Harris: Genocide Must Come at a Political Cost

In the long road to justice, let’s make this election count. We owe this to the beleaguered people of Gaza. We owe this to ourselves.

The Biden-Harris administration has aided and abetted genocide. The argument they still deserve our vote is not only politically naïve but is also built upon a bed of lies. We must show courage in this election and vote for a third party. This is not only morally the correct position; it is the only way to build long-term political leverage for the American Muslim community. 

This genocide was commissioned in Washington. The Biden-Harris administration gave it diplomatic cover, provided the weaponry, helped to subvert the narrative, ensured the world stayed silent and used a mixture of diplomatic sophistry and strong-arm tactics to keep shaky allies on side. This administration must pay a political price for genocide. And even if, and it’s a big if, as I will argue, but even if the alternative is ‘worse’ – if we do not hold this perverse government responsible, this is an indictment of our humanity. We will be as soulless as the ones who ultimately pulled the trigger and dropped the bombs because we have made a crude electoral calculation that the 186,000 murders, according to the Lancet, could be weighed up like some frivolous transaction. As if genocide should be balanced against our comforts. 

All people of conscience, but in particular American Muslims in swing seats, find themselves in a prime position to impact the outcome and send a strong message for Gaza. In fact, the only sane political course in this coming election is to solidify your vote as a ‘Gaza vote’. Many Muslim communities live in these critical swing states, and this election will come down to a wafer-thin margin in the handful of marginals. We owe it to Gaza to attach a grave political price to this genocide.

Complicity of the Biden-Harris Administration 

There are still those who are under the illusion that the Biden-Harris administration is a mere bystander in the slaughter of Gaza. And so assign a misplaced benignity to their actions. This allows them to wheel out the much misused ‘lesser of the two evils’ argument. With this framing, the Democratic administration will always come out on top in any calculation that includes the repulsive Trump. This could not be further from the truth. Far from being inert, the Biden-Harris administration collaborated with Israel from the very start to perpetuate this genocide. They are partners in this slaughter – willing accessories. 

Washington, which was long ago captured by special interests that work against the ordinary American, worked diligently with the Israeli war machine, punctuating their complicity with slight tickles of distaste for the most extreme excesses of Netanyahu. When these light words of censure were not taken seriously, they refused to utilize their enormous armory of political, economic and material leverage to reign in this war machine, even when they were warned at the earliest stages that the result would be a humanitarian catastrophe and would violate international law. Instead, the administration drew imaginary red lines that blew away in the dust.

Biden and Harris have provided every single weapon the Israelis required to prosecute its slaughter, releasing billions in military aid. They have vetoed every UN resolution that called for a ceasefire, even ones worded with the most placid language. And when a non-binding resolution was presented to end the occupation of the West Bank at the General Assembly, they lobbied their allies to vote it down. 

The charge sheet is endless ­– Washington is a crime scene. When the ICC chief investigator Karim Khan sought to issue arrest warrants against leading Israeli officials, Biden hit out at the institution, calling the move outrageous, whilst Democratic US lawmakers pressurised the organisation to drop the process after Netanyahu lobbied Senators. Eight months into the killing spree, Biden declared, “Let me be clear… what’s happening is not genocide”. It’s the same administration that arbitrarily cut funding to UNRWA, a lifeline for many in Gaza - to help the Israelis starve the population and aid ethnic cleansing. It was a Biden-Harris administration that coerced allies to ignore the ICJ opinion that Israel may be committing genocide.

It’s the same vile administration that laid down a ‘red line’ over an assault on Rafah, only to walk back when, indeed, Israel began its assault on the city. This horrid administration showed zero empathy for American Aisha Nur when she was shot in the head by Israelis in cold blood as she stood as an observer to a protest. They refused even to meet the family, lest they could be misconstrued as pro-Palestinian. Instead, the administration accepted the Israeli narrative that it was an accidental killing. It was Biden and Harris who secured Israel against any possible Iranian attack by shooting down Iranian missiles, albeit telegraphed and instructing Arab allies to do the same. This administration is not a bystander. It is complicit. Biden-Harris are Israel. They belong to the same settler-colonial enterprise. 

Trump and the greater of the two evils? 

Yet the argument goes that any vote not going to Kamala Harris would enable Trump to come to office. And Trump is the greater of the two evils. Let me make it clear: Trump is a Zionist. His blend of right-wing populism and narrow nationalism is repulsive. But the Democrats are looking to scare the electorate into voting for their presidential candidate, irrespective of the carnage her administration has wrought. This misapplication of the lesser of the two evils is done intentionally to scare voters. Both Harris and Trump would continue the bi-partisan consensus on Israel because the future of this settler colonial enterprise is bound up in post-war US foreign policy thinking. This was seen in the recent presidential debate, where Trump and Harris both fell over one another in showing their undying love for Zionism. Democratic Vice-Presidential nominee Tim Walz declared, “The expansion of Israel and its proxies is an absolute fundamental necessity for the United States”. This is a two-party nightmare. 

