Follow us on social

google cta
|

On Gaza: What would Martin Luther King do?

He insisted in 1967 that it was morally imperative for the US to stop its role in the Vietnam war. He would be calling for Biden to demand a ceasefire now.

Analysis | Global Crises
google cta
google cta

As we celebrate the life and legacy of Reverend Martin Luther King today, we cross the 100-day mark in the devastating war in Gaza. If Dr. King were alive today, I feel certain he would have joined marches this weekend and used his voice and his pulpit to press the United States government to do everything in its power to persuade or pressure the government of Israel — which it has backed politically, diplomatically, militarily and financially — to agree to a ceasefire in its war in Gaza.

That war, waged in response to the deadly cross-border attack by Hamas and other militants on October 7 into Southern Israel has resulted in at least 23,000 Palestinian deaths and massive destruction, to date, as well as a punishing blockade preventing adequate food, water, medicine and other critical care to the two million people penned into the Gaza strip. As they seek shelter from artillery or bombs, more than 90 percent of the population is now at near term risk of starvation.

All of this horror is transpiring before our eyes — in much the way that the nightly network TV news brought reports from Vietnam in the 1960s. On April 4, 1967, Rev. King spoke out against the deadly impacts of America’s role in the Vietnamese civil war at the Riverside Church in his historic “Beyond Vietnam” speech, declaring “my conscience leaves me no other choice.” Rev. King insisted that it was morally imperative for the United States to take radical steps to halt the war — or at least its role in the war.

Inspired by his example, in early November more than 1,000 Black Christian leaders joined me to call upon President Biden to support a ceasefire in Gaza. Several of us met with White House outreach staff before publishing our call in a full page ad in the New York Times, urging them to use America’s leverage to actively work for a bilateral ceasefire and the release of all hostages held by Hamas and its allies, an increase of humanitarian aid and a peaceful resolution of the crisis. Among the signers were Rev. King’s daughter, Bernice A. King, Bishop Leah Daughtry and Rev. Dr. Freddy Haynes.

We called for “the safe and immediate return of all hostages still held in Gaza, the restoration of water, electricity, and urgent humanitarian relief to Palestinians commensurate with the scale of need created by this war.” We expressed concern that unless there is an immediate ceasefire by both Hamas and Israel, the conflict in Gaza will escalate into a regional war resulting in the continued death and injury of countless Palestinian and Israeli civilians, particularly children. Our fears are now being realized, as the U.S. government has launched missiles or dropped bombs on Syria, Iraqi militias, and — most recently — unleashed a barrage against the Yemeni forces who are disrupting shipping in the Red Sea, in an effort to put pressure on states to end Israel’s slaughter in Gaza. And war with forces in Lebanon appears highly probable.

Our call on the Biden Administration to “see the deaths and hear the cries of both our Palestinian and Israeli siblings whom all deserve to live safe from harm,” appear to have fallen on deaf ears. Beyond a temporary seven-day ceasefire in November, President Biden and the U.S. representatives in the UN have largely been unwavering in their support of Israel. While saying that he wants the war to end “as soon as possible.” Biden has not presented a timeline for ending the war. In a recent UN vote calling for an immediate humanitarian ceasefire in Gaza, the US was one of only 10 nations to vote against the resolution.

When we published our NYT appeal, “only” 10,000 residents of Gaza had been killed. We were told that President Biden is quietly applying pressure. Yet two months later, that toll stands at over 23,000 people killed. By the time Biden's “quiet strategy” bears fruit, there may well be nothing left of Gaza and we may have a regional war.

Against this backdrop, I and other Black American church leaders welcomed the moral leadership of the government of South Africa in bringing to the International Court of Justice an allegation of intent by Israel to commit genocide against the Palestinians of Gaza. Their request for rapid assessment of Israel’s compliance with its obligations under the Genocide Convention was heard in the Hague and viewed with interest around the world this past week.

