Follow us on social

google cta
'I'm speaking now': Harris rebukes Gaza protesters

'I'm speaking now': Harris rebukes Gaza protesters

This and a key advisor’s tweet this morning suggest her differences with Biden on Israel may be more style than substance

Analysis | Middle East
google cta
google cta

This week, Vice President Kamala Harris has missed important opportunities to distinguish herself from President Biden’s disastrous approach on Gaza — renewing serious concerns about how she might handle the Israeli-Palestinian conflict if elected in November.

At a campaign rally in Detroit last night, Harris was met with protests of the Biden administration’s unconditional support for Israel’s war in Gaza, which has killed at least 40,000 Palestinians (and likely many more). “Kamala, Kamala, you can’t hide, we won’t vote for genocide,” the protesters chanted — echoing the disgust with America’s role in the slaughter in Gaza that led more than 100,000 primary voters in Michigan to cast a ballot for “uncommitted” during the state’s democratic primary.

After first responding cordially — “I’m here because we believe in democracy. Everyone’s voice matters. But I am speaking now” — Harris shifted to dismissiveness when the protesters continued chanting, telling them, “You know what? If you want Donald Trump to win, then say that. Otherwise, I’m speaking.”

Since assuming the Democratic nomination, Harris’ approach to the U.S.-backed war in Gaza has differed somewhat in style from Biden. This was evident in her campaign’s decision to invite leaders from Michigan’s “Uncommitted” campaign to a rope line at yesterday’s rally, where they reportedly aired their concerns with Vice President Harris and her ticketmate, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz. But her dismissal of the protesters from the podium, along with a tweet this morning from Harris’ key foreign policy advisor, Phil Gordon, suggests that those of us hoping that her different style might portend substantive policy change shouldn’t hold our breath.

Vice President Harris, Gordon writes, “has been clear: she will always ensure Israel is able to defend itself against Iran and Iran-backed terrorist groups. She does not support an arms embargo on Israel. She will continue to work to protect civilians in Gaza and to uphold international humanitarian law.”

I resigned from the State Department in March because America’s unconditional support for Israel’s war in Gaza made protecting civilians in Gaza and upholding international humanitarian law impossible. In July alone, Israel has bombed 17 United Nations Relief and Works Agency schools serving as temporary shelters — another Israeli violation of international humanitarian law, likely committed with American bombs.

Refusing to withhold U.S. weapons from Israel as it conducts what the ICJ has ruled is plausibly a genocide is wholly incompatible with Harris’ purported humanitarian goals. And now, as the Middle East awaits a worrying escalation in violence between Israel and its opponents, there is an extraordinary risk that the U.S. will be boxed into entering a regional war for Israel — an outcome that would not only put U.S. service members in the line of fire and spell far more needless death and destruction in the region, but also deal a perhaps fatal blow to Harris’ presidential ambitions.

Vice President Harris needn’t risk her campaign and U.S. lives to satisfy Netanyahu, who hopes to prolong his political viability by putting Israel in a state of semi-permanent war. America has massive leverage to prevent further Israeli aggression in the region — it’s time to use it. If Harris and the Democrats want to win in November, they must work diligently now to avert a regional war by convincing Biden to withhold all further security aid until Netanyahu agrees to a full cease-fire in Gaza.

Israel needs to know that America won’t fight this war for them. Pairing more weapons shipments with increased displays of empathy for Palestinians and rope line greetings will do nothing to avert an escalation that could have catastrophic consequences for Harris’ campaign, America, the region, and the world.


Kamala Harris addresses protesters in the crowd at Detroit, Michigan, rally, Aug. 7. (Screenshot/You Tube)

google cta
Analysis | Middle East
nuclear weapons
Top image credit: rawf8 via shutterstock.com

What will happen when there are no guardrails on nuclear weapons?

Global Crises

The New START Treaty — the last arms control agreement between the U.S. and Russia — is set to expire next week, unless President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin make a last minute decision to renew it. Letting the treaty expire would increase the risk of nuclear conflict and open the door to an accelerated nuclear arms race. A coalition of arms control and disarmament groups is pushing Congress and the president to pledge to continue to observe the New START limits on deployed, strategic nuclear weapons by the US and Russia.

New START matters. The treaty, which entered into force on February 5, 2011 after a successful effort by the Obama administration to win over enough Republican senators to achieve the required two-thirds majority to ratify the deal, capped deployed warheads to 1,550 for each side, and established verification procedures to ensure that both sides abided by the pact. New START was far from perfect, but it did put much needed guardrails on nuclear development that reduced the prospect of an all-out arms race.

keep readingShow less
Trump Hegseth Rubio
Top image credit: President Donald Trump, joined by Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Secretary of the Navy John Phelan, announces plans for a “Golden Fleet” of new U.S. Navy battleships, Monday, December 22, 2025, at the Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Florida. (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok)

Trump's realist defense strategy with interventionist asterisks

Washington Politics

The Trump administration has released its National Defense Strategy, a document that in many ways marks a sharp break from the interventionist orthodoxies of the past 35 years, but possesses clear militaristic impulses in its own right.

Rhetorically quite compatible with realism and restraint, the report envisages a more focused U.S. grand strategy, shedding force posture dominance in all major theaters for a more concentrated role in the Western Hemisphere and Indo-Pacific. At the same time however, it retains a rather status quo Republican view of the Middle East, painting Iran as an intransigent aggressor and Israel as a model ally. Its muscular approach to the Western Hemisphere also may lend itself to the very interventionism that the report ostensibly opposes.

keep readingShow less
Alternative vs. legacy media
Top photo credit: Gemini AI

Ding dong the legacy media and its slavish war reporting is dead

Media

In a major development that must be frustrating to an establishment trying to sell their policies to an increasingly skeptical public, the rising popularity of independent media has made it impossible to create broad consensus for corporate-compliant narratives, and to casually denigrate, or even censor, those who disagree.

It’s been a long road.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.