Opinion | Harris must change U.S. policy in the Gaza war

Americans are again calling on a Black candidate when White predecessors have made an embarrassing, bloody mess of things.

I noted this pattern back in 2020, when then-Sen. Kamala D. Harris became the first Black woman to be elected vice president, after four years of the Trump circus. Now, Harris is poised to become America’s first Black woman presidential nominee of a major political party. Since President Biden announced his withdrawal from the race on Sunday, leading Democrats have largely fallen in line behind her. Donations large and small are pouring in. The energy, as of now at least, feels reminiscent of Barack Obama’s historic 2008 campaign.

Obama was himself an example of the pattern, coming to power after America got its hands soaked in blood in the Middle East. Harris, too, is called on to steer the country onto a new path in the region. It’s clear that Harris understands that generational attitudes on Israel/Palestine have shifted. She declined to preside in the Senate while Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addresses Congress. According to the Wall Street Journal, she will tell Netanyahu “it is time for the war to end in a way where Israel is secure, all hostages are released, the suffering of Palestinian civilians in Gaza ends, and the Palestinian people can enjoy their right to dignity, freedom, and self-determination,” All of these are steps in the right direction, especially in light of the recent International Court of Justice ruling that Israel is illegally occupying Gaza and the West Bank.

Advertisement

The role of foreign policy failures in the elevation of Black leaders is underestimated. In a paper called “George W. Bush, the Iraq War, and the Election of Barack Obama,” political scientist Gary C. Jacobson makes the case that negative opinions on Bush’s failed war in Iraq had direct and indirect impacts on Obama’s rise to the presidency. Support for the war dropped from 73 percent in 2003 to 33 percent in 2008. Bush’s popularity cratered in parallel — and the Republican Party lost young voters especially. Bush’s fumbling response to Hurricane Katrina and the economic crash of 2008 were major factors as well, but Jacobson argues that the war was the “single most important contributor to Obama’s presidential victory.”

I believe future scholars will see that today’s historic protests against Biden’s support for Israel’s appalling campaign in Gaza have played a similar role in Harris’s snap rise to the top of the presidential ticket.

Let’s be real here: Biden’s debate performance in June embarrassed donors and party operatives who hoped to keep a lid on his decline. Yet few if any of these same people questioned his mental fitness when he was denying the death toll of Palestinians, bypassing Congress to send more weapons to Israel, and condemning student protesters as contributing to chaos and disorder. But voters, especially young people watching the horrors of the conflict on their phones nearly daily, have been questioning Biden’s fitness for some 10 months, as the death toll of Palestinians has risen to about 40,000, with tens of thousands seriously wounded.

Advertisement

There is evidence that the war in Gaza has harmed Democrats more than Biden’s embarrassing debate performance. According to a recent Century Foundation poll, nearly 4 in 10 voters (38 percent) said they were less likely to vote for Biden due to his handling of Israel’s Gaza campaign. One in 3 independent voters expressed the same reluctance.

Beyond polls, there are other huge, if not historic, markers for popular anger over the war in Gaza. In November, 300,000 people descended on Washington to protest the war. This spring’s encampment movement on college campuses was the largest student antiwar movement since Vietnam. The NAACP and other organizations have called for a permanent cease-fire. In a number of states, notably the swing state of Michigan, organizers inspired significant numbers of Democrats to vote “uncommitted” in presidential primaries rather than give their support to Biden. And just this week, seven major labor unions called for a halt to U.S. weapons shipments to Israel.

Already, as vice president, Harris has signaled at least a bit more empathy for Palestinians, though her campaign says she is missing Netanyahu’s speech because of a previously scheduled event in Indianapolis and — according to reported remarks by an aide — the decision “should not be interpreted as a change in her position on Israel.”

Advertisement

A meaningful break with the Biden policy would mean breaking with Obama’s, too. Despite his deep dislike for Netanyahu, Obama gave Israel more arms and munitions than any of his predecessors. In 2016, Obama signed a 10-year, $38 billion military aid package to Israel. As senator, Harris came out in support of the package. During her 2020 presidential campaign she said she believed Israel met international standards of human rights. Given its ruling last week, the International Court of Justice might like a word with the former prosecutor.

Look, Donald Trump, the felon, has no business being near the White House. This cannot mean we stop the pressure on ending the carnage in Gaza, however. The least Harris can do in her elevated role is to push boldly on a permanent cease-fire, call for release of all hostages and bring the parties to the table to negotiate a solution that includes the rebuilding of Gaza. Short of that, Harris, like Obama before her, will be diminished despite being elevated.

ncG1vNJzZmivp6x7uK3SoaCnn6Sku7G70q1lnKedZLyxtc2ipqerX2d9c4COaW5oamRktaK%2B0aKqZqGjp66muIygmLOZXayus3nPqKOim6lk