What can Harris be expected to say now about funding Israel’s military?

Vice President Kamala Harris. | Tom Williams / CQ Roll Call via AP

Peace forces in the United States and around the world are horrified by the latest increase in Israeli brutality in the Middle East. More than 41,000 are dead in Gaza. Hundreds have been attacked and many killed in the occupied West Bank, and now hundreds are dead in Lebanon. It is all being done in an attempt by the right-wing Benjamin Netanyahu government in Israel to stay in power.

The brutality and the genocide are also the result of U.S. imperialist policy in the Middle East. The Biden administration’s refusal to cut off military funding to Israel, even if only to restrict the provision of all the different types of offensive weapons being shipped there, makes this Israeli brutality possible. The many thousands of dead would be alive were it not for those U.S. weapons.

Sen. Bernie Sanders has again introduced legislation to cut off that funding. He points out that he supports Israel’s right to self-defense but that that self-defense does not include the bombing and killing of tens of thousands of innocent civilians. He points out that his legislation does not eliminate the “Iron Dome” the U.S. provided to Israel for its defense against incoming missiles.

Now Israel, using U.S. weapons, is expanding the conflict which is on the verge of becoming a full-scale region-wide war. That expansion threatens to cause real problems for the U.S. election, too, especially if Arab American voters in swing states like Michigan and Arizona decide to stay home as a result of Harris identifying herself so completely with the policies of the Biden administration.

No one can reasonably expect that Vice President Harris is in a position to announce a total break with U.S. policy. There is more that she can say and do, however, to differentiate herself from Biden. In so doing, she could signal to key voting blocks in those states that her election may well herald a change in policy, certainly a policy far better than one Trump would implement.

She can say, as she has, that she backs Israel’s right to self-defense. She can say, as has Sen. Bernie Sanders, that she does not advocate dismantling the Iron Dome Israel uses to fend off incoming missiles. She can say, as she has, that she backs a two-state solution to the Palestinian question.

But she can also remind voters that she is not now the president of the United States and does not set policy.

She can promise, if elected, to re-evaluate and re-assess, as any new president should, the entirety of U.S. policy in the Middle East, including the unlimited provision of U.S. weapons to Israel. She can say that she is aware that U.S. law states it is illegal to provide military aid to anyone using it to violate human rights and that she will if elected, assess, as any president should, whether that law is being violated.

If she does these things, she will be sending an unmistakable signal to not just Arab American voters in Michigan and Arizona but to all pro-peace voters that she is the best possible choice in this election when it comes to the issue of peace. Of course, if she is elected, the peace movement in this country will have to continue and step up its work to win a true long-term change of policy.

It is not enough for progressives to throw up their hands and say there is nothing Harris can say or do about this now. For Harris to either ignore the potential impacts of Israel’s stepped-up brutality on the U.S. elections or her failure to signal that she is willing, if elected, to re-evaluate U.S. policy could well have a negative effect on the outcome of those elections. That’s not something the people of the U.S., the Middle East, or the rest of the world can afford.

As with all op-eds published by People’s World, this article reflects the views of its author.

We hope you appreciated this article. At People’s World, we believe news and information should be free and accessible to all, but we need your help. Our journalism is free of corporate influence and paywalls because we are totally reader-supported. Only you, our readers and supporters, make this possible. If you enjoy reading People’s World and the stories we bring you, please support our work by donating or becoming a monthly sustainer today. Thank you!

---

CONTRIBUTOR

John Wojcik

John Wojcik is Editor-in-Chief of People's World. He joined the staff as Labor Editor in May 2007 after working as a union meat cutter in northern New Jersey. There, he served as a shop steward and a member of a UFCW contract negotiating committee. In the 1970s and '80s, he was a political action reporter for the Daily World, this newspaper's predecessor, and was active in electoral politics in Brooklyn, New York.