VP Candidates’ Stances on the Israel-Hamas Conflict: A Closer Look
The Israel-Hamas conflict, a long-standing issue in the Middle East, has once again emerged as a significant point of discussion in the 2020 US Presidential race. The vice presidential candidates, Kamala Harris and Mike Pence, have expressed their views on this matter during various interviews and speeches. In this paragraph, we will delve deeper into their stances, highlighting some key points.
Kamala Harris
Senator Kamala Harris, the Democratic vice presidential nominee, has taken a pro-Palestinian stance. She has criticized Israel for its use of force against Palestinian civilians and called for an end to the occupation of Palestine. Harris also supports the two-state solution, which involves creating a separate Palestinian state alongside Israel. During her tenure as California Attorney General, she investigated and sued companies that provided equipment used in the construction of Israeli settlements in the West Bank.
Mike Pence
Vice President Mike Pence, the Republican nominee, has a pro-Israel stance. He strongly supports Israel’s right to defend itself and has criticized Hamas for its violence against Israelis. Pence believes that the US should continue to provide military aid to Israel, stating that it is essential for American national security interests in the Middle East. He also supports moving the US Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, a move that was controversial among Palestinians.
Comparing Their Stances
The primary difference between Harris and Pence lies in their approach to the Israel-Hamas conflict. Harris takes a more critical stance towards Israel, focusing on its treatment of Palestinians, while Pence remains steadfastly pro-Israel, emphasizing the need for Israel’s security. It is essential to understand their stances as voters head to the polls in November 2020.
Conclusion
In conclusion, both Vice Presidential candidates, Kamala Harris and Mike Pence, have taken clear positions on the Israel-Hamas conflict. While Harris emphasizes Palestinian rights and criticizes Israeli actions, Pence remains pro-Israel and focuses on its security needs. Understanding their stances can help voters make informed decisions during the election.
Sources:
CNN, “Kamala Harris: Israel must end its ‘occupation and human rights violations,’” link
The New York Times, “Mike Pence on Israel and Palestinians: A Record of Unwavering Support,” link
I. Introduction
The Israel-Hamas conflict, a longstanding and complex dispute between the Israeli government and Hamas, a militant Palestinian organization, continues to pose significant challenges for U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East.
Brief Overview of the Israel-Hamas Conflict
Historical Background: The conflict’s roots can be traced back to the late 19th and early 20th centuries when Jewish immigrants began to settle in what was then Palestinian territory, leading to tensions between the two communities. In 1948, following the end of British rule and the declaration of Israeli independence, hundreds of thousands of Palestinians were displaced, giving rise to a deep sense of resentment that has persisted to this day. Hamas emerged as a major player in Palestinian politics during the first Intifada, or uprising, in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Since then, Hamas has carried out numerous terror attacks against Israeli targets and engaged in several wars with Israel, most notably in 2008-09, 2012, and 2014.
Key Issues and Disputes:
The conflict centers around several key issues, including: the status of Jerusalem as the capital city of Israel; the right to self-determination for both Palestinians and Israelis; and the role of external actors, particularly Iran, in fueling the conflict. Hamas’s commitment to violence and refusal to recognize Israel’s right to exist complicates efforts to find a peaceful solution.
Importance of Understanding VP Candidates’ Stances on the Issue:
Potential Role in Foreign Policy Decision-making: As the second-highest office in the U.S. government, the Vice Presidency plays a crucial role in shaping U.S. foreign policy. Understanding where candidates stand on the Israel-Hamas conflict can provide insight into their overall approach to Middle East policy and potential diplomatic initiatives.
Impact on U.S.-Israel Relations: The Vice President also plays a pivotal role in strengthening and maintaining the U.S.-Israel relationship, which has been a cornerstone of U.S. foreign policy since the establishment of Israel in 1948. A Vice President who is perceived as unsympathetic to Israeli interests could weaken this vital alliance.
Broader Middle East Policy: The Israel-Hamas conflict is interconnected with broader issues in the Middle East, such as Iran’s nuclear program, regional instability, and the refugee crisis. A Vice President who takes a hardline stance on Israel could exacerbate tensions with Arab and Muslim countries, potentially harming U.S. interests in the region.
Objective of the Analysis:
This analysis aims to provide an in-depth look at the stances of key Vice Presidential candidates on the Israel-Hamas conflict and their implications for U.S. foreign policy. By examining each candidate’s statements, voting records, and policy proposals related to the Israel-Hamas conflict, we can better understand their perspectives and assess how they might approach this issue if elected.
