The Price of Alliance and the Problem of Silence

If you support everything your ally does, you can no longer influence your ally.

I spent years in organizations where this pattern appeared. There is someone you want to work with. They do something you disapprove of. You have two choices: you say what you think and risk the relationship, or you accept it silently. Many leaders choose silence. They think: we need this partner, so I'll just accept what they do. Later they discover they have no influence anymore.

That is exactly what Biden did with Gaza.

October 2023. Hamas attacks. Thousands of Israelis die. Israel responds. Biden immediately says: we support Israel fully. No reservations. No nuance. No moment where America says: yes, we understand the response, but this line you may not cross.

And for months, tens of thousands of Palestinians die in Gaza. Starvation. Destruction of infrastructure. Massacres of civilians. America does not merely stay silent; America actively supports. Weapons deliveries. Unconditional backing.

Now it is true that Israel has the right to self-defense. That is not a gray area. But self-defense has limits. Proportionality. The idea that you have targets, not: an entire population as a target. Not ignoring all international norms. Not settling West Bank colonists to occupy space in Gaza.

Biden took no position. Or rather, your position was: what Israel does is good. No criticism. No conditions. No "we help you, but not this way."

What happened there? Biden lost his only real currency. Influence. If you seal every move your partner makes, you have no influence anymore. You are swept up in their choices. If you then say "actually you should not do this," your partner hears: why did you not say that last week? You are not serious. You support us, so be quiet.

This is a very famous mistake in diplomacy. You have two options: you support conditionally and retain influence, or you support unconditionally and lose influence. No third way. If you say "I support you, except in that one thing," your partner hears "you do not really support us." If you say "I support you, so I am at your disposal," you are complicit.

And after months of death, suffering and international condemnation, Biden suddenly tries to exercise influence anyway. Too late. His voice no longer counts.

The Palestinian question is complex. Israel has the right to security. Palestinians have the right to human dignity. These two things do not exclude each other. But Biden should have said: we help you, and you cannot do whatever you want with that help. That would not have stopped Israel, but it would have given America a voice. Instead, Biden chose silence, and lost his voice by doing so.

That is a fundamental error in leadership. For countries, for organizations, for relationships. You cannot be unconditionally loyal and simultaneously influential. One excludes the other.

The Palestinians are underrepresented in this thinking. But the lesson applies to them as well. You cannot maintain that America helps you if you simultaneously say that America is complicit.

Loyalty is the beginning of conversation. It is not the end of it.

Sources: White House statements October 2023-March 2024; Palestinian rights organizations; New York Times, Washington Post Gaza coverage