这“特殊关系”随着以色列在2007年发动地面进攻，美国和以色列之间的关系面临压力拉法加沙南部的一个城市，据信大约有140万巴勒斯坦人在那里避难。
总统乔·拜登称入侵拉法是一条“红线”美国国务卿安东尼布林肯上周在中东之行中表示，那里的一次重大军事行动将是一个“错误”，会导致更多平民死亡，并加剧本已严峻的人道主义危机。
布林肯说:“有一种更好的方式来应对哈马斯构成的持续威胁。”3月21日在埃及举行的新闻发布会上说尽管他没有详细说明“更好的方式”是什么样的。
副总统卡玛拉·哈里斯告诉ABC新闻在周日播出的采访中美国政府不排除如果以色列总理本雅明·内塔尼亚胡不顾美国的担忧，像他发誓要做的那样发动进攻的后果。
更多:哈里斯称美国没有排除以色列入侵拉法的“后果”
内塔尼亚胡说，进入拉法对战胜哈马斯和防止未来的恐怖袭击至关重要。虽然他感谢美国的支持，但以色列可以单独行动。据联合国称，在以色列-哈马斯战争期间，100多万巴勒斯坦人逃到拉法寻求庇护。以色列国防军表示，在进攻拉法之前，计划将平民推向加沙地带中心的“人道主义岛屿”。
当内塔尼亚胡突然取消周一，一个以色列代表团前往华盛顿讨论拉法的替代方案。此前美国以弃权的方式允许联合国通过一项决议，要求在斋月剩余时间内在加沙立即停火。自那以后首相同意重新安排会议时间据白宫称，但具体日期尚未确定。这次会议将是一次重要的会议，因为美国还没有看到以色列打算如何处理拉法平民的确切计划正如政府所要求的那样。
在这张2023年10月18日的档案照片中，乔·拜登总统会见了以色列总理本杰明·内塔...显示更多
布伦丹·斯米卢斯基/法新社
在僵局中，问题仍然是拜登还能做些什么来对内塔尼亚胡施加压力，以及政府如何可能让以色列对入侵拉法负责。
美利坚大学以色列研究中心副主任盖伊·齐夫在接受美国广播公司采访时说:“他的能力有限。“就他们能做的事情而言，任何一位美国总统都有些有限，他不会取悦所有人。”
正如前国务院外交官、现就职于卡内基国际和平基金会的亚伦·大卫·米勒所说:“拜登在一个盒子里，没有出路。”
根据以色列当局的说法，哈马斯于2023年10月7日从加沙通过空中、陆地和海上入侵以色列南部，造成1200多人死亡，另有253人被劫为人质。根据哈马斯控制的加沙卫生部的数据，自10月7日以来，在以色列持续不断的地面行动和对加沙地带的空中轰炸中，加沙已有32，000多名巴勒斯坦人死亡，74，000多人受伤。
当被问及拜登在以色列问题上可以使用什么后果或手段时，白宫一直避免讨论“假设”。美国国家安全委员会发言人约翰·柯比(John Kirby)周一被一名记者问及这个问题时，回避并重申了美国对以色列的总体支持，并表示美国将继续主张尽量减少平民伤亡、提供更多人道主义援助以及达成一项潜在的人质协议。
一些民主党议员，特别是该党进步派成员，呼吁随着加沙人道主义局势的恶化，对以色列的军事和财政援助附加条件。人道主义和国际援助组织对加沙地带正在发生的前所未有的危机发出了详尽的警告。综合粮食安全阶段分类倡议本月早些时候表示，加沙北部的饥荒“迫在眉睫”，可能发生在3月中旬至5月底之间，因为加沙地带的所有人口都经历了高水平的饥荒食物不安全感。
在这张2023年10月13日的档案照片中，一架美国C-17停在以色列沙漠中的内瓦提姆空军基地。空气...显示更多
洛丽塔·巴尔多/美联社文件
自1947年以色列建国以来，美国向以色列提供的援助超过了其他任何国家。根据国会研究服务中心的数据，其中包括1580亿美元(未经通胀调整)的军事援助和国防资金。该部门去年报告称，来自美国的此类援助约占以色列国防总预算的16%。
齐夫在谈到美国对以色列的军事援助时说:“这非常非常重要。他说，对其附加条件“为以色列创造了一个危险的先例，因为在此之前这是不可能的。”