Background:
U.S. Policy Towards Israel and Hamas
Overview of U.S. policy
The United States has been deeply involved in the Israel-Palestine conflict, with a complex and multifaceted approach towards both Israel and Hamas. Officially, the U.S. maintains that Israel is a vital ally in the Middle East, while expressing support for peace and security for both sides. However, unofficially, U.S. policy has been criticized for being pro-Israel and favoring Israel’s interests over those of the Palestinians. This tension has been evident in U.S. policy towards Hamas, an Islamic militant group that controls the Gaza Strip.
Historical U.S. involvement in the conflict
The United States has been involved in various peace process efforts between Israel and the Palestinians since the 1970s, including the Camp David Summit in 2000 and the Oslo Accords signed in 199These initiatives aimed to establish a two-state solution, with an independent Palestine living side by side with Israel. However, military conflicts, such as Operation Protective Edge in 2014, have disrupted these efforts and led to renewed violence and instability.
Key policy initiatives and their implications
Peace process efforts (Camp David, Oslo Accords)
The Camp David Summit in 2000 was a high-profile peace conference attended by Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat. The talks ultimately failed, with the Palestinians rejecting an offer that did not include a full Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank and a creation of a Palestinian state. The Oslo Accords, signed in 1993, aimed to establish a peace process between Israel and the Palestinians through mutual recognition and economic cooperation. However, the agreements did not lead to a lasting peace, with violence and instability continuing in the region.
U.S. military intervention (Operation Protective Edge)
Operation Protective Edge was a military operation launched by Israel in July 2014 against Hamas in the Gaza Strip. The conflict began after rockets were fired from Gaza into Israel, and resulted in over 2,000 Palestinian deaths and 73 Israeli deaths. The United States provided logistical and diplomatic support to Israel during the conflict, with some critics arguing that this intervention further exacerbated tensions between Israel and the Palestinians.
Criticisms and controversies surrounding U.S. policy
Criticism from pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian groups
U.S. policy towards Israel and Hamas has been criticized by both pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian groups. Pro-Israel critics argue that the United States needs to maintain strong relations with Israel as a key ally in the Middle East, while pro-Palestinian groups criticize U.S. policy for being biased towards Israel and failing to prioritize Palestinian rights and self-determination.
Allegations of bias or lack of evenhandedness
Critics argue that U.S. policy towards Israel and Hamas is not even-handed, with the United States providing more support to Israel than to the Palestinians. This perception of bias has fueled tensions and violence in the region, with some arguing that a more balanced approach is needed to achieve lasting peace.
I VP Candidate Kamala Harris (Democratic Party)
Background on Harris’ Record on Israel-Hamas Conflict
Kamala Harris, the Democratic Vice Presidential nominee, has a recorded history of statements and votes related to the Israel-Hamas conflict.
Key statements and votes in the Senate
During her tenure as a senator, Harris has consistently shown a pro-Israel stance. In 2019, she cosponsored the United States-Israel Security Assistance Authorization Act, which ensures military aid to Israel. Harris has also been a vocal supporter of Israel’s right to defend itself against Hamas rocket attacks.
Personal connections to the issue (her Jewish heritage)
Harris’ Jewish heritage adds a personal dimension to her stance on Israel. Her late mother, Shyamala Gopalan, was from Tamil Nadu, India, and converted to Christianity. Harris identifies as a Christian but also acknowledges her Indian and Jewish roots.
Analysis of Harris’ Stance on the Conflict
Pro-Israel leaning
Harris’ pro-Israel stance is evident in her emphasis on Israel’s right to self-defense. She has criticized Hamas for launching rocket attacks against Israeli civilians and condemned their terrorist activities. Her support extends beyond military aid, as she also advocates for diplomatic relations between the U.S. and Israel.
Criticisms of Hamas
Harris has been critical of Hamas, calling for accountability for human rights abuses against Palestinians and Israelis. She believes that both sides must respect international law and protect civilians during conflicts.
Potential Implications for U.S. Policy under a Biden-Harris Administration
Under a
Biden-Harris administration
, we can expect continued U.S. support for Israel. However, there may be a renewed focus on diplomacy and peace efforts to address the root causes of the conflict. The administration will likely need to balance U.S. interests with human rights concerns, potentially leading to more diplomatic engagement and pressure on both Israel and Hamas to make concessions for peace.
