With the U.S. presidential election just around the corner and a fierce contest heating up, rival contenders Kamala Harris and Donald Trump are acutely aware that Israel’s forthcoming actions in the ongoing Middle East conflict could sway the electoral balance. As they solemnly mark the anniversary of Hamas’s devastating assault on northern Israel, which ignited the bloody war on October 7, 2023, both candidates continue to adopt a hawkish demeanor, underscoring their steadfast American allegiance to Israel’s fight against “terrorism.” Their rhetoric reveals a striking disparity, with greater sympathy directed toward the 1,350 plus Israeli victims than the staggering tally of over 42,000 Palestinian casualties that have followed.
In a poignant gesture, Harris, alongside her husband, yesterday planted a tree at the Vice President’s residence to honor the lives lost on that fateful day. In her address, she condemned Hamas while subtly advocating for an end to the conflict that has wreaked havoc on innocent civilians. Trump, on the other hand, attended a special Jewish ceremony where he expressed condolences for Israeli victims, asserting that had he been in office, the Hamas attack would have been thwarted, positioning himself as a more resolute defender of Israel than the Biden-Harris administration.
Meanwhile, President Biden’s influence over Israel’s military strategies has come under scrutiny. He participated in a White House event alongside his wife and a Jewish rabbi, who led prayers in Hebrew for the victims of October 7. The plight of Palestinian victims and the urgent call for a ceasefire were mere footnotes in this ceremony. The once-promising ceasefire resolution aimed at establishing lasting peace and ensuring the return of hostages has now been cast aside, allowing Israel to ramp up military operations in Gaza and southern Beirut against Hamas and Hezbollah.
Despite the Biden-Harris administration facing mounting criticism from Americans increasingly disturbed by the ongoing carnage, they have granted Prime Minister Netanyahu considerable latitude, even as he often and openly defies their counsel. Within the administration, there is a yearning for Israel to avoid retaliating against Iran before the November election. However, there is no assurance that Israel will heed Biden’s plea and his suggestion for proportional responses, as evidenced by Iran’s recent actions against Israel.
Reports suggest that the Biden administration has dispatched a special delegation of negotiators to Israel, armed with incentives to persuade Netanyahu to delay any retaliatory actions until after the U.S. elections. The prevailing belief is that an Israeli strike on Iran prior to November could provoke immediate U.S. involvement, jeopardizing Harris’s electoral chances and fortifying Trump’s position. Voter fatigue over the brutal, costly war is obvious, with many attributing its continuation to the Biden-Harris administration.
Despite Trump’s claims that Harris embodies a continuation of Biden’s “weak” policies, her supporters are hopeful she will emulate Clinton and Obama in tackling the enduring Middle East crisis. They envision a future where, if elected, she would adopt a more assertive stance than Biden, advocating for an immediate ceasefire, the release of Israeli hostages held by Hamas, and a genuine pursuit of the UN-endorsed two-state solution, seen as the only viable path to lasting peace in the region. Yet, Prime Minister Netanyahu and his hardline allies vehemently oppose any proposals for a two-state solution or a ceasefire until all perceived enemies, including Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, and Yemen, are neutralized.
Conversely, a Trump victory is perceived as a potential revival of his previous policies, characterized by firm support for Israel. This could embolden Netanyahu to launch a decisive attack on Iran aimed at dismantling its vital infrastructure and economy.
Such actions echo my own fears regarding calls for NATO to empower Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy with long-range missiles to strike deeper into Russia, a strategy that could drastically shift the global power balance. Both Iran and Russia have made it clear that they would not acquiesce easily to such provocations, warning that they would employ all means necessary to resist.
As the countdown to the November election accelerates, I earnestly hope that further recklessness is avoided and that all parties involved will seek to de-escalate the ongoing and senseless conflict in the Middle East.
Lt. Col. Samsudeen Sarr Rtd
Kotu