以色列入侵拉法对平民意味着什么:“灾难性的严重”
两国在援助方面最显著的分歧之一出现在20世纪90年代初。然后，在老布什总统的领导下，美国同意向以色列提供100亿美元的贷款担保，以帮助苏联犹太人在以色列重新定居。但布什直到以色列政府同意减少在被占领土上的定居点活动后才做出这些保证。
不过，这种分歧涉及经济援助，而不是军事援助。它也不是在以色列正在与威胁其安全的恐怖组织进行战争的时候出现的。
接受美国广播公司采访的专家同意，美国不太可能过度限制军事援助，尤其是在以色列还面临与黎巴嫩接壤的北部边境压力的情况下。
拜登本人已经排除了停止供应会使以色列无法自卫的武器的可能性，比如其铁穹系统所使用的武器。在本月早些时候接受MSNBC采访时，拜登重申，尽管拉法是一条“红线”，但他绝不会切断对以色列的所有武器供应。
战略与国际研究中心中东项目主任乔恩·奥尔特曼对美国广播公司新闻频道说:“明确的条件性带来的挑战是它会造成一场意愿竞赛。”
他说:“通常情况下，不太明确地列出后果，让你的伴侣有机会悄悄遵守，比明确的条件更有效。”
报告称，加沙北部饥荒“迫在眉睫”，许多人面临“灾难性”的饥饿
尽管如此，奥尔特曼表示，他认为如果内塔尼亚胡无视拜登政府对拉法的要求，可能会有其他潜在后果，例如减缓援助或推迟交付进攻性武器。这种情况以前也发生过，比如20世纪80年代罗纳德·里根总统推迟向以色列交付军用飞机由于以色列和黎巴嫩之间的冲突升级。
外交压力也可能继续存在。拜登尚未邀请内塔尼亚胡访问华盛顿，参议院多数党领袖查克·舒默是美国最高级别的犹太官员，呼吁举行新的选举以取代总理，他称总理是和平的拦路虎。
美国可以继续弃权甚至支持以色列认为不利的联合国决议，就像它本周所做的那样。联合国安理会通过一项决议要求加沙停火并释放人质，美国弃权。内塔尼亚胡声称，联合国的投票代表着美国在冲突问题上的立场发生了变化，但白宫强烈否认了这一点。
“拉法行动是一个更广泛问题的一部分，即拜登政府在什么情况下会行使真正的影响力，并对本届以色列政府施加任何成本或后果?”米勒说。“(开战)已经快6个月了，尽管政府对内塔尼亚胡政府的一些政策感到沮丧和愤怒，但一直不愿这么做。”
联合国安理会就包括巴勒斯坦在内的中东局势举行会议...显示更多
安吉拉·维斯/法新社通过盖蒂图片
这一爆发点也正值拜登和内塔尼亚胡都面临国内政治压力之际。
美国长期以来一直支持以色列，尽管美国成年人仍然普遍支持以色列人，观点一直在转变甚至在战争爆发前就已经存在了。新的调查皮尤研究中心(Pew Research Center)本月发布的研究发现，在冲突发生近六个月的时间里，约有60%的美国人(58%)认为以色列打击哈马斯的理由是合理的，但以色列如何应对10月7日的袭击得到了更复杂的评价:38%的人认为以色列的战争行为是可以接受的，而34%的人认为这是不可接受的。
拜登是密歇根州和明尼苏达州等摇摆州的大型阿拉伯裔美国人和穆斯林社区对他对战争的反应进行抗议投票的目标。拜登说，他理解批评他的人的沮丧情绪，并在国情咨文中强调，美国一直在领导向加沙提供人道主义援助的努力，包括在地中海建造一个新码头，以便加沙可以接收运送食品、水、药品等的船只。
在以色列，内塔尼亚胡正面临着来自许多公民和他自己的联盟成员的挫折-其中一些在围绕他提议的司法改革的战争爆发前就开始了。
奥尔特曼说:“以色列是一个认为自己面临生存威胁的国家，因此任何外部力量影响以色列行动的能力都是有限的。”“除此之外，你还会看到总理和总统之间的政治斗争，双方都担心自己的政治前途，觉得对方可能会对自己构成威胁。”
US hasn't ruled out consequences for Israel over looming Rafah operation: What would that look like?
