Harris will have to do more.
Watching Kamala Harris accept the Democratic presidential nomination last night, Americans across the political spectrum braced themselves for disappointment when, at long last, the vice president broke her relative silence on the war in Gaza. In the end, that apprehension was unwarranted. Harris set out to make everyone happy.
She began with a rote testament to the undesirability of war, expressing her preference for peace and hostage exchanges. Bold stuff. But the vice president did offer some specifics.
First, on Israel:
I will always stand up for Israel’s right to defend itself, and I will always ensure Israel has the ability to defend itself, because the people of Israel must never again face the horror that a terrorist organization called Hamas caused on Oct. 7, including unspeakable sexual violence and the massacre of young people at a music festival.
The acknowledgment of the historical record won’t strike most Americans as controversial. Some of Israel’s advocates might even bristle at her framing, in which the Jewish state is rendered a mere victim. Israel’s Western critics are discomfited when it rises from a supplicating posture and defends itself, and they rediscover affection for Israel when it is on its back. But making note of the “massacre” of defenseless civilians and establishing the validity of “unspeakable sexual violence” is not nothing in Democratic politics. Among Israel’s pathological detractors on the international Left and within the multinational institutions they’ve captured, the idea that Hamas was responsible for such crimes was bitterly resisted for months. Endorsing reality is a modest concession, but it’s one the activists who have made anti-war picketing a substitute for community in their lives won’t want to hear.
Having irritated the pro-Palestinian resistance types, Harris sought to salve their wounded pride. “At the same time, what has happened in Gaza over the past ten months is devastating,” she said. “Innocent lives” have been “lost.” Civilians, “desperate” and “hungry,” have been “fleeing to safety.” The passive voice absolves the perpetrators of these crimes. Nevertheless, it’s “heartbreaking.” That’s why it’s crucial to “end this war” so “the Palestinian people can realize their right to dignity, security, freedom, and self-determination.”
The crowd roared, and pro-Palestinian activists might have been satisfied with what they likely assumed was a sop to their demands. If so, that only further exposes the degree to which they do not understand the conflict against which they’re protesting.
Why have “innocent lives” been lost in Gaza, and why are its people “desperate” and “hungry”? Because Hamas has abused the people over whom it presides. Their only value to Hamas is as sympathetic corpses. Why are they “fleeing to safety”? Because they are being evacuated via no-fire corridors by the IDF to temporary refugee cordons. Israelis do not oppose Palestinian self-determination. Before October 7, they regularly expressed support for that outcome, although that sentiment had eroded with every “round” of hostilities inaugurated by Hamas and like-minded terrorist groups. Successive Israeli governments have made dozens of concessions over the decades in the effort to make Palestinian self-determination a reality. Where the pro-Palestinian Left heard a rebuke of Israel, Israel’s friends heard pablum.
“And know this,” Harris closed, “I will never hesitate to take whatever action is necessary to defend our forces and our interests against Iran and Iran-backed terrorists.”
Well, that should be that. Hamas is very much one of those “Iran-backed” terrorist organizations — one of many in the region with American blood on its hands. Its destruction is in America’s immediate national-security interests. Harris refused to identify the real obstacle blocking her preferred pathway to peace, likely to preserve the delusion that Benjamin Netanyahu is the recalcitrant party here. But it is Hamas that has rejected every temporary cease-fire on offer, and it is Hamas that will not accept its own dissolution. Obviously.
If Harris were compelled by her own logic, she would clear the way for the IDF to finish the job in Gaza, neutralize Hamas, and open the door to a better future in which a responsible civilian authority might succeed the terrorist regime under which Gazans have long suffered. That, not mollifying an unyielding mob, is the path of least political resistance.
But Harris hasn’t earned anyone’s trust yet. The anti-Israel/pro-Hamas activists are crestfallen today. They cannot be appeased, and it was foolish of Harris to make the attempt. Even her perfunctory nod in the general direction of their concerns will embolden them to keep menacing the Democratic Party until it capitulates to their demands. Pro-Israel Americans are probably just as unsatisfied. They need to know if, by giving Israel “the ability to defend itself,” Harris means defensive weapons alone — just enough support to keep Israeli civilians from dying en masse, but not enough to eliminate the threats that regularly force Israelis to flee their homes, huddle in bunkers, or spend restless nights wondering if their families will be murdered in their beds.
Harris will have to do more. We know the vice president is for peace. How she intends to secure that peace remains a mystery.