U.S. editorial roundup: Saturday, July 20, 2024

Excerpts from recent editorials in the United States and abroad:

The Washington Post

July 12

Young people in America and national service

Polls suggest young Americans are less enchanted with their country than previous generations. Yet even those who want to serve their country, conducting some form of national service, are too often turned away by top programs. The opposite should be true: Volunteer organizations such as AmeriCorps, Teach for America, the Peace Corps and the newly formed American Climate Corps should be well-funded and encouraged. National service could become a pervasive post-graduation option that all young Americans consider.

British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak this year proposed a national service plan that would have granted young adults the option of enrolling in a year-long military training program or committing to civil service one weekend every month for the same amount of time. The proposal was highly unpopular, with Brits balking at what they saw as the effective conscription of their nation's youths.

The idea has more support here in the States. A 2017 Gallup poll shows that nearly half of Americans favor mandatory national service. Many teenagers themselves, it turns out, are interested - too many for the system to accommodate. Relevant programs are underfunded, and, as a result, can't accept the millions of Americans who sign up, even if there's plenty of useful work those applicants could do. Expanding opportunities for national service is one of the few topics that transcend political affiliation, age and race in the United States. People see the benefits of serving their country, whether it be through the military or helping out at their local soup kitchen. But the costs of doing so can be high - so it's on the government to reduce them.

To be clear, Congress should not impose a mandate. Forcing a year or two of service from the nation's next great tech innovators, or star athletes, or cohort of primary-care physicians, or skilled construction workers needed to build new infrastructure would do more harm to society than good - though such people should obviously be welcome in these programs. Rather, as they and their peers approach their later teenage years, they should discuss with their friends who will go right to college, or directly to graduate school, or immediately into a trade, and who will take a year or two to make the United States more livable, more safe or more healthy, along with millions of others from around the country.

The Unity Through Service Act would make it easier for Americans to find their way into national service, building an interagency council that includes military, national and public service officials working together to inform young adults about existing service opportunities. Heads of agencies such as AmeriCorps and Peace Corps could engage in joint recruitment campaigns. The costs for the council itself, according to one legislative official, are "negligible" and would create the infrastructure needed to support the expansion of service programs while many wait for additional funding.

But passing this modest bill would be only a start. Participating in a program such as AmeriCorps or Peace Corps means sacrificing one or two years in the workforce and the likely higher salary that would come with a job. Meanwhile, the stipends these programs offer usually do not cover the cost of living - largely because the programs have faced years of sharp funding cuts. National service might never pay as well as a Wall Street internship, but Congress should invest in increasing pay for young people so it's at least a plausible option for Americans with little money to spare. National service initiatives should also provide flexibility to applicants, allowing them to focus on a particular skill set, say, or geographic location. Doing so would attract Gen Z participants who want to develop skills during their service that could further their career goals.

Yet, a revitalized national service program would help not only young Americans preparing to enter the workforce or government agencies and organizations that benefit from young Americans' labor. The most profound benefits might flow to society at large, from instilling in a diverse group of participants a shared sense of service and duty, alleviating political apathy and building unity. If newly minted adults are following President John F. Kennedy's famous advice, asking what they can do for their country, the country should make sure it has an answer.

The New York Times

July 13

Attack on Trump shows violence is infecting American political life

Americans received a sobering reminder on Saturday of the threat that political violence poses to our democracy. It is a mercy that Donald Trump was not seriously injured by gunfire at an evening campaign rally in Butler, a Pennsylvania city north of Pittsburgh, and a tragedy that at least one person at the rally was killed. We hope that Mr. Trump recovers quickly and fully.

There is much we don't know yet about the gunman and the shooting, which is being investigated as an attempted assassination. But this much is clear: Any attempt to resolve an election through violence is abhorrent. Violence is antithetical to democracy. Ballots, not bullets, should always be the means by which Americans work through their differences.

