以色列和哈马斯在加沙地带的武装冲突已经持续半年多。尽管联合国安理会3月25日通过要求在加沙立即停火的第2728号决议，但这并不能真正解决巴以之间的危机，因为相关各方远未就停火及后续政治安排达成共识，以色列仍在磨刀霍霍，试图对巴勒斯坦难民云集的加沙南部城市拉法开展军事攻击。

加沙危机在很大程度上折射出当前拜登加沙政策的多重困境，并对拜登连任构成了巨大挑战。随着2024年美国总统大选趋于白热化，拜登团队在这一问题上的困境或会进一步加剧。

笔者认为，这些困境至少体现在五个方面：

第一，加沙危机凸显拜登政府所追求的“大国竞争”战略与其中东战略之间的矛盾。

拜登执政后，为追求所谓的“大国竞争”，在中东地区试图进行战略收缩，包括2021年不管不顾地从阿富汗全部撤军。但事与愿违，美国在中东地区战略收缩的意图和布局不仅引起域内国家的忧虑与不安，还促使一些中东国家和非国家行为体采取更加铤而走险的做法。

事实上，无论加沙冲突、红海危机，还是以色列和伊朗之间矛盾的激化，无不如此。对拜登政府而言，基于传统的利益和同盟关系，它很难从这些地区危机中迅速抽身，但美国在这些危机中又离不开其他世界大国的合作与支持。如果华盛顿政客继续固守所谓“大国竞争”，缓解中东紧张局势只会更加困难。

第二，加沙危机令拜登政府的“价值观外交”和“人权外交”面临困境。拜登在任内第一年就召开所谓的“民主峰会”，试图以价值观重塑西方阵营，并以“人权”为借口对其他国家频频施压或制裁。

然而，截止4月底，以色列在加沙的军事行动已经造成超过34000巴勒斯坦人死亡，77000多人受伤，其中包括13000多名儿童和8400多名妇女，另有数百联合国机构与人道主义援助组织成员和记者丧生。200多万巴勒斯坦人居住的加沙如今遍地废墟，满目疮痍。

在血淋淋的事实和加沙人道主义灾难面前，拜登政府所鼓吹的价值观外交和人权更像是国际社会中的滑稽剧。

第三，加沙危机让拜登政府在美以关系上陷入前所未有的战略困境。众所周知，以色列虽非北约盟国，但其与美国的军事合作却远超普通北约盟国。加沙冲突爆发后，拜登政府不仅默许内塔尼亚胡政府以“自卫”名义在加沙进行军事冒险，而且不遗余力地为其提供各种军事援助。然而，内塔尼亚胡对拜登政府要求其约束加沙军事行动的声音置若罔闻，并不惜公开批评拜登政府。

事实上，尽管拜登从未中断对以色列的军事援助，但以色列却无法从美以关系中获得新的安全感。加沙冲突之后，以色列领导人需要考虑的是如何应对下一次类似的非对称袭击，如何面对一个美国渐次撤离的新中东，以及如何面对一个反犹主义情绪不断高涨的西方世界。

第四，加沙危机还凸显拜登政府在巴以和平进程陷入僵局后的困境。解决当前加沙局势的首要问题在于如何寻求新的政治共识和政治安排，这是结束武装冲突和人道主义灾难的前提。

首先，内塔尼亚胡政府在加沙进行军事冒险时并未提供一个切实可行的政治远景，这造成拜登政府在以色列的军事行动面前处处被动，无所适从。

其次，拜登政府支持的“两国方案”已遭到以色列明确反对。在巴以关系问题上，拜登政府既不敢对以色列施压和谈，也未能提出一个为各方接受的创新性政治解决方案。

即便是当前拜登政府支持的“两国方案”，在以色列定居点的侵蚀和耶路撒冷占领被固定化等事实面前，也越来越难以落实。最后，美国在联合国无条件支持以色列的政策不仅引起整个国际社会不满，也破坏了二战后所形成的国际秩序的基础。

鉴于以色列是在联合国大会分治决议基础上建立的国家，美国的做法无异于饮鸩止渴，只会进一步削弱自身的国际地位和权威性。

第五，加沙危机已经成为拜登寻求连任的新障碍。从历史上看，美国犹太人在历年总统大选中举足轻重，而且一直是民主党的主要票仓和竞选资金来源，支持以色列也是大多数美国犹太社团和犹太院外集团的目标。在2020年美国总统大选中，约有69%的犹太人把选票投给了拜登，拜登政府对以色列的支持自然会得到不少犹太选民和院外集团的支持。

然而，加沙冲突的久拖不决或会迫使拜登继续对内塔尼亚胡施压，危及美以之间的“特殊关系”，从而造成部分犹太人收回对拜登的支持。

与此同时,美国穆斯林（将近350万人）与左翼政治群体同样是民主党的票仓，如今他们对拜登政府的加沙政策极为失望和不满。显然，对拜登团队来说，近期美国校园内大量支持巴勒斯坦人的抗议活动并不是一个吉兆。如果加沙危机长期得不到合理解决，它同样会成为压垮拜登连任的最后一根稻草。

So far, the armed conflict between Israel and Hamas in the Gaza Strip has lasted more than six months. Although the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 2728 on March 25, calling for an immediate cease-fire, this does not really resolve the crisis between the Palestinians and Israelis, as the parties are far from reaching consensus on either the cease-fire or the subsequent political arrangements. Worse, Israel is still sharpening its knives and proceeding with a military attack on the southern Gaza city of Rafah, where a large number of Palestinian refugees have gathered.