In reality, there is no lesser evil when it comes to Palestine, rather just two vessels of poison. One blue and one red.  

Will American Muslims choose domestic comfort or solidarity with Gaza?

Some readily acknowledge this reality, that Harris and Trump are the same on Palestine, but suggest that at home, Trump will curtail the rights of American Muslims. The Muslim ban is oft-cited, but also the general level of Islamophobia that was encouraged within some quarters of the far-right, to which Trump depends heavily for votes. Undoubtedly, Trump is repulsive. But consider how much the Palestine protests and encampments have been over-policed and the level of intimidation and coercion, most of which happened under blue states. But this is not the point; the real question is how much American Muslims are willing to sacrifice their perceived comforts to take a courageous stand on Gaza. This genocide must come with a political price. Otherwise, it sends to future administrations the message that no matter what you do to the ummah, Muslims in America will always vote for self-interest over ummatic solidarity. 

Let’s chart a long-term political strategy 

In reality, it’s not who wins; in a two-party system where there is a consensus on Israel, you will not immediately solicit a radical change in policy on Gaza; it’s really about how they lose. American Muslims are in a unique position because many concentrations of voters happen to reside in the few swing states that will determine the outcome of this election. States like Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Georgia are hanging in the balance. They are too close to call, and every vote counts. That’s why the Democrats are pulling out all the stops to win back Muslim voters. A Muslim block traditionally voted Democrat can make the difference if they unite behind a third-party candidate. A significant group of prominent imams, including Dr Omar Suleiman and Dr Yasir Qadhi, have signed a joint letter saying just this: that a vote for Harris is a vote for genocide. 

This is the most astute strategy because if, after a genocide, Muslims are willing to forgive and forget and return to the party responsible, our vote will remain worthless. This strategy is the first step to showing the weight of the Muslim vote. It attaches a price to our politics. At the moment, promises of a ‘seat at the table’ are enough to capture the attention of some within our community, who have lacked political insight for decades, jumping from one presidential candidate to another, all of whom disappoint at home and murder abroad. Yet we still return for more gruel. As if doing the same thing over and over again would produce different results.  

The Israel lobby

It also matters because of the power solicited by AIPAC, the Israel lobby that dominates Washington. They have pumped money into pro-Israeli candidates of both parties. The power of the lobby would be severely undermined if Harris and a host of preferred Zionist-backed congressional candidates lost because of the ‘Gaza vote’. That’s why AIPAC brashly claim that 99% of all candidates backed by the lobby group win, ‘being pro-Israel is both good policy and good politics,’ they brashly declare.  And this is the political objective we should aim at, challenging this lobby's strength through tactical voting.

The British experience

In the recent UK elections, despite the Labour Party landslide, the news the next day was that Labour did very badly in constituencies (voter districts) that were angered by the bi-partisan position on Gaza. Some big names destined for cabinet positions were torpedoed by unified voters that sent a clear political message, whilst others narrowly kept their seats despite a national swing towards their government. It is not about who wins; it is about how they lose. Muslim Americans can construct a strong political statement on election night. The millions offered by the Israel lobby in swing seats and tight congressional races were blunted by people unified against injustice. Gaza mattered. 

Third-party challenges 

There’s also an argument that voting for a pro-Gaza third-party candidate may also come with a compromise. Those standing are perceived to have regrettable views on several social and political matters, including Syria. The reality is that Muslim voters have to engage with these parties and individuals actively. Already, Jill Stein has clarified (or shifted) on Syria. But because these parties and candidates are never going to win, the aim is to bank Muslim and conscientious votes behind one candidate so that the political objective to show the power of the ‘Gaza vote’ can be realized. You are not responsible for their programme for government in a two-party system that is not designed to bring a third party to power, at least not in one election. You will not make Gaza the political call if votes are diffused between many parties. Muslim community leaders have to quickly decide on who this candidate will be. 

Staying at home 

Some have argued that the best option is to stay at home, and by doing so, you act as a conscientious objector in that you refuse to engage in this two-party charade. Undoubtedly, this system is a charade, but the system will positively chuckle at such political naivety. It is not going to collapse because you decided not to turn up. It will happily chug along on the most minimal turnout, as it has. More importantly, your denunciation based on Gaza will not be registered effectively. Indeed, there has to be a broader outreach to denounce the systemic problems of Washington, but in the little time available, we should not let the perfect be the enemy of the good. 

This coming US election is the first step in freeing ourselves of the two-party nightmare, but its impact may not lead to an immediate change on the ground in Gaza. I readily accept that. Rather, it will dent the very system, this duopoly that has added a silencer to Israeli firepower.  But suppose you want to send a powerful message to the establishment, to the lobbies, to the military-industrial complex, to those who care little about your vote, let alone the lives of the children of Gaza. In that case, this election requires you to punish the facilitators of genocide in Washington. It needs American Muslims to display courage and ummatic solidarity. Let’s wake up to the news that Harris lost because she supported this nightmare. In the long road to justice, let’s make this election count. We owe this to the beleaguered people of Gaza. We owe this to ourselves.