It is now incumbent on political leaders of both parties, and on Americans individually and collectively, to resist a slide into further violence and the type of extremist language that fuels it. Saturday's attack should not be taken as a provocation or a justification.

Americans also must be cleareyed about the challenge that is confronting this nation. Saturday's events cannot be written off as an aberration. Violence is infecting and inflecting American political life.

Acts of violence have long shadowed American democracy, but they have loomed larger and darker of late. Cultural and political polarization, the ubiquity of guns and the radicalizing power of the internet have all been contributing factors, as this board laid out in its editorial series "The Danger Within" in 2022. This high-stakes presidential election is further straining the nation's commitment to the peaceful resolution of political differences.

Democracy requires partisans to accept that the process is more important than the results. Even before Saturday's events, there were worrying signs that many Americans are failing that essential test. In a survey conducted last month by the Chicago Project on Security and Threats, 10 percent of respondents agreed that the use of force was justified to prevent Mr. Trump from becoming president, and 7 percent said the use of force was justified to return Mr. Trump to the presidency.

Mr. Trump's political agenda cannot and must not be opposed by violence. It cannot and must not be pursued through violence.

The attack on Saturday was a tragedy. The challenge now confronting Americans is to prevent this moment from becoming the beginning of a greater tragedy.

This election must be resolved by the votes Americans will cast.

The Wall Street Journal

July 12

Biden's cease fire deal in Gaza

"Look at the numbers in Israel," President Biden said at his press conference Thursday. "My numbers are better in Israel than they are here." These days that's not saying much, but in fact Israelis prefer a Donald Trump victory by 21 percentage points, according to the July poll from Israel's leading news channel. Perhaps that will change if Mr. Biden gets the hostage deal he's trumpeting.

The president took credit Thursday for progress in Gaza negotiations. He recalled his May 31 speech on an Israeli framework for a cease-fire and hostage agreement. "That framework is now agreed on by both Israel and Hamas," he announced. "There are still gaps to close, but we're making progress."

The framework has three phrases. The first would free some 30 Israeli hostages in exchange for a six-week cease-fire and hundreds of terrorists. From there would spring negotiations for the next phases, involving the release of the remaining hostages and a full Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, then reconstruction.

The sticking point has been the transition from the first phase. Hamas had insisted that Israel agree from the outset on an end to the war and automatic passage to phase two - which is unacceptable to Israel, as it would guarantee Hamas' victory. Israel wants the option to resume the war after phase one if negotiations for postwar Gaza fail.

Under Israeli military pressure in Rafah, Hamas is finally showing flexibility on this condition. Recall how the president bashed Israel, withheld and delayed weapons and drew a red line at an invasion of Rafah. White House spokesman John Kirby had even claimed, "Any kind of major Rafah ground operation would actually strengthen Hamas' hands at the negotiating table." So much for that.

Hamas now may need a deal, but it's trying alternative wording to lock in Israel to indefinite negotiations for phase two. This is a point on which Israel needs Mr. Biden's backing. The president wants a diplomatic success, but a deal that would let Hamas control Gaza - officially or unofficially, as with Hezbollah in Lebanon - would seed the next massacre and war.

Another point of contention concerns the Philadelphia corridor between Gaza and Egypt. When Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005, it made the mistake of trusting Egypt to patrol the corridor. Technological solutions were also supposed to block tunnels and keep arms from Hamas - only for Israel now to unearth the extensive Gaza-Egypt tunnels in Rafah.

To stop Hamas from rearming, and strangle a potential insurgency, Israel needs to watch the border. It isn't in the U.S. interest to pressure Israel to pretend otherwise. Some Israeli statements have left an opening for Egyptian control, but Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu seemed to close that door in recent days. A senior Israeli official tells us, "We are going to be in Philadelphia for the foreseeable future. We've made that clear in negotiations."

Another thing Israel has made clear: It isn't going to slow the pace of the fighting to smooth the talks. To get a deal, let Hamas negotiate under fire.