In the closing months of his presidency, Joe Biden is demonstrating a renewed readiness to leverage U.S. military support for Israel as both an incentive and a deterrent in its critical standoff with Iran and Iran-aligned militant factions. However, experts express uncertainty about whether this strategy will effectively meet Biden’s objectives, which include averting a wider regional conflict and compelling Israel to address the worsening humanitarian crisis in Gaza, especially with the U.S. presidential election approaching.

On Sunday, the Biden administration announced the deployment of approximately 100 troops to Israel, accompanied by a sophisticated U.S. anti-missile system. This deployment is notable as it coincides with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s consideration of a retaliatory strike against Iran following an Iranian missile attack on October 1. Additionally, the administration issued a letter to Israel on the same day, emphasizing the need for immediate action to alleviate the humanitarian conditions in Gaza, warning that failure to do so could result in potential limitations on U.S. military assistance.

U.S. officials publicly assert that the seemingly contradictory actions align with established policies designed to ensure Israel’s security while also advocating for the protection of civilians amid the ongoing conflict in Gaza. However, both current and former officials privately recognize that these actions mark a significant increase in U.S. involvement in Israeli strategy, even as President Biden prepares to leave office. Israel has often resisted U.S. counsel, creating political challenges for the Biden administration, which is under pressure from some progressive activists within the Democratic Party to leverage U.S. influence to moderate Israel’s actions.

Aaron David Miller, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, noted that the administration’s dual approach suggests that, despite appearances of inactivity, there is a clear strategy in play. He warned, however, that it is unlikely Washington will reduce its military support for Israel if tensions with Iran escalate. “As we approach the potential for significant escalation—considering both Israel’s response and Iran’s likely actions—it seems almost unimaginable that this administration would contemplate any serious limitations or conditions on military assistance,” he stated.

White House spokesperson John Kirby informed reporters on Tuesday that the letter was not intended as a threat; however, it seems that the Israeli authorities are treating the matters with seriousness. An Israeli official based in Washington stated, “The letter has been acknowledged and is currently under comprehensive review by Israeli security personnel.” On Wednesday, Israel announced that 50 aid trucks had been sent to northern Gaza from Jordan, which may be an initial response to the demands from the U.S.

A DEADLINE TO INCREASE AID

President Biden has made Israel’s defense a top priority following the outbreak of war initiated by Hamas militants, which resulted in approximately 1,200 fatalities, according to Israeli sources. Despite significant pressure from fellow Democrats, he has continued to supply arms to Israel, with the exception of 2,000-pound bombs, even as the conflict in Gaza has reportedly claimed 42,000 lives, as per Palestinian health authorities.

In April, the administration called for enhanced protections for civilians and aid workers in Gaza, a move that U.S. officials claim led to a temporary increase in aid deliveries to the region.

However, a letter sent on Sunday marked the clearest ultimatum to Prime Minister Netanyahu’s government since the onset of the Gaza conflict, specifying that Israel must take concrete actions within 30 days, including allowing at least 350 aid trucks to enter Gaza daily.

This development raises the possibility that Washington may consider making Israel ineligible for U.S. military assistance due to its restrictions on aid distribution, according to John Ramming Chappell, an advocacy and legal advisor at the Center for Civilians in Conflict. “It represents a small step towards a significant change,” he noted.

In response, Netanyahu held an emergency meeting on Wednesday to deliberate on increasing humanitarian aid to Gaza, with three officials present indicating that aid levels are expected to rise soon.

The decision to deploy the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system (THAAD) is also seen as a significant move, according to former officials and analysts, aligning with a strategy to provide Israel with close military support to influence its military operations.

A former defense official characterized this deployment as a “paradigm shift,” given Israel’s historical approach to self-defense. It also heightens the stakes for the United States. “The U.S. is putting actual U.S. ‘skin in the game’ by placing U.S. forces inside Israel, which just two weeks ago faced 180 Iranian ballistic missiles,” the official stated.

Tensions in the Middle East have heightened as the region anticipates Israel’s reaction to a missile strike executed by Tehran earlier this month, which was a response to Israel’s military actions in Lebanon. President Biden has expressed his opposition to any Israeli attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities and has raised concerns regarding potential strikes on energy infrastructure.

“This is likely an incentive aimed at persuading the Israelis to refrain from extensive military action,” stated Thomas Karako, director of the missile defense project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, commenting on the possibility of Israel targeting nuclear and other significant sites. “Moreover, deploying a multi-billion dollar asset typically comes with certain conditions.”

The White House has not provided a direct answer regarding whether the deployment of THAAD to Israel was part of an agreement to dissuade Israeli strikes on Iranian oil or nuclear facilities.

The administration is under time pressure, as the 30-day period given by Biden for Israel to meet its demands will conclude after the U.S. elections on November 5. This timeline allows Netanyahu to determine the extent of his compliance, particularly if the Republican candidate he aligns with, former President Donald Trump, wins against Democrat Vice President Kamala Harris.

“Miller noted that Netanyahu may feel he is in a position of maximum influence, especially with the potential for a new president-elect who aligns more closely with his interests in the coming weeks.”