In the State Department’s annual report on terrorism, issued last week, the section concerning Hamas’s rocket attacks and the IDF’s response cites both Israeli estimates of civilian and military casualties and the now-discredited estimates produced by the UN. Matthew Cella notes that these reports rarely contain such detail, and never mention conflicting estimates of casualties:

Consider the overview in the same State Department report in 2009, the first produced under the Obama administration. That document outlined the beginnings of the 22-day military campaign called Operation Cast Lead . . ., but it did so with far less detail. . . . The next year, the administration in its overview detailed even less about Palestinian casualties in the conflict. . . . Subsequent reports during the Obama administration document the firing of rockets and mortar shells and the subsequent responses with little elaboration.

Tensions have been high in recent months between President Barack Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over a deal to limit Iran’s nuclear ambitions. An op-ed this week in the Wall Street Journal by the former Israeli ambassador Michael Oren suggested President Obama has made mistakes in the Israeli-U.S. relationship “deliberately,” and that he was responsible for abandoning two core principles of the U.S.-Israel alliance: no public disagreements and no surprises.

Though subtle, [the] State Department report may have been a little bit of both.

For some time, opponents of U.S support for Israel have been urging the White House to end the war in Gaza, or simply calling for a ceasefire. Douglas Feith and Lewis Libby consider what such a result would actually entail:

Ending the war immediately would allow Hamas to survive and retain military and governing power. Leaving it in the area containing the Sinai-Gaza smuggling routes would ensure that Hamas can rearm. This is why Hamas leaders now plead for a ceasefire. A ceasefire will provide some relief for Gazans today, but a prolonged ceasefire will preserve Hamas’s bloody oppression of Gaza and make future wars with Israel inevitable.

For most Gazans, even when there is no hot war, Hamas’s dictatorship is a nightmarish tyranny. Hamas rule features the torture and murder of regime opponents, official corruption, extremist indoctrination of children, and misery for the population in general. Hamas diverts foreign aid and other resources from proper uses; instead of improving life for the mass of the people, it uses the funds to fight against Palestinians and Israelis.

Moreover, a Hamas-affiliated website warned Gazans last month against cooperating with Israel in securing and delivering the truckloads of aid flowing into the Strip. It promised to deal with those who do with “an iron fist.” In other words, if Hamas remains in power, it will begin torturing, imprisoning, or murdering those it deems collaborators the moment the war ends. Thereafter, Hamas will begin planning its next attack on Israel:

Hamas’s goals are to overshadow the Palestinian Authority, win control of the West Bank, and establish Hamas leadership over the Palestinian revolution. Hamas’s ultimate aim is to spark a regional war to obliterate Israel and, as Hamas leaders steadfastly maintain, fulfill a Quranic vision of killing all Jews.

Hamas planned for corpses of Palestinian babies and mothers to serve as the mainspring of its October 7 war plan. Hamas calculated it could survive a war against a superior Israeli force and energize enemies of Israel around the world. The key to both aims was arranging for grievous Palestinian civilian losses. . . . That element of Hamas’s war plan is working impressively.