This week leaders of over 100 countries are gathering in Glasgow to discuss how to slow the pace of climate change, and no doubt the carbon emissions from fossil fuels and other energy sources are on the agenda. Victoria Coates and Fred Zeidman, placing energy policy in a broader strategic perspective, explain how American and Israeli interests overlap:

As energy shortages convulse Europe and Asia, the U.S. and Israel find themselves in the enviable position of having not only sufficient energy production to support their domestic needs, but also excess to export in support of more stable global energy flows.

This represents a tectonic shift for the two historically energy-vulnerable nations and opens up previously unimaginable potential for them to partner together to their mutual benefit as they emerge from the COVID-19 pandemic. Ensuring the free passage of energy from the Persian Gulf to supply both America and fellow importers such as Israel has for decades been a key pillar of both [U.S.] Middle East and energy policies.

Both the United States and Israel can . . . take advantage of their radically new energy posture. Even with ample supply, both are still vulnerable to price spikes, but the answer to this problem is not increased imports from the Gulf. They don’t need to ask for help to do this when they can do it theirselves by boosting production and, most importantly, by encouraging exploration and development of new resources.

In addition, the U.S. can strongly support the proposed pipeline between Israel and Egypt for export via the facilities near Alexandria. It can revisit the Eastern Mediterranean pipeline that would give Europe a badly needed alternative to Russia’s Nord Stream 2 pipeline. These prudent investments now will ensure the citizens of both countries enjoy the bountiful energy with which they have been blessed, even as they continue to explore further diversification of supply through renewables and alternatives such as hydrogen.

If there is to be peace, Palestinians will have to unlearn the hatred of Israel they have imbibed during nearly two decades of Hamas rule. This will be a difficult task, but Cole Aronson argues, drawing on the experiences of World War II, that Israel has already gotten off to a strong start:

The population’s compliance can . . . be won by a new regime that satisfies its immediate material needs, even if that new regime is sponsored by a government until recently at war with the population’s former regime. Axis civilians were made needy through bombing. Peaceful compliance with the Allies became a good alternative to supporting violent resistance to the Allies.

Israel’s current campaign makes a moderate Gaza more likely, not less. Destroying Hamas not only deprives Islamists of the ability to rule—it proves the futility of armed resistance to Israel, a condition for peace. The destruction of buildings not only deprives Hamas of its hideouts. It also gives ordinary Palestinians strong reasons to shun groups planning to replicate Hamas’s behavior.