VP Candidate Mike Pence (Republican Party)
Background on Pence’s Record on Israel-Hamas Conflict
As the VP Candidate for the Republican Party in the upcoming presidential election, Mike Pence‘s record on the Israel-Hamas conflict is a crucial aspect of his political profile.
Key Statements and Actions as Vice President
During his tenure as Vice President, Pence has consistently expressed pro-Israel sentiments. In 2017, he helped orchestrate the historic move of the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, a decision that solidified American recognition of Israel’s sovereignty over its capital city. He has also been vocal in condemning Hamas‘s terrorist activities and rocket attacks against Israel, urging the international community to isolate Hamas politically and economically.
Personal Connections to the Issue (his evangelical Christian faith)
Pence’s evangelical Christian faith also plays a significant role in his stance on the Israel-Hamas conflict. Many evangelical Christians believe that the return of Jews to their ancient homeland is a prophetic sign of the end times, making support for Israel a deeply held conviction. This belief is reflected in Pence’s strong advocacy for the Jewish state.
Analysis of Pence’s Stance on the Conflict
Strongly Pro-Israel
Pence has consistently emphasized Israel’s right to defend itself against Hamas attacks and advocated for the United States to support its ally unwaveringly. His stance is based on the belief that a strong Israel is essential not only for regional stability but also for American security interests.
a. Emphasis on Israel’s right to defend itself
Pence has repeatedly expressed that Israel has the right and duty to protect its citizens from Hamas aggression. He believes that any nation would do the same in similar circumstances, making Israel’s actions defensible under international law.
b. Advocacy for moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem
Pence’s decision to support the relocation of the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem was a powerful symbolic gesture, reinforcing America’s commitment to Israel’s security and sovereignty.
Criticism of Hamas and Palestinian Leadership
Pence has been unsparing in his condemnation of Hamas‘s terrorist activities and the Palestinian leadership’s complicity in perpetuating the conflict. He has called for a more robust international response to Hamas’ actions, arguing that the international community must hold the organization accountable for its violent behavior and refusal to recognize Israel’s right to exist.
a. Condemnation of terrorist activities and rocket attacks
Pence has been unequivocal in his denunciation of Hamas’ use of violence against civilians and its ongoing rocket attacks against Israeli population centers. He has also criticized the Palestinian leadership for their incitement to hatred and violence against Israel.
b. Calls for isolating Hamas politically and economically
Pence has advocated for a more aggressive approach to dealing with Hamas, urging the international community to put pressure on the organization to cease its violent activities and recognize Israel’s right to exist. He believes that economic sanctions and diplomatic isolation are essential tools in achieving this goal.
Potential Implications for U.S. Policy under a Trump-Pence Administration
Under a Trump-Pence administration, we can expect continued strong support for Israel and increased pressure on Palestinians and the international community to isolate Hamas. The United States may take further provocative actions, such as recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights or implementing more stringent sanctions against Hamas. These moves could significantly alter the political landscape in the Middle East and potentially lead to renewed negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians or further escalation of tensions.
Conclusion
Summary of key findings:
Harris’ stance on Israel reflects a pro-Israeli position with an emphasis on diplomacy, demonstrating her commitment to maintaining the U.S.-Israel relationship through peaceful means. In contrast, Pence’s stance is markedly more pro-Israeli and confrontational towards Hamas, with a history of strong support for Israel and a more aggressive approach towards Palestine.
Implications for U.S. policy under a Biden or Trump administration, depending on the Vice Presidential pick:
- Continued bipartisan support for Israel: Regardless of the Vice Presidential pick, the U.S.’s strong alliance with Israel is expected to remain a bipartisan issue, as both Democrats and Republicans have historically expressed their unwavering support for the country.
- Differences in approach to diplomacy, human rights concerns, and engagement with Hamas: If Biden is elected and Harris is his Vice President, we can anticipate a more diplomatic approach to conflict resolution in the Middle East. Conversely, if Trump is re-elected and Pence remains as Vice President, we may see a more confrontational approach to Hamas and a potential escalation of tensions in the region.
Importance of considering the VP candidates’ stances when assessing potential foreign policy outcomes under their respective presidential tickets:
Understanding a Vice Presidential candidate’s stance on Israel and its relationship with the United States is crucial when evaluating potential foreign policy outcomes under their respective presidential tickets. By examining their past actions, statements, and policies regarding Israel, we can gain valuable insights into how they might approach issues in the Middle East should they become President.
