Middle East conflict/ Kamala Harris/ Donald Trump/ 2024 election/ U.S. foreign policy/ Israel-Hamas war/ battleground states/ Arab American voters/ Jewish voters/ Newslooks/ WASHINGTON/ J. Mansour/ Morning Edition/ As the U.S. presidential election nears, the conflict in the Middle East is influencing the campaigns of Kamala Harris and Donald Trump. Harris faces challenges balancing support for Israel and concern for civilian casualties, while Trump claims peace would have prevailed under his leadership. Both candidates target key voters in battleground states.
Mideast Conflict and the 2024 Election – Quick Look
- Harris navigates criticism over her stance on Israel and Gaza.
- Trump promises Middle East peace if re-elected.
- Arab and Jewish voters in Michigan and Pennsylvania are key targets.
- Both candidates struggle to gain clear political advantage on the issue.
- Trump warns of escalating conflict under Harris’ leadership.
- Harris, as vice president, is tied to Biden’s foreign policies, creating challenges.
Harris and Trump Clash Over Middle East Amid Election
Deep Look
With only two weeks until Election Day, the escalating Middle East conflict is weighing heavily on the U.S. presidential race, as Kamala Harris and Donald Trump take opposing approaches to the crisis. Both candidates are vying for the support of voters deeply invested in the outcome of U.S. foreign policy, particularly Arab Americans, Muslim Americans, and Jewish voters in key battleground states.
Vice President Kamala Harris finds herself in a delicate position, attempting to express unwavering support for Israel while simultaneously addressing the humanitarian concerns surrounding the deaths of Palestinian civilians in Gaza and Lebanon. This balancing act has led to mixed reactions from both sides of the political divide. Harris was recently caught up in controversy after a viral video showed her responding to a pro-Palestinian protester by saying his concerns were “real.” While some saw this as a tacit agreement with the protester’s reference to Israel’s actions as “genocide,” her campaign quickly clarified that Harris was referring to the broader issue of civilian suffering and did not endorse the protester’s characterization of Israel’s conduct.
On the flip side, former President Donald Trump has taken a more assertive stance, stating that the ongoing Middle East turmoil would never have occurred under his administration. In interviews with major Middle Eastern outlets, including Saudi Arabia’s Al-Arabiya and Lebanon’s MTV, Trump expressed confidence in his ability to restore peace, claiming that he could quickly resolve the crisis. Trump’s rhetoric has resonated with voters seeking decisive action, but his critics argue that his promises lack detail or a clear strategy.
Both candidates recognize the importance of Michigan and Pennsylvania in the upcoming election, where voters of Arab and Jewish descent make up crucial segments of the electorate. In Michigan, home to the largest Arab American community in the U.S., the ongoing Israel-Hamas war has had a profound impact. Many families in the state have close ties to Gaza and Lebanon, where the conflict has claimed thousands of lives. The loss of a Detroit-area resident, Kamel Ahmad Jawad, who was killed while delivering aid in Lebanon, has further fueled calls from the community for the U.S. to take a stronger stand in advocating for an immediate ceasefire.
Despite her efforts to address the crisis with empathy, Harris faces significant challenges within her own party. A recent AP-NORC poll shows that only about two-thirds of Democrats believe Harris would handle the Middle East situation better than Trump, with the rest either uncertain or leaning toward Trump. Republican voters, on the other hand, overwhelmingly believe that Trump is the stronger candidate for navigating international conflicts.
Trump has not held back in his attacks on Harris, recently warning that her presidency would lead to long-term chaos in the Middle East. In a post on his social media platform, Trump predicted that another four years of Harris in office would escalate into global conflict, potentially leading to World War III. He urged voters to support his campaign for the sake of their children’s future, framing himself as the candidate for peace.
Harris’ struggle to distance herself from the Biden administration’s policies has been a point of frustration for her campaign. As vice president, she remains closely tied to President Biden’s foreign policy decisions, which have been perceived by some as too slow or inadequate in addressing the complexities of the Israel-Hamas conflict. Harris has attempted to strike a more compassionate tone, but her ability to differentiate her stance from Biden’s is limited by her role within the current administration.
The contrast between the two candidates is stark. While Harris is careful in her rhetoric, seeking to maintain a diplomatic balance, Trump has adopted a more brash, direct approach, confidently asserting that he can singlehandedly restore peace. However, as some political analysts have pointed out, Trump’s foreign policy track record from his first term, which included abrupt decisions like withdrawing from key international agreements, raises questions about his ability to deliver on such promises.
The stakes are high, particularly for voters directly affected by the violence in the Middle East. Many Arab American voters, disillusioned with both parties’ support for Israel, feel that neither candidate is adequately addressing their concerns. The National Network for Arab American Communities has voiced frustration, with Director Rima Meroueh noting that voters are weary of being asked to choose between two unsatisfactory options. “To say to Arab Americans, ‘Trump is going to be worse’ — what is worse than having members of your family killed?” Meroueh said, emphasizing the deep sense of despair felt by many in the community.
Adding fuel to the fire, political action committees (PACs) aligned with billionaire Elon Musk have launched ads targeting both Arab American and Jewish voters. In Michigan, these ads criticize Harris for her support of Israel, while similar ads in Pennsylvania attempt to appeal to Jewish voters by highlighting her support for withholding some military aid to Israel. These dual efforts underscore the contentious nature of the race, with both sides using the Middle East crisis to sway voters.
As Election Day approaches, the Middle East conflict remains a pivotal issue for many Americans. The candidates’ contrasting approaches to this volatile region could prove decisive in swaying key voters in swing states, ultimately shaping the direction of U.S. foreign policy in the coming years.