The"special relationship"between the United States and Israel is under pressure amid a looming Israeli ground offensive inRafah, a city in southern Gaza where it's believed there are about 1.4 million Palestinians taking refuge.
PresidentJoe Bidenhas called invading Rafah a "red line." Secretary of State Antony Blinken, in a trip to the Middle East last week, said a major military operation there would be a "mistake" that would result in more civilian deaths and worsen an already dire humanitarian crisis.
"There is a better way to deal with the threat, the ongoing threat posed by Hamas," Blinkensaid during a March 21 press conference in Egypt, though he did not elaborate on what a "better way" would look like.
Vice President Kamala Harris told ABC Newsin an interview that aired Sundaythat the administration was not ruling out consequences if Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu went ahead with an offensive, as he's vowed to do, despite U.S. concerns.
MORE: Harris says US has not ruled out 'consequences' if Israel invades Rafah
Netanyahu has said going into Rafah is crucial for victory over Hamas and to prevent future terror attacks, and while he appreciates U.S. support, Israel could do it alone. More than 1 million Palestinians have fled to Rafah to seek shelter during the Israel-Hamas war, according to the United Nations. The Israel Defense Forces has said it plans to push civilians toward "humanitarian islands" in the center of the Gaza Strip in advance of an offensive in Rafah.
Tensions boiled over when Netanyahuabruptly canceledan Israeli delegation to Washington on Monday to discuss an alternative approach to Rafah after the U.S. allowed, through abstention, the U.N. to pass a resolution demanding an immediate cease-fire in Gaza for the remainder of Ramadan. The prime minister has sinceagreed to reschedule the meeting, according to the White House, but no date has been set. The meeting will serve to be an important one, as the U.S. hasn't seen an exact plan for how Israel intends to deal with the civilian population in Rafah --as the administration has demanded.
Amid the stalemate, questions remain about what more Biden can do to exert pressure on Netanyahu and how the administration could potentially hold Israel accountable for an invasion of Rafah.
"He's limited in terms of what he can do," Guy Ziv, the associate director of American University's Center for Israel Studies, told ABC News. "Any U.S. president is somewhat limited in terms of what they can do, and he's not going to please everyone."
As Aaron David Miller, a former State Department diplomat now at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, put it: "Biden's in a box and there's no way out."
Hamas carried out an incursion from Gaza into southern Israel by air, land and sea on Oct. 7, 2023, killing more than 1,200 people and taking 253 others hostage, according to Israeli authorities. More than 32,000 Palestinians have been killed and more than 74,000 others have been injured in Gaza since Oct. 7, amid Israel's ongoing ground operations and aerial bombardment of the strip, according to the Hamas-run Gaza Health Ministry.
The White House has avoided discussing "hypotheticals" when pressed on what consequences or leverage Biden can use when it comes to Israel. National Security Council spokesman John Kirby, when asked that question by a reporter on Monday, sidestepped and reiterated overall U.S. support for Israel and said the U.S. would continue to advocate for minimizing civilian casualties, more humanitarian assistance and a potential hostage deal.
Some Democratic lawmakers, particularly members of the party's progressive wing, have called on conditioning military and financial aid to Israel as the humanitarian situation in Gaza worsens. Humanitarian and international aid organizations have exhaustively warned of the unprecedented crisis unfolding in the strip. The Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) initiative said earlier this month famine is "imminent" in northern Gaza and may occur between mid-March and the end of May, as the entire population of the strip experiences high levels offoodinsecurity.
The U.S. has provided Israel with more assistance than any other nation since the Jewish state's inception in 1947. That includes $158 billion (not adjusted for inflation) in military aid and defense funding, according to the Congressional Research Service. Such aid from the U.S. makes up roughly 16% of Israel's total defense budget, the service reported last year.
