Defense Priorities Defense Priorities
  • Policy Topics
    • Ukraine-Russia
    • NATO
    • China
    • Syria
    • Israel-Iran
  • Research
    • Briefs
    • Explainers
    • Reports
  • Programs
    • Grand Strategy Program
    • Military Analysis Program
    • Asia Program
    • Middle East Program
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Media
  • About
    • Mission & Vision
    • People
    • Jobs
    • Contact
  • Donate
Select Page
Home / Israel-Hamas / Doing something can be worse than doing nothing
Israel‑Hamas, Grand strategy, Israel, Middle East

June 14, 2024

Doing something can be worse than doing nothing

By Alexander Langlois

Winston Churchill once argued that “perfection is the enemy of progress” — a statement that certainly does not describe the US pier operation in Gaza. While the publicly stated goal of alleviating the humanitarian suffering of Palestinians trapped in the small coastal enclave is commendable, the reality is that the project was a failure before it broke apart. Rather than opt for additional band-aid fixes, the Biden administration should simplify its approach — namely by pressuring Israel to allow aid into Gaza from land crossings while providing relief workers real security guarantees.

The humanitarian situation has deteriorated in Gaza since Israel’s invasion following the Hamas attacks of October 7. An ongoing Israeli and Egyptian blockade of the territory — which the Israeli government hardened in October — has most of the roughly 2.5 million Palestinians in Gaza struggling to survive. According to the United Nations, 1.1 million Palestinians face catastrophic levels of food insecurity, or famine conditions, with another 1.7 million displaced.

Washington has pressured Israel to open more land crossings into Gaza, albeit sporadically. The Biden administration also began working with regional partners to conduct airdrops into the enclave.

Both efforts proved to have serious limitations due to Israeli slow-rolling and the inefficiency of airdrops, leading Biden to announce plans to deploy the temporary pier operation. The administration stressed that no US troops would be on the ground in Gaza for the operation. It also argued the pier would cost roughly $180 million initially, with those costs increasing to $320 million over time.

Read at The Critic

Author

Alexander
Langlois

Contributing Fellow

Defense Priorities

More on Middle East

op-edIsrael‑Hamas, Israel, Middle East

What Israel’s Qatar strike on Hamas reveals

By Daniel DePetris

September 9, 2025

op-edIsrael‑Hamas, Israel, Middle East

What does Trump want in Gaza?

By Daniel DePetris

September 4, 2025

op-edAfghanistan, Counterterrorism, Middle East

Turns out leaving Afghanistan did not unleash terror on U.S. or region

By Rosemary Kelanic

August 28, 2025

In the mediaIran, Middle East, Sanctions

Why European countries want to reimpose harsh sanctions on Iran

Featuring Jennifer Kavanagh

August 28, 2025

op-edIsrael‑Hamas, Israel, Israel‑Iran

America’s relationship with Israel is a moral hazard

By William Walldorf

August 26, 2025

op-edMiddle East, Israel, Syria

Donald Trump tries to make history in Syria and Lebanon

By Daniel DePetris

August 26, 2025

Events on Israel-Hamas

See All Events
virtualMiddle East, Basing and force posture, Diplomacy, Houthis, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Israel‑Hamas, Military analysis, Syria

Past Virtual Event: Trump in the Middle East: Impacts, implications, and alternatives

May 16, 2025
virtualHouthis, Iran, Israel‑Hamas, Middle East, Yemen

Past Virtual Event: Houthi conundrum: defend, degrade, or defer

March 28, 2024
virtualMiddle East, Iran, Israel‑Hamas, Israel‑Iran, Syria, Yemen

Past Virtual Event: Keeping the U.S. out of war in the Middle East

January 16, 2024

Receive expert foreign policy analysis

Join the hub of realism and restraint

Expert updates and analysis to enhance your understanding of vital U.S. national security issues

Defense Priority Mono Logo

Our mission is to inform citizens, thought leaders, and policymakers of the importance of a strong, dynamic military—used more judiciously to protect America’s narrowly defined national interests—and promote a realistic grand strategy prioritizing restraint, diplomacy, and free trade to ensure U.S. security.

  • About
  • For Media
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Contact
© 2025 Defense Priorities All Right Reserved