The response needs to catch up

There are few instances in recent memory that so profoundly illustrate what not to do when addressing a public-policy crisis than our current migrant crisis. From Joe Biden’s failures at the southern border, to the empty “sanctuary” promises of Gov. Kathy Hochul and New York City Mayor Eric Adams, to the lack of communication and transparency at all levels of government, New York’s migrant crisis shows no signs of slowing down. No part of this emergency was handled properly, and the coming months will almost certainly bring more challenges for local officials and communities.

It was less than a year ago, last October, when Mayor Adams initially suggested the city would need $1 billion to pay for shelter and services to offer incoming migrants. At the time, this was an eye-opening request. But now, after 10 months of Democrats’ continued dysfunction, the mayor is estimating the costs will reach at least $12 billion over the next three years.

This is a staggering sum. Gov. Hochul and Mayor Adams have each declared states of emergency on the migrant crisis, allowing them to spend taxpayer money without the normal oversight measures in place. As Republican members of the state’s congressional delegation pointed out in a recent letter to city and state officials, the contracts to develop the emergency infrastructure needed to house the migrants are being awarded without a competitive bidding process. 

We witnessed similar missteps under the COVID emergency. Gov. Hochul was able to award a $637 million state contract to a loyal campaign donor, forcing taxpayers to pay more than twice the market rate for test kits. In an effort to avoid similar situations in the migrant crisis, Assemblyman Ed Ra (R–Franklin Square) introduced a bill — A.7508 — earlier this year, yet the effort was roundly rejected by the state legislature’s majority conferences.

The strain this massive migrant influx is going to have on our communities cannot be overstated. Already, school-district officials around the state are scrambling to come up with a plan for September, which is just a few weeks away. Education advocates, rightfully, have demanded transparency on how these children will be treated, where their mandated immunizations will come from, how much it will cost to educate them, and a host of other considerations associated with classroom management.

Ultimately, for as much money as this is going to cost New Yorkers, the true tragedy here is that those who are responsible for creating this mess have put all of us in danger — and that includes the migrants. Right now, the strain on these services is substantial and growing, and that puts us all at risk. Simply put, this entire situation was a disaster at every stage — from the White House to the governor’s mansion to city hall. It has jeopardized the well-being of New York City, communities across the state, and the thousands of migrants here with no real plan to house, educate, and protect them. We are facing a genuine crisis, and New York’s leaders have done nothing but illustrate what not to do during one.        

William (Will) A. Barclay, 54, Republican, is the New York Assembly minority leader and represents the 120th New York Assembly District, which encompasses all of Oswego County, as well as parts of Jefferson and Cayuga counties.

All eyes were on NATO [recently] as leaders of its member nations met in Lithuania to debate key issues, including their response to Russia’s war against Ukraine. That marked quite a change — a positive one — in the status of the 74-year-old organization.

Israeli President Isaac Herzog celebrated the “sacred bond” between the United States and Israel when he spoke to a joint session of Congress [July 19]. But recent developments have tested that bond as rarely before in Israel’s 75-year history.

On July 24, Israel’s parliament approved the first phase in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s plan to restructure the judicial system, despite mass protests that brought hundreds of thousands of Israelis to the streets. A White House statement called the vote “unfortunate.”

Israeli society is divided, with Netanyahu’s far-right governing coalition determined to take the country in one direction and secular, liberal Israelis pushing back. (The prime minister is Israel’s chief executive [who returned to power in last November’s election]; Herzog’s presidency is largely ceremonial). Critics say Netanyahu’s judicial reforms will undermine democracy by making it harder for the courts to check government power.

Meanwhile, tit-for-tat violence has escalated between Israel’s defense forces and Palestinian militants in the West Bank and Gaza, reaching levels not seen since the last Palestinian uprising in 2005. Controversially, the government has increased Jewish settlements in Israeli-controlled Palestinian territories, settlements that the United Nations considers illegal.

The news from the region doesn’t lend itself to optimism, but neither should we give in to pessimism. The Middle East has a complex history, and it has faced great challenges throughout history. Its people have shown themselves to be determined and resilient.

The U.S. regards Israel as a cornerstone of democracy in a region known for autocratic and repressive rulers. But Netanyahu’s government, the most far-right in Israel’s history, has strained the relationship. The ultimate political survivor [Israel’s longest-serving prime minister who has served a total of 15 years in office], he has aligned himself with nationalist and religious parties to hold together a governing coalition despite facing charges of fraud and bribery.

The international community has long pinned its hopes for Middle East peace on a two-state solution in which Palestinians would have their own independent nation that could include East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza. That idea seems dead in the water for now, but no real alternative has replaced it.

But international support has helped achieve progress in the past, and surely it can in the future. Fifty years ago, the Geneva Conference reduced conflict between Israel and Egypt but made little progress on the Palestinian question. The 1978 Camp David Accords raised hopes but again fell short of a peaceful resolution. Then came the Oslo Accords, signed at the White House, which called for a reduction in violence and interim Palestinian governance in the West Bank and Gaza.

But Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, who had signed the agreement, was assassinated by a right-wing extremist. Palestinian groups stepped up terrorist attacks, producing a reaction that helped bring Netanyahu to power and helps keep him there. Progress stalled again.

For the United States, the current situation requires a diplomatic balancing act. We have a long history of support for Israel, and we provide it with $3.8 billion a year in aid, most of it being military aid. We also provide significant humanitarian and civil-society aid for the Palestinians. We have a stake in all these conflicts.

President Joe Biden greeted Herzog warmly when the Israeli president visited last month. He also phoned Netanyahu and invited him to the White House this year. For all the disagreements, Israel remains a key American ally, and the wider Middle East is crucial to global stability.

For the U.S., the only real option is to do whatever we can to discourage violence and promote dialogue. Crucially, we should try to help keep lines of communication open between Israelis, Palestinians, and their neighbors. The saying attributed to Winston Churchill — that it’s better to jaw, jaw, than to war, war — holds especially true for this unstable and conflict-prone region.

These kinds of disagreements among friends are to be expected in any large alliance. What’s important is that NATO members work through them and stay focused on our common interests. A strong and unified NATO has made the world safer for almost 75 years. We must work so that it continues to do so.                      

Lee Hamilton, 92, is a senior advisor for the Indiana University (IU) Center on Representative Government, distinguished scholar at the IU Hamilton Lugar School of Global and International Studies, and professor of practice at the IU O’Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs. Hamilton, a Democrat, was a member of the U.S. House of Representatives for 34 years (1965-1999), representing a district in south-central Indiana.