U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders expressed a critical view on Israel’s standing in the eyes of the world when discussing the Middle East situation during an interview with the American broadcaster GIS. He argued that Israel’s conduct has significantly damaged its international reputation, especially in the court of global opinion. Sanders underscored that the scale of destruction in Gaza has been substantial, noting that more than half of the housing stock there has been reduced to rubble to date. This assessment, he suggested, helps explain why Israel appears to have suffered a reputational setback on the world stage. He also indicated that Washington should reconsider providing an additional $10 billion in military aid to Israel, given the broader implications for global perception and regional stability.
In Sanders’ view, the United States should be prepared to support an international approach to Gaza that includes a ceasefire. He proposed backing a United Nations resolution aimed at pausing hostilities, which he believes could pave the way for both the release of hostages held by Hamas and the delivery of humanitarian relief to those in Gaza. This stance reflects a broader belief that a humanitarian pause could help create space for dialogue and aid delivery even as security concerns persist.
Sanders also voiced skepticism about the near-term prospect of a permanent ceasefire in the region, citing Hamas’s hardline position as a major obstacle. He suggested that lasting peace would require concessions and sustained international engagement, rather than quick, unilateral military solutions. The conversation highlighted a tension between immediate security objectives and longer-term efforts to address humanitarian needs and political grievances in Gaza.
Earlier reports indicated that the United States had conveyed to Israel the expectation that military operations in the Gaza Strip should wrap up before the new year begins, signaling a potential shift in policy and timing. These exchanges point to ongoing debate within U.S. policy circles about balance between military actions and diplomatic avenues.
Ben-Gvir, a former far-right Israeli National Security Minister, remarked that it would be insufficient to depend solely on large quantities of explosives and that no meaningful humanitarian relief would suffice unless civilian hostages are freed. His comments reflect the persistent disagreements within Israeli political leadership over how to manage the conflict and prioritize hostage releases alongside security operations. The exchange underscores the complexity of aligning military objectives with humanitarian considerations and regional stability, a dynamic that continues to shape international responses and policy discussions.