At the beginning of Thanksgiving break with all the festivities and excitement around the Yale-Harvard game, we may not all be keeping up with events in the world as much as previously.

For this reason, I wanted to write to draw attention to the recent publication of an op-ed by President Biden in the Washington Post.

In it, Biden generally defends the administration’s current stance on the conflicts in Israel and Ukraine, but he also makes a crucial announcement, calling for the international community to provide “interim security measures” to administer post-war Gaza. This confirms reported European Union-United States discussions on an international peacekeeping force that would be sent to Gaza.

This approach to Gaza reflects what should be at the heart of all countries’ responses to the Israel-Hamas war. We must focus on how to prevent further tragedies like the one that has played out since Oct. 7. Too many people have died for us to deem acceptable some band-aid solution that halts the violence now only for it to erupt again next year after Iran has managed to smuggle a few more rockets to Hamas — or whatever combination of militias take over. Too many people have also died for us to hold out and refuse any solution until we apportion land according to what’s “just” or achieve some paradise of freedom, equality and human rights — the solution will be messy, and we’ll have to let Palestinians and Israelis come to heal and negotiate the best way to coexist over time.

What response to this crisis best ensures lasting peace in the region? Surely not one where militant groups like Hamas control Gaza, a group that in launching its attack undermined negotiations between Israel and its neighbors. The same Hamas that has long served as the violent alternative to Fatah’s willingness to compromise, as the alternative to finding a peaceful settlement. Surely a militant group that is willing to sacrifice the lives of civilians, even forcing them at gunpoint into harm’s way, has insufficient qualms about engaging in violence to be a partner with whom peace can be found. Peace cannot begin without actors who are at least theoretically open to it.

Hamas is still probably the better alternative to a state of anarchy where even more armed groups proliferate or an Israeli occupation that would just bring the combatants closer together into even more brutal violence. But we don’t need to resort to this option. 

Because of the tragedy ongoing since Oct. 7, the world is stepping up. There is widespread willingness to support an international force in Gaza, both from ardent supporters of Israel like Biden and those now urging for a ceasefire like Macron. Such an option would deal with Israel’s legitimate security concerns — that Hamas killed thousands of Israeli civilians is a fact; only the proper reaction is in debate — reducing the need/excuse for Israel to launch incursions into Gaza in the future. 

This United Nations proposal has been criticized due to past failures of missions in the region to take active steps to prevent violence, but most of these failures could be ascribed to a lack of sufficient authority to enforce peace, such as being civilian missions or relying on host-country permission. And the most likely candidate to take over sovereign control of Gaza post-war is probably the Palestinian Authority. It’s unlikely it would allow Hamas to act freely given the hostility between the two groups, making these issues unlikely to surface. 

And while it may be harder to find nations willing to send their own children to Gaza to maintain the peace when plans become more concrete, that is a problem each one of us can control by expressing to our home country’s government our desire for peace in the Middle East and willingness to thus put our nation’s just a little into harm’s way.

In order to build the groundwork for this peace, though, we must eliminate Hamas. The United States must continue supporting Israel’s operations in Gaza.

For this reason, although divestment from corporations that heavily rely on Israeli settlements is desirable — e.g. Ahava, though not companies that generally service Israel like EuroAsia Interconnector — I urge Yale University to NOT divest from weapons manufacturers. The employees of these corporations work day in and day out to produce ever more accurate munitions necessary to defeat the enemies of peace, both Hamas and Russia’s army, minimizing the cost of innocent, human lives.

Cease calling for a ceasefire now!

JOHN MATTHEWS-EDERINGTON is a first-year in Berkeley College. Contact him at john.matthews-ederington@yale.edu.