Harris And Democrats Have A Problem With Israel

Even after President Joe Biden stepped aside and Kamala Harris was anointed as the Democratic nominee, the party knew it was in trouble. Analysts predicted a rout if Biden stayed in the race, and even with Harris or another candidate, the route to the White House is narrow given the crazy electoral map, which minimizes the impact of New York and California, where tens of millions of Americans (and most Jews) live and maximizes those of smaller states. Still, Jewish voters could play a role in deciding races in the swing states Democrats must win. With polls showing that Donald Trump could win a record number of Jewish votes, the draft Democratic Party platform regarding the Middle East is not likely to help and may make matters worse unless the new nominee moves to change it.

After Biden alienated Arab and Muslim voters in the critical swing state of Michigan by having the wisdom to support Israel over Palestinian terrorists, the platform writers tried to win them back by pandering. The party committed to fighting anti-Muslim bigotry and to “restore U.S.-Palestinian diplomatic ties and critical assistance to the Palestinian people in the West Bank and Gaza, consistent with U.S. law” (that is, to circumvent, as Biden has, the Taylor Force Act barring aid to the Palestinians so long as they continue their “pay-for-slay” policy of providing funds to terrorists and their families). The party pledged to work to end the conflict and pursue the two-state unicorn.

If Harris is the nominee, these positions are likely hers, though her commitment to them until now was expected of her as a spokesperson for Biden’s policies. In a 2019 profile of Harris, the JTA’s Ron Kampeas described her as “more AIPAC than J Street.” In The Forward, Dan Perry wrote more recently, however, that “she seems distinctly cooler to Israel than Biden and is generally understood to be closer to the progressive camp’s views on the Middle East.”

For many Jews, the platform represents a continuation of a disastrous policy towards Iran. It incredulously calls for a return to diplomacy and a renewal of the nuclear agreement, and falsely says the agreement stopped Iran’s pursuit of nuclear capability. On Biden’s watch, Secretary of State Antony Blinken now says Iran has reduced its atomic breakout period—the time it would need to create sufficient fissile material for a nuclear weapon—to one to two weeks. After pledging never to allow Iran to obtain an atomic bomb, Biden has done less than nothing to stop it. Worse, he has waived sanctions to enable Iran to get billions of dollars in oil revenue and paid billions more as ransom for five Americans held hostage by the regime.

Biden tried mightily to negotiate a return to the nuclear agreement but failed as Iran continued to defy the terms of the deal and, contrary to Barack Obama’s rosy scenario of improving ties with the Islamic radicals, Iran became even more anti-American to the point that its proxies in Iraq and Yemen have attacked U.S. forces.

The platform mentions addressing “Iran’s other threatening activities, including its regional aggression, ballistic missile program and domestic repression.” However, there is little evidence that the Biden-Harris administration has done anything other than appease Iran. Iraqi and Houthi terrorists have continued to attack American and Israeli targets as Biden refused to use sufficient force to deter them or to make Iran pay a price for its involvement in supporting Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis.

The platform also says, “We need to reset our relations with our Gulf partners to better advance our interests and values” and “we have no interest in continuing the blank-check era of the Trump Administration.” But it is Biden who offered a large arms package to the Saudis, help with a civilian nuclear program and a defense umbrella. He learned quickly that politics and economics are more important than values when his commitment to ostracize the Saudi Crown Prince ran into the reality that doing so led the Saudis to raise oil prices, which in turn hurt the U.S. economy and Biden’s re-election prospects. For decades, Democrats and Republicans have both been driven by the Arabist influence to put aside American values to secure oil supplies.

The authors are similarly naive in believing a different policy with the Gulf countries will help Iraq without addressing the Iranian threat.

While generally opposed to sending troops to fight to defend our interests, the platform grudgingly accepts “a small, finite and focused military presence” to fight ISIS.

The Democrats pledge to work with “the Lebanese people to promote political and economic reform, financial stability and security.” No mention is made of how that could be done without eliminating the influence of Iran and the presence of Hezbollah.

Regarding Israel, the platform restates the usual platitudes: “Democrats believe a strong, secure, and democratic Israel is vital to the interests of the United States. Our commitment to Israel’s security, its qualitative military edge, its right to defend itself, and the 2016 Memorandum of Understanding is ironclad.”

Democrats say Jerusalem “should remain the capital of Israel, an undivided city accessible to people of all faiths,” but is still “a matter for final status negotiations.” What is there to negotiate if they recognize the reality on the ground?

The platform reflects the Democrats’ inability to unequivocally fight antisemitism, declaring opposition delegitimizing Israel and, specifically, the BDS movement, but insisting it must be done while protecting free speech. This non-existent dilemma has enabled antisemites and many Democrats to sabotage anti-boycott legislation.

They also can’t bring themselves to unequivocally condemn antisemitism, falling back on the now all-too-common conflation of the persecution of Jews with racism, misogyny, anti-Muslim bigotry, white supremacy, sexism, homophobia and discrimination towards religious minorities, people with disabilities, Native Americans, “and all who have been discriminated against in too many ways and for too many generations.”

If the next nominee, presumptively Harris, adopts this platform, many Jews will defect to Trump.

Mitchell Bard is a foreign-policy analyst and an authority on U.S.-Israel relations who has written and edited 22 books, including The Arab Lobby, Death to the Infidels: Radical Islam’s War Against the Jews and After Anatevka: Tevye in Palestine. He writes for Jewish News Syndicate.