��������Ƶ

In the six weeks since US President Joe Biden withdrew from the presidential election race, Vice President Kamala Harris, the new Democratic candidate, has had some time to express her own views on policy issues to American voters — including the war in Gaza and ongoing US support for Israel.

Before Biden withdrew, opposition among many Democrats and some independent voters to the president’s unconditional support for Israel was building into a serious problem for his campaign. For example, in the Michigan Democratic primary earlier this year, a movement encouraging people to vote “uncommitted” in a sign of opposition to the war in Gaza demonstrated that Biden’s support for Israel was a potential electoral liability. Voters who are committed to using their votes to oppose Israel’s actions in the Occupied Territories remain a small group, but in crucial swing states like Michigan, where just a few votes could determine the election, they have gained influence.

As vice president, Harris is in a tricky position, as she must remain aligned with Biden’s policies while also presenting her own views as a candidate. On many issues, including support for Israel, she has tried to balance loyalty to Biden’s policies with suggesting a change in course if she were to win the election. For example, she has expressed commitment to Israel’s security while also expressing more concern for Palestinian suffering than Biden has done.

When Harris became the nominee, many activists and voters hoped that she might offer a significant change in US policy. In particular, the uncommitted movement called for her to demand an immediate ceasefire and to pledge to stop sending weapons to Israel. Harris had already called for a ceasefire earlier this year, but activists felt that she needed to do more to distinguish her position from Biden’s.

She has expressed commitment to Israel’s security as well as more concern for Palestinian suffering

Kerry Boyd Anderson

In the last few weeks, Harris has had several opportunities to clarify her views on the Israeli-Palestinian war. One opportunity was the Democratic National Convention. Activists reported that Harris and her campaign were listening to them and expressing sympathy, whereas the Biden team had ignored them. Harris addressed the war in Gaza during her speech, calling for a ceasefire deal, pledging to “always stand up for Israel’s right to defend itself” and stating that “what has happened in Gaza over the past 10 months is devastating.” Many observers of Democratic politics were surprised that Harris directly mentioned the controversial issue at all and saw it as a sign of shifting views in the party. However, for uncommitted activists, the speech was disappointing.

Also, the Democratic leadership refused to grant time at the convention for a Palestinian American to speak, even while allotting time for the Israeli American parents of hostage Hersh Goldberg-Polin to speak (tragically, he has since died in Gaza). The activists did not object to the parents of a hostage speaking, but rather felt that the exclusion of a Palestinian American voice sent a clear signal that the Democratic leadership is not ready to truly hear their perspective.

Harris had another opportunity in an Aug. 29 interview with CNN. The host directly asked if she would withhold some shipments of weapons to Israel and she dodged the question. Rather, Harris repeated positions similar to her convention speech: that she is “unwavering in my commitment to Israel’s defense,” but how Israel defends itself “matters” and “far too many innocent Palestinians have been killed.” She called again for a deal to end the war and promised to work toward a “two-state solution, where Israel is secure and, in equal measure, the Palestinians have security and self-determination and dignity.”

Harris has diminished some of the sting that many Democrats have felt over US support for Israel

Kerry Boyd Anderson

Harris’ comments on this issue demonstrate both a subtle shift away from the traditional commitment to unconditional support for Israel and yet reluctance among Democratic Party leaders to significantly change course. Polls have shown growing sympathy for Palestinians among Democrats and younger voters for several years and that shift has accelerated in the face of the destruction in Gaza. Many Democratic voters want a change in US policy; for example, a June poll from CBS found that 77 percent of Democrats do not support sending weapons to Israel in the current situation.

However, this major change among Democratic voters has not fully reached the party’s political and foreign policy leaders. One reason is that such leaders tend to be older and older Americans are more likely to maintain the traditional pro-Israel consensus. Experienced politicians and policymakers also developed their careers in an environment in which criticizing Israel was seen as a good way to lose an election or damage your career. Furthermore, the Harris campaign is trying to promote a positive image and, for Democrats at the convention who wanted to celebrate, protesters reminding everyone that US weapons are being used in Gaza felt like killjoys.

A key question is whether the change from Biden to Harris will encourage voters concerned about Gaza to vote for the Democratic candidate. For some, the answer is yes. There are many voters who oppose the war in Gaza but are also concerned about other political and economic issues and believe that Harris will take a more balanced approach to Israel and the Palestinians than Donald Trump or Biden. For others, the answer is no. There are Palestinian, Arab and Muslim Americans who understandably say they cannot vote for anyone who will use US resources to kill Palestinian civilians. Others may not share the same personal ties but will hold fast to social justice principles. Few of these voters will vote for Trump; rather, they will vote for a third-party candidate or simply choose to not vote for Harris.

Harris has diminished some of the sting that many Democrats have felt over US support for Israel, but she has not taken sufficient steps to gain the support of uncommitted activists and voters who are unwilling to compromise on this issue. Unfortunately, the next few weeks in Gaza and the West Bank are likely to be bloody and she will find it difficult to walk the tightrope between traditional Democratic support for Israel and the growing demands among many voters to stop supporting Israel’s military actions.

• Kerry Boyd Anderson is a writer and political risk consultant with more than 18 years of experience as a professional analyst of international security issues and Middle East political and business risk. Her previous positions include deputy director for advisory with Oxford Analytica. X: @KBAresearch