Uncommitted Movement Withholds Endorsement of Kamala Harris Over Gaza Policy
The Uncommitted Movement made a significant announcement on Thursday, stating that it would not endorse Vice President Kamala Harris as the Democratic candidate for president. The group cited Harris’s unwillingness to shift her stance on unconditional weapons policy and her failure to make a clear campaign statement in support of upholding existing U.S. and international human rights law as the reasons for their decision. Uncommitted leaders and observers had initially hoped that Harris’s nomination would lead to a policy shift toward Israel and Gaza, despite her strong pro-Israel record. However, as Harris solidified Democratic support, her campaign intensified its efforts to reach out to Arab and Muslim voters.
Harris’s aides became cautious of public criticism after President Joe Biden withdrew as the Democratic nominee, with concerns that the administration had neglected Arab and Muslim constituents by providing billions of dollars in weapons to Israel. Uncommitted delegates and their supporters were hopeful that Harris would distance herself from Biden’s unconditional support for Israel’s military and take a stronger stance against Israel’s human rights abuses. At the Democratic National Committee convention last month, Uncommitted delegates withheld their support for Harris, pressuring her to commit to immediately ceasing the sending of weapons to Israel and securing a permanent ceasefire. Tensions between Uncommitted and the Harris campaign escalated when the DNC refused Uncommitted’s request to have a Palestinian American speaker on the main stage at the convention.
Despite not endorsing Harris, Uncommitted emphasized its opposition to a Donald Trump presidency and discouraged third-party voting in fear of inadvertently benefiting Trump in the Electoral College. The group urged uncommitted voters to cast anti-Trump votes in all other races. Harris’s campaign did not provide an immediate response to Uncommitted’s decision.
Harris’s public remarks denouncing the killing of civilians in Palestine had given some Democrats hope that she might change her stance on Israel and Gaza. However, NBC reported in July that the White House had toned down Harris’s criticism of Israel in a planned speech from March. During her nomination acceptance speech, Harris reiterated her support for Israel’s right to defend itself but used the passive voice to describe the destruction in Gaza.
While Uncommitted’s decision may not significantly impact Harris’s chances of winning the White House in November, it does raise concerns about the Democrats’ ability to engage disenchanted voters, including their Arab and Muslim constituents. Over 740,000 people voted “uncommitted” in Democratic primaries earlier this year. Uncommitted voters expressed their dissatisfaction with the Democratic nominee, regardless of who it was, and stated that they would withhold their votes unless significant policy changes were made to stop the killing of civilians in Gaza.
Shaneez Hamed, an uncommitted voter in California, emphasized that policy change in Gaza was a red line for securing his vote. He criticized Harris for not supporting an arms embargo against Israel and for failing to make any real changes in policy. Another uncommitted voter, Will Dawson from Washington, D.C., stated that Harris had not earned his vote due to her failure to appeal to the demands of the Democratic Party for an immediate ceasefire and the threat of a full arms embargo or boycott if not met. Dawson expressed his intention to vote for Jill Stein instead.
In conclusion, Uncommitted’s decision not to endorse Kamala Harris over her support for the Gaza slaughter reflects the dissatisfaction of voters who believe that significant policy changes are necessary to address the ongoing conflict and protect civilian lives. The decision highlights the challenges the Democratic Party faces in engaging disenchanted voters and underscores the importance of addressing human rights concerns in foreign policy.
