Kamala Harris, the Democratic presidential nominee, has firmly reaffirmed her support for Israel’s military, rejecting widespread calls for an arms embargo despite the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Gaza. In a recent interview with CNN, Harris made it clear that her administration, if elected, would continue the Biden administration’s policy of providing robust military aid to Israel. This stance has provoked strong reactions from within her own party and from Palestinian rights advocates who see the current U.S. policy as complicit in Israel’s military actions.
During the interview, Harris was unequivocal about her commitment to Israel’s defense, stating, “I’m unequivocal and unwavering in my commitment to Israel’s defense and its ability to defend itself, and that’s not gonna change.” She referenced the horrors of the Hamas-led Oct. 7 attack, underscoring Israel’s right to defend itself. When asked by CNN’s Dana Bash whether she would consider withholding arms shipments to Israel, Harris responded with a definitive “no,” despite acknowledging the high number of Palestinian civilian casualties.
This interview marks Harris’ first major television appearance since becoming the Democratic nominee. Her unwavering stance aligns closely with the Biden administration’s policy, which has continued to supply Israel with substantial military aid throughout the conflict, even as international criticism of Israel’s actions has mounted.
Harris’ position has sparked immediate backlash from progressive circles within the Democratic Party and from human rights advocates who have long criticized U.S. military support for Israel. Many had hoped that Harris, known for her more progressive stances during her earlier political career, would signal a shift in U.S. policy, particularly in light of the ongoing humanitarian disaster in Gaza.
Polling data underscores the depth of this dissent. A CBS News/YouGov poll revealed that 77 percent of Democrats and 61 percent of Americans oppose sending weapons to Israel during the conflict. These numbers reflect a significant disconnect between Harris’ stance and the views of her party’s base. Assal Rad, a Middle East scholar, summed up the sentiment, stating, “Harris is saying she will reject 77 percent of Democrats, 61 percent of Americans, international law, domestic U.S. law, and basic humanity to continue the flow of weapons to Israel while it stands accused of genocide.”
The progressive backlash is not just theoretical but has tangible political implications. Yonah Lieberman, co-founder of the progressive Jewish group IfNotNow, criticized Harris for being “out of touch with voters, especially those in key battleground states.” Lieberman emphasized that the majority of Americans, particularly key Democratic constituencies, want the U.S. to stop providing arms to Israel, especially given the daily reports of civilian casualties in Gaza.
The humanitarian situation in Gaza has reached catastrophic levels, with reports indicating that over 40,600 Palestinians have been killed and 90 percent of the population displaced since the conflict escalated. The relentless Israeli bombardment has not only resulted in a massive loss of life but also sparked a famine across the territory, exacerbating an already dire situation.
Harris’ refusal to consider an arms embargo comes amid allegations that Israel is committing war crimes, including the targeting of aid workers, journalists, and civilians. On Thursday, Israel’s military killed five Palestinians in an airstrike on a vehicle convoy led by the Washington, D.C.-based American Near East Refugee Aid (ANERA) agency. This attack, a violation of U.S. law that prohibits providing weaponry to a country obstructing American humanitarian aid, occurred just a day after Israeli forces opened fire on a World Food Program vehicle, forcing the U.N. agency to suspend its operations in Gaza.
The response from Palestinian rights advocates has been swift and severe. Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), the only Palestinian American in Congress, warned that Harris’ position signals a continuation of “war crimes and genocide.” The sentiment was echoed by other advocates, who argue that Harris’ stance not only perpetuates the violence but also undermines U.S. moral authority on the global stage.
Harris’ staunch support for Israel is part of a broader political strategy as she positions herself for the upcoming election. Despite her progressive past, Harris has recently moved toward the center on several key issues, reflecting a pragmatic approach to securing votes in a deeply polarized political landscape. Her stance on Israel, as well as her tougher position on migration and her shift away from a fracking ban, suggest a calculated effort to appeal to a broader electorate, including more moderate and conservative voters.
This strategy appears to be paying off, at least in the short term. Harris has surged in the polls since becoming the Democratic candidate, leading Donald Trump by 45 percent to 41 percent in a recent Reuters/Ipsos poll. Her campaign has also seen a significant boost in donations, with hundreds of millions of dollars pouring in as she hits the campaign trail.
However, this shift toward the center is not without risks. By alienating key progressive constituencies, Harris may face challenges in maintaining voter enthusiasm, particularly among younger voters and activists who have been vocal in their opposition to U.S. policy on Israel. Norman Solomon, national director of RootsAction, warned that “time is running out for Kamala Harris to distance herself from U.S. policies that enable Israel to continue with mass murder and genocide in Gaza.”
The political implications of Harris’ stance on Israel are significant, particularly in swing states where public opinion on U.S. foreign policy could influence the election outcome. With many voters increasingly critical of the U.S.‘s unconditional support for Israel, Harris’ position could be a double-edged sword, boosting her appeal among certain demographics while alienating others.
Republicans, including Donald Trump, have already seized on Harris’ policies, framing them as indicative of her broader political philosophy. Trump, in a post on Truth Social, stated, “I look so forward to Debating Comrade Kamala Harris and exposing her for the fraud she is.” This rhetoric is likely to intensify as the election draws nearer, with Israel’s military actions continuing to dominate international headlines.
Harris’ commitment to Israel’s defense, as she stated, “We must get a deal done,” will continue to be a defining aspect of her candidacy as she seeks to balance competing pressures from both within and outside her party.
COMMENTS