"It's very, very important," Ziv said of U.S. military aid to Israel. Placing conditions on it, he said, "creates a dangerous precedent for Israel because it just wasn't in the cards up until now."
What an Israeli invasion of Rafah would mean for civilians: 'Catastrophically serious'
One of the most notable rifts regarding aid between the two nations came in the early 1990s. Then, under President George H.W. Bush, the United States had agreed to provide Israel $10 billion in loan guarantees to help Soviet Jews resettle in Israel. But Bush didn't issue those guarantees until the Israeli government agreed to curtail settlement activity in occupied territory.
Still, that fissure involved economic aid, not military aid. It also did not come at a time when Israel was engaged in a war with a terrorist organization that threatens its security.
Outrightly conditioning U.S. military aid is not likely, experts who spoke with ABC News agreed, especially as Israel also faces pressure on its northern border with Lebanon.
Biden himself has already ruled out stopping the supply of weapons that would leave Israel unable to defend itself, like those used by its Iron Dome system. In an interview with MSNBC earlier this month, Biden reiterated that while Rafah was a "red line," he would never cut off all weapons to Israel.
"The challenge with explicit conditionality is it creates a contest of wills," Jon Alterman, director of the Middle East program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told ABC News.
"Oftentimes, having consequences that are less explicitly laid out and give your partners opportunities to quietly comply are more effective than explicit conditions," he said.
Famine is 'imminent' in northern Gaza, with many facing 'catastrophic' levels of hunger: Report
Still, Alterman said he believed if Netanyahu were to ignore the Biden administration's demands about Rafah, there could be other potential consequences, such as slowing down aid or postponing the delivery of offensive weapons. That's been done before, like when President Ronald Reagan delayed military aircraft deliveries to Israel in the 1980sdue to an escalating conflict between Israel and Lebanon.
Diplomatic pressures can also continue. Biden has yet to invite Netanyahu to Washington and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, the highest-ranking Jewish official in the U.S.,called for new electionsto replace the prime minister, who he described as a roadblock to peace.
The U.S. could continue to abstain or even support United Nations resolutions that Israel finds unfavorable, as it did this week. The U.N. Security Counciladopted a resolutiondemanding a cease-fire in Gaza and the release of hostages, with the U.S. abstaining. Netanyahu asserted the U.N. vote represented a change in the United States' stance on the conflict, which the White House vehemently denied.
"The Rafah operation is part of a broader question of under what circumstances would the Biden administration exercise real leverage and impose any costs or consequences on this Israeli government?" Miller said. "It's almost six months in [to the war] and the administration, despite its frustration and anger with some of the policies of the Netanyahu government, has been reluctant to do so."
The flash point also comes as both Biden and Netanyahu face political pressure at home.
There has been longstanding support in the U.S. for Israel, and while American adults remain broadly supportive of Israelis,opinions had been shiftingon Israel and the Palestinians even before the war broke out. A newsurveyfrom Pew Research Center published this month found that nearly six months into the conflict, roughly six in 10 Americans (58%) said Israel's reasons for fighting Hamas are valid, but how Israel is carrying out its response to the Oct. 7 attack receives a more mixed evaluation: 38% said Israel's conduct of the war has been acceptable, while 34% say it has been unacceptable.
Biden was the target of protest votes from large Arab American and Muslim communities in swing states such as Michigan and Minnesota over his response to the war. Biden has said he understands the frustration of his critics, and at his State of the Union stressed that the U.S. has been leading efforts to get humanitarian assistance into Gaza, including building a new pier in the Mediterranean so Gaza can receive ships carrying food, water, medicine and more.
In Israel, Netanyahu is facing frustration from many citizens and from members of his own coalition -- some of which began before the war broke out over his proposed judicial overhauls.
"Israel is a country that feels it's facing an existential threat and so the ability of any outside power to shape Israeli actions is limited," Alterman said. "On top of that, you have a political tussle between the prime minister and the president, each of whom is concerned about his political future and feels the other may pose a threat to him."