The crisis reflects the multiple dilemmas of U.S. President Joe Biden's current Gaza policy, and poses a huge challenge to his re-election. As the 2024 U.S. presidential election campaign heats up, the dilemmas faced by Biden's team may further intensify.

I believe that these dilemmas are clear in at least five aspects:

First, the Gaza crisis has highlighted the contradiction between the “great power competition” strategy pursued by the Biden administration and the U.S. strategic contraction in the Middle East.

The Biden administration, while pursuing its great power competition concept, attempted a strategic contraction in the Middle East, including the withdrawal of all troops from Afghanistan in 2021. Contrary to what we had hoped for, the intent of the contraction in the region has not only aroused the concern and anxiety of the regional countries but also prompted some regional actors to take desperate measures.

This is true despite the Gaza conflict, the Red Sea crisis or the intensification of the conflict between Israel and Iran. On one hand, based on traditional interests and alliances, it is difficult for the United States to withdraw quickly from these regional crises. On the other hand, the U.S. cannot be separated from the cooperation and support of other world powers. If the politicians in Washington continue to be obsessed with their so-called great power competition, it will only become more difficult to reduce the tensions in the Middle East, let alone resolve any conflicts.

Second, the Gaza crisis presents a dilemma for the Biden administration's “values diplomacy” and “human rights diplomacy.” In his first year in office, Biden convened the first Summit for Democracy to reshape the Western world based on values, and he used human rights as a pretext for frequent pressure or sanctions on other countries.

However, by the end of April, Israel's military operations in Gaza had killed more than 34,000 Palestinians and injured more than 77,000, including more than 13,000 children and 8,400 women. In addition, hundreds of members of UN agencies and humanitarian aid organizations and journalists have lost their lives. Gaza, which is home to more than 2 million Palestinians, is now a wasteland of rubble and devastation.

In the face of the bloody facts and the humanitarian disaster in Gaza, the Biden administration's advocacy of values-based diplomacy and human rights is more like a burlesque in the international community.

Third, the Gaza crisis puts the Biden administration into a strategic dilemma with regard to the U.S.-Israel “special relationship.” It is well-known that while Israel is not a NATO ally, its military cooperation with the United States far exceeds that of many NATO allies. After the outbreak of the Gaza conflict, the Biden administration not only acquiesced to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's military adventures in Gaza in the name of self-defense, but also provided all kinds of military assistance. However, Netanyahu has ignored Biden's voice calling for him to restrain military operations in Gaza, and has even gone so far as to publicly criticize the Biden administration.

Even though the United States has never interrupted its military aid, Israel has been unable to gain a sense of security from the special relationship. There is no doubt that in the wake of this Gaza conflict Israel's leaders will have to consider how to respond to new challenges to their national security — for example, how to deal with the next asymmetric attack, how to face a new Middle East in which the U.S. continues to withdraw and how to face a Western world in which antisemitism is on the rise.

Fourth, the Gaza crisis highlights the Biden administration's dilemma following the stalemate in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. The Biden administration faces a great dilemma as it looks for peace between Palestine and Israel. The overarching issue in resolving the current situation in Gaza is how to find a new political consensus. This is a prerequisite for ending the armed conflict and humanitarian catastrophe.

First, the Netanyahu government's military adventure offered no practical political resolution, which sidelined the Biden administration in a passive role — at a loss in the face of Israel's military operations.

Second, the current two-state solution supported by the U.S. has been roundly rejected by Israel. On the issue of Israeli-Palestinian relations, the Biden administration neither dares to pressure Israel for peace talks nor can muster the courage and capability to put forward a more innovative political solution that can be accepted by all parties.

Even the current two-state solution supported by the U.S. is becoming increasingly difficult to implement when facing the erosion of Israeli settlements and the fixed occupation of Jerusalem. The U.S. policy of unconditional support for Israel at the United Nations has not only caused dissatisfaction throughout the international community but has also undermined the foundations of the international order that emerged after World War II.

Given the fact that Israel was established as a state based on a UN General Assembly partition resolution, such practices are tantamount to quenching thirst and will only further weaken America's international standing and moral authority.

Fifth, the Gaza crisis has become a new obstacle to Biden's re-election. Historically, American Jews have been pivotal in presidential elections. They have been a reliable vote bank for the Democratic Party and a major source of campaign funds. Support for Israel has been the goal of most American Jewish organizations and lobbies. In the 2020 U.S. presidential election, some 69 percent of Jews voted for Biden.

Biden's support for Israel will naturally be applauded by a few Jewish voters and lobbies. However, the protracted Gaza conflict may force Biden to continue to pressure Netanyahu, jeopardizing the special relationship between the U.S. and Israel and hence causing these voters and lobbies to withdraw their support.

At the same time, Muslim-Americans, along with left-wing groups — which are also traditional Democratic constituencies — are now extremely disappointed and dissatisfied with Biden's Gaza policy. In the same vein, the recent spate of pro-Palestinian protests on U.S. campuses does not bode well for Biden's reelection. If the Gaza crisis remains unresolved, it could be the straw that breaks Biden's back.