Last week, reports emerged that the U.S., Israel, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia are involved in negotiations for the islands of Tiran and Sanafir to pass from Egyptian to Saudi control. The two tiny islands are uninhabited and without natural resources, yet they have outsized geopolitical significance, as Orde Kittrie explains:

Both Tiran and Sanafir are located in the Strait of Tiran, the narrow body of water connecting the Gulf of Eilat to the Red Sea. Whoever controls the islands can block maritime access to Israel’s port of Eilat and to Jordan’s only port, Aqaba. . . . Egypt’s closures of the Strait of Tiran to Israeli shipping were a major cause of the 1956 and 1967 wars between the two countries.

During the 1967 war, Israel . . . seized Tiran and Sanafir. The islands returned to Egypt only as part of the 1979 Egypt-Israel peace treaty, which legally obligated Egypt to allow Israel “unimpeded and non-suspendable” navigation of the strait, limited Egypt’s military presence on the islands, and established a multinational peacekeeping force. . . . The need for Israel to agree to the islands’ transfer to Saudi Arabia results from Egypt’s 1979 peace-treaty obligations.

Reportedly, the only public step to which Riyadh agreed in exchange for the island transfer is to authorize more Israeli airliners to cross Saudi airspace en route to other destinations. Saudi Arabia was reportedly also considering allowing Israeli Muslim pilgrims to fly directly from Israel to Saudi Arabia, but that was reportedly omitted from the final deal. Notably, Biden’s announcement of the deal will reportedly not include a public meeting between Israeli and Saudi officials.

In exchange for Saudi Arabia being given what are in essence the keys to Israel’s outlet to the Indian Ocean and most of Asia, Riyadh should be pushed to provide more in return, including public evidence that its attitude towards Israel has truly and sustainably changed. Indeed, Saudi Arabia should be strongly encouraged to move as close to normalization as possible with Israel.

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.