In recent weeks, the international community has increasingly voiced its opposition to Israel's ongoing military operation in Gaza, citing a growing civilian death toll and a worsening humanitarian crisis. The changing tide of global opinion has put new pressure on Israel's government and its closest ally, the United States, which is supplying and supporting the Israeli offensive.

Highlighting the shifting dynamics, a recent United Nations vote revealed a surge in global support for a ceasefire, with 153 countries in the General Assembly, a vast majority, voting in favor of an immediate humanitarian truce. This represents an increase from a similar vote in October, where 121 countries backed a ceasefire. Strikingly, US allies such as Canada, Australia, and Japan, who had abstained in October, joined the countries voting affirmatively this time. Meanwhile, the US stood among the few opposing the ceasefire resolution, while some of its other allies, including Germany and the United Kingdom, chose to abstain.

Notwithstanding the mounting global pressure, the Israeli government, perceiving its struggle with Hamas as existential, is not expected to alter its course. Likewise, experts anticipate that the US, a longstanding ally of Israel providing military aid, will continue its strong support due to the enduring relationship between the two countries and its own regional interests.

While US President Joe Biden has recently adopted a more moderate tone regarding Israel, tangible changes in the US's position on the conflict have primarily been rhetorical thus far. As long as Israel retains US backing, the increasing global backlash is unlikely to have a substantive impact on its ongoing military campaign, experts contend.

James Gelvin, a Middle Eastern history professor at UCLA, points out that only the United States wields the power to exert pressure on Israel through actions such as threatening to vote for or abstain in a UN Security Council call for a ceasefire, or by reconsidering its material support for the Israeli offensive. However, the US has shown no inclination to take such steps, allowing Israel to continue its wartime policies seemingly unaffected by international criticism.

The global concerns surrounding the Israeli offensive in Gaza, articulated by humanitarian organizations, the United Nations, and numerous countries, are influencing how the US frames its support for Israel. Nonetheless, these concerns have yet to manifest in concrete actions.

Steven Cook, a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, suggests that the Biden administration's public statements reflect its sensitivity to global public opinion, although he characterizes the shift as mainly rhetorical without any substantive change.

Biden himself has acknowledged the waning support for Israel, attributing it to the "indiscriminate bombing that takes place." US officials have also cautioned that Israel must take more measures to reduce civilian casualties, warning that a failure to do so could lead to further erosion of public backing.

The conflict with Hamas on October 7 triggered a sharp rise in civilian casualties in Gaza. Since then, Israel's airstrikes and ground offensive have purportedly claimed at least 18,600 lives, with the majority being civilians according to the Gaza Health Ministry. Furthermore, Israel's blockade of Gaza, which has severely restricted essential supplies such as food, water, fuel, and medicine, has contributed to a humanitarian catastrophe described by the UN as "apocalyptic." The ongoing offensive has resulted in widespread internal displacement and forced civilians into overcrowded and uninhabitable "safe zones."

Private fractures have reportedly emerged between the US and Israel regarding preferred approaches to tactics and strategy in the war, partially driven by global outcry. Some progressive voices have advocated for the Biden administration to condition military aid on the fulfillment of humanitarian measures. While the administration has not endorsed this proposal, it has pressured Israel to prioritize evacuations and reduce civilian casualties, also expressing openness to discuss a different post-war vision that could include a two-state solution.

At present, any significant shift in policy from either Israel or the US is more likely to stem from domestic pressures rather than global ones, according to foreign policy experts.

Israeli officials, including Ambassador Gilad Erdan, have emphasized that a ceasefire would amount to ensuring the "survival of Hamas," an outcome Israeli forces are determined to prevent. Drawing parallels with the political environment in the United States after 9/11, William Wechsler, a senior director at the Atlantic Council, suggests that Israel is unlikely to pause its military actions merely two months after the October 7 attack. Surveys indicate widespread support among the Israeli public for the government's military actions in Gaza.

In the US, President Biden faces pressure from his own party, which is divided on the issue of military support for Israel, as well as a growing domestic call for a ceasefire. A December poll conducted by Data for Progress revealed that 61 percent of likely US voters support a ceasefire in Gaza. However, another poll conducted by YouGov/CBS News found that 69 percent of Americans feel Biden has shown either the right amount or too little support for Israel. These competing opinions showcase the complexity of public sentiment on the matter. The upcoming 2024 election may further influence Biden and his administration's approach to the conflict, although no significant shift has occurred in the US's position thus far.