In 2019, when the new U.S. embassy was opened in Jerusalem, the American consulate in the city—which had theretofore served as a diplomatic mission to the Palestinian Authority and to individual Palestinians—was merged into it. In May, Washington informed the Palestinian Authority of its intention to reopen the consulate. Alan Baker explains the institution’s history, and argues that its proper location is Ramallah rather than Jerusalem:

The U.S. consular mission in Jerusalem was originally established with the encouragement of American Christian proto-Zionists in 1844, when Jerusalem was still part of the Ottoman empire. Its function was to provide “humanitarian and legal assistance to Americans in the Holy Land and to protect minorities against discriminatory Ottoman practices.” The American consulate afforded consular services to Christian missionaries and Jews in the Holy Land.

[Today], a mutually accepted consular relationship between Israel and the United States is based on the 1963 Vienna Convention of Consular Relations to which both Israel and the United States are party. Article 4 determines that consular posts, or any other offices forming part of a consular post, may only be established in the territory of the receiving state with that state’s consent. Similarly, articles 7 and 8 of the convention require that the exercise of consular functions vis-à-vis or on behalf of another state requires specific approval.

Thanks to U.S. recognition of Israeli sovereignty over Jerusalem, Baker explains, the presence there of a consulate to the Palestinian Authority violates these requirements. But there is a simple solution to this problem:

A document entitled “The U.S.-Palestinian Reset and the Path Forward,” prepared for the incoming Biden administration . . . raises the “idea of reopening a U.S. mission in the Palestinian territories to signal a commitment to the two-state solution.” . . . Opening by the United States of such a representative office in Ramallah, or anywhere else in the territories under Palestinian governance, would be in accordance with the peace-process documentation agreed to by Israel and the Palestinians and supported by the United States, and would not require Israel’s consent, inasmuch as Israeli law is not applied in those areas.

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.