A $95.3 billion package passed Tuesday by the U.S. Senate includes what supporters call critical aid for Ukraine and Israel. U.S. Senator Jack Reed, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, is among those who voted for the package.
Reed spoke about the aid package with The Public’s Radio political reporter Ian Donnis. The following telephone interview was condensed for length.
Ian Donnis: More than 30,000 Palestinians have been killed during the conflict with Israel, mostly women and children. Critics say that ongoing US aid signals support for the carnage, and they call this morally indefensible. How do you respond to that?
Jack Reed: Well, we’ve made it very clear, the president directly to Prime Minister Netanyahu, that their operation has to conform with the basic laws of war, which is to do all you can to spare civilian population and also you must provide humanitarian assistance. And that’s one of the major aspects of this legislation we just passed — significant resources, humanitarian assistance. We’re also taking steps not only to encourage Israeli operations to be more sensitive to civilians, but we’re building a floating pier arrangement in north Gaza so we can get significant amounts of food and other humanitarian aid into the country. I think we’ve seen certainly since the first days, we’ve seen a more sensitive response by the IDF to their obligations under the humanitarian laws.
Donnis: Would you support calling for a ceasefire in Gaza at this point?
Reed: I would call or support a ceasefire, but it has to be mutually agreed by both Hamas and the state of Israel. We have been working overtime, Secretary Blinken, Bill Burns, the CIA director, we’ve been working with the Qatari government, we have been going all out to try and negotiate a ceasefire. I think many times, it’s Hamas that will refuse the ceasefire. They see themselves, unless they essentially get guarantees that the war against them will end immediately, they seem unwilling to have a ceasefire, and more importantly, to exchange the hostages. They’re using those hostages as human shields. And so when you know people rightfully point out deficiencies in Israeli tactics, they should also understand that you’re fighting a diabolical group of people who have no qualms about using Palestinians as shields and Israeli hostages as shields.
Donnis: Nancy Pelosi calls Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu an obstacle to peace and she says that he should resign. Do you agree with your Democratic colleague?
Reed: I’ve said that publicly already on the floor of the Senate. I’ve also called for the resignation of Abbas, the Palestinian leader — really he’s kind of a token.Netanyahu, I think, would do his country and the world a great service if he resigned.
Donnis: How concerned are you at this point that this conflict between Hamas and Israel will spiral into a wider war?
Reed: That is a great concern. That is one of the reasons why President Biden very adroitly and immediately sent in significant carrier forces and other support to send a signal that an unrestricted all-out attack on Israel and a counter-response would not be effective. Preventing escalation is one of the president’s key missions. And so far, he’s done very effectively. I think the operations, which knocked down all the Iranian missiles were not only a display of technological superiority, but more importantly, coordination and cooperation. And the key to this was, I think, the American presence there. And the whole goal was to prevent escalation and to date, the Iranian seem to recognize that; they’ve made statements that they no longer want to pursue direct attacks, etc.
Donnis: Student protests at American universities have received a lot of attention this week. Do you think it was a mistake or the right move for the president of Columbia University to call for the arrest of student protesters?
Reed: It’s the right of an American citizen to organize, to make their points clear to both government and to their academic leaders. They have to maintain, though, basic order and not be a force that’s deliberately designed to disrupt rather than to communicate. The Columbia president, I can’t second guess her. I don’t know what the situation was in terms of security or danger to other people or you know, other things that a president has to worry about. Can fire apparatus, for example, get to buildings if there’s a fire because of this situation?
