They did use the stop vetoing resolutions button. Not much but it’s not nothing.
Sending their warships would mean Israel would try calling their bluff and force USA to commit an act of war to stop them, which would cause absolutely chaos in the region. They probably should start with sanctions though.
Biden’s biggest problem here is he’s so focused on backrooms negotiations, that he’s not using some of the options that could increase public pressure, and all other people see is old treaties continuing with very slow changes and seeing the continued actions of the other party who doesn’t really want to negotiate.
As far as I know, the Oval Office doesn’t have start/stop genocide button, or control inflation lever for that matter.
If it’s not going to be Biden, then it will be someone else. Either a Republican or a Democrat.
Even someone who earlier looked promising, eg Fetterman is a staunch Israel supporter.
Because the problem is systematic. You can’t just uproot the US-Israel nexus that’s deeply entrenched in the US politics.
It has a stop paying for genocide button.
It has a stop vetoing UN resolutions button.
It has an impose sanctions button and a freeze assets button.
It has a pull their warships out button.
It has dozens of make life really uncomfortable for Israel if it doesn’t fucking stop committing genocide buttons.
But at the very least it could stop actively helping them commit genocide.
They did use the stop vetoing resolutions button. Not much but it’s not nothing.
Sending their warships would mean Israel would try calling their bluff and force USA to commit an act of war to stop them, which would cause absolutely chaos in the region. They probably should start with sanctions though.
Biden’s biggest problem here is he’s so focused on backrooms negotiations, that he’s not using some of the options that could increase public pressure, and all other people see is old treaties continuing with very slow changes and seeing the continued actions of the other party who doesn’t really want to negotiate.
They also claimed that the resolution is non-binding, which is contrary to stated international law.