In an interview with CNN, Harris said she supports a ceasefire deal but made it clear that she would not stop sending Israel weapons if elected.
In her first interview as the Democratic presidential nominee, Vice President Kamala Harris told CNN it was imperative to reach a ceasefire deal in Gaza, but made it clear that she would not alter President Joe Biden’s policy in the region.
However, when pressed on whether she would stop sending weapons to Israel she told Bash, “No, we have to get a deal done, Dana. We have to get a deal done.”
“Adopting an arms embargo against Israel’s assault on Gaza is not only a moral imperative but also a strategic move to defeat Trump and MAGA extremism. It is difficult for the Democratic candidate to champion democracy while arming Netanyahu’s authoritarian regime” reads a recent letter to Harris from the coalition Not Another Bomb.
Recent polling has repeatedly demonstrated that Democratic voters overwhelmingly support the conditioning of U.S. military aid. A Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) survey from March found that 52% of Americans want the U.S. to halt weapons shipments to Israel in order to force a ceasefire. 62% of Biden voters said “The US should stop weapons shipments to Israel until Israel discontinues its attacks on the people of Gaza,” while only 14% disagreed with the statement.
The numbers from a June CBS News poll were even higher, with more than 60% of all voters and almost 80% of Democrats saying the U.S. shouldn’t send Israel weapons.
“The real question should have been, ‘When are you going to start enforcing U.S. law as it relates to arms shipments’ because what we are doing right now, with this United States policy, is in violation of not just international law, but also of American law, “said the Arab Center’s Yousef Munayyer in an interview with Democracy Now in response to the CNN segment. “Vice-President Harris made it clear in other parts of her interview that she wants to be a prosecutor. She wants to enforce the law, but Israel is clearly getting an exception from the Harris campaign.”
How hard is it to field a presidential candidate that is not a senior citizen and who doesn't wish to remain allies with countries engaged in genocide?
As much as I hate to admit this, I don't think this will change my opinion on her. Don't get me wrong, I think it's incredibly fucked up that they continue to give them the weapons they use to murder civilians. But I also know that pretty much every president that has been elected since Israel has existed as a country would do exactly the same. The vast majority of politicians are spineless when it comes to Israel and always will be, regardless of party affiliation. No matter who gets elected it will always be the same answer with varying degrees of severity. And even if Harris wanted to do something about it, do you really think she would say anything new until she knew for a fact she was going to win? She'd get ostracized by the majority of her own party and potentially lose a bunch of those fancy endorsements she just received.
I'm not saying it's right. In fact, it's so fucked up it makes my blood boil. I'm just saying that politicians are fucking cowards and always will be.
As a European citizen: is it really a possibility for any US president not to do so? (Honest question, since from Europe US's policy is seen as supporting Israel no matter what)
Israel will not stop until we take away their ability to continue.
When this war ends, Netanyahu will be removed from power for his prior crimes and likely jailed. He doesn’t want that and he’s murdering Palestinians to be sure he never sees the inside of a cell.
I wish we had an actual viable option for ending this war. But my choices right now are vote for the genocide or flee the country because Trump has promised he will make my wife’s life hell day one.
I have little hope that Biden, Harris, or (obviously) Trump will actually change course on the US’s Israel/Palestine policy—but to be fair, we shouldn’t expect the current vice president to openly say she would reverse the current president’s foreign policies even if she intended to.
I don't really understand what weapons our government is sending Isreal. Is it that we just aren't canceling their contracts with our weapons manufacturers? Or we arent banning exports of weapons?
Our government doesn't actually make weapons, we give contracts to companies to make them and have limits on who else can buy. Isreal doesn't need our hand-me-downs.
Does it even matter which party is in power when it comes to this? It's in America's geopolitical interest to have a strong Israel to counter the neighboring Arab States, especially Iran.
The fate of Palestine is almost a non-issue in that context.
I mean, if it was any other ally surrounded by countries that hate them, I'd understand this policy. If Israel wasn't lead by a dickhead and their regime, I'd understand this policy. They literally only exist as a country with our support.
But as is stands now, it's a carrot we should use to leverage peace and, in an ideal world, push for a better coexistence with people they've historically shit on. Giving it away for 'free' makes little sense aside from fear of losing their support and by extension, the election.
If we didn't have foreign money, or PACs in general, would this be different? I would imagine it would be, if we could just fix that shitty system.
It's not like she has a choice. The defense contractors call all the shots and they want to keep the arms flowing. We vote for the promise of maybe getting a small piece of that pie to fund healthcare for the elderly, maybe, they'll increase military spending anyways.