This leadership by South Africa is especially poignant to Black clergy, many of whom actively campaigned in the 1980s to force the Reagan White House to end its support for the racist, apartheid government in South Africa. That work paid off, finally, in 1987, when Congress overrode President Reagan’s veto of a bill requiring comprehensive sanctions by the US government against the racist apartheid government that denied people of color their basic rights.

South African president Cyril Ramaphosa, who was a leader in that struggle in South Africa, explained the decision to bring the World Court case by saying, “As a people who once tasted the bitter fruits of dispossession, discrimination, racism and state-sponsored violence, we are clear that we will stand on the right side of history."

As Rev. King reminded us in his Letter from a Birmingham Jail, “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.” As people of moral conscience and as citizens of the United States, Black Christian leaders and so many other moral voices will continue to do all that is within our power to end U.S. support for the indiscriminate war and to press urgently for the return of the hostages and humanitarian assistance to the children, adults and elderly of Gaza.


Martin Luther King Jr., March on Washington, Aug. 28, 1963 (public domain)

google cta
Analysis | Global Crises
Did the US only attack Iran because of Israel?
Top image credit: President Donald J. Trump holds a joint news conference at the White House with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Feb. 4, 2025. (Shutterstock/ Joshua Sukoff)

Did the US only attack Iran because of Israel?

QiOSK

In the months that led up to the Iraq War, the Bush administration went to extraordinary lengths to convince the world of the need to oust Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein. Leading officials laid out their case in public, sharing what they claimed was evidence that Iraq was moving rapidly toward the deployment of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. When U.S. tanks rolled across the border, everyone knew the justification: the U.S. was determined to thwart Iraq’s development of weapons of mass destruction, however fictitious that threat would later prove to be.

In the months that led up to the Iran War, the Trump administration took a different tack. President Trump spoke only occasionally of Iran, offering a smattering of justifications for growing U.S. tensions with the country. He claimed without evidence that Iran was rebuilding its nuclear program after the U.S.-Israeli attack last June and even developing missiles that could strike the United States. But he insisted that Tehran could make a deal with seven magic words: “we will never have a nuclear weapon.”

keep readingShow less
Iran says ‘no ship is allowed to pass’ Strait of Hormuz: Reports
Top image credit: A large oil tanker transits the Strait of Hormuz. (Shutterstock/ Clare Louise Jackson)

Iran says ‘no ship is allowed to pass’ Strait of Hormuz: Reports

QiOSK

Hours after the U.S. and Israel launched a campaign of airstrikes across Iran, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps is warning vessels in the Persian Gulf via radio that “no ship is allowed to pass the Strait of Hormuz,” according to a report from Reuters.

The news suggests that Iran is ready to pull out all the stops in its response to the U.S.-Israeli barrage, which President Donald Trump says is aimed at toppling the Iranian regime. A full shutdown of the Strait of Hormuz would cause an international crisis given that 20% of the world’s oil passes through the narrow channel. Financial analysts estimate that even one day of a full blockade could cause global oil prices to double from $66 per barrel to more than $120.

keep readingShow less
Ro Khanna Jon Fetterman
Top photo credit: Ro Khanna (creative commons/WebSummitt ) and Jon Fetterman (shutterstock/EB Photos)

Fury and fanboys: US, world leaders react to US-Israeli war on Iran

QiOSK

The reactions are already coming in following the early morning attacks on Iran by U.S. and Israeli forces in what is being called "Operation Epic Fury." The reports are fluid, but as President Trump announced on his Truth Social, the U.S. is taking aim at Iran's military and senior leadership and hopes to raze both so that the Iranian people can take over. "When we are finished the government is yours to take. Your hour of freedom is at hand."

For some, like U.S. Senator Jon Fetterman, a Democrat who represents the people of Pennsylvania, this is the greatest thing to happen since the last time the U.S. and Israel attacked Iran in June. "President Trump has been willing to do what’s right and necessary to produce real peace in the region. God bless the United States, our great military, and Israel."

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.