s strategy, reliant on military leverage, risks isolating it in a region ready for dialogue. By blending the U.S.’s influence with China’s soft-power diplomacy, the two powers could reframe the peace process.
The question now is whether the U.S. can adjust its approach or continue down a path that seems increasingly unviable. Can America shake its longstanding biases, or will its stance on Israel ultimately limit its effectiveness as a Middle East peace broker?
