Near midnight last week, Democratic delegates with the Uncommitted movement sat in protest outside Chicago’s United Center. Elected by hundreds of thousands of primary voters who oppose President Joe Biden’s response to the war in Gaza, the delegates were sent to the DNC “uncommitted”—not pledged to support any candidate at the convention. Earlier in the week, the group did what they were elected to do by calling for a permanent ceasefire and immediate arms embargo. They also continued a simpler request they’d started making before the convention: a spot for a speaker on the main stage to talk about Palestine.

On Wednesday evening, the DNC and Harris campaign finally told them that no Palestinian American would be allowed to speak from the main stage of the convention. Here was their last ditch effort. They hoped a sit-in—and the Civil Rights history it evoked—would push party leaders to change their minds.

Despite being a group of staunch Democrats working to affect change from within the party, the Harris campaign—and many Democrats—mostly treated Uncommitted and their allies as outsiders ruining a party at the DNC. And, often, it seemed without even understanding what they were saying or where agreement could be had. The result was a four-day convention that managed to find space for seemingly everyone on the main stage except those willing to speak personally about what is happening in Palestine.

  • Buffalox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    The bitter truth for Palestine is that Israel/Palestine is not a security issue for USA.
    What happens there will not have any influence on Americans in general.
    Although Gaza is an obvious humanitarian problem, USA has obligated itself to protect Israel by law many years ago, when the exact same humanitarian issue was the case but with Israel as the victim.

    AFAIK favorability for helping Palestine is about as high as for helping Israel, so this is not about which standpoint has the most votes, it’s simply not an important issue for the American election.

    Ukraine is not mentioned much either, and that is an actual security issue for USA, and especially for its NATO allies, and has way higher support (AFAIK) than Palestine.

    So it’s not because Democrats are afraid, it’s just not something they choose to become an important issue for the election. As heartbreaking as it may be, other issues are considered more important for Americans.

    That said, I have no doubt that Harris will put way harder pressure on Israel, I think she recognizes the hardship of an oppressed minority.

    • ralphio@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      You’re right that most Americans don’t care about this and, to the extent they do the pro-Israel group has more resources and have it as a higher political priority. On the other hand the pentagon and state dept definitely see it as a security issue. They see a highly militarized Israel as an asset as a detterent and an insurance policy if things pop off in the ME. This is the conventional wisdom, but it’s far from controversial if it’s the best policy given that Arab forces refuse to fight on the same side as the Israelis, and modern US war stategy calls for using local indigenous forces they prop up. Overall the US will never except not having a strong military presence in the ME (atleast until oil demand drops in the coming decades when renewables become very cheap) and Israel is one of the ways they achieve this.

      Edit: for some reason I said far from controversial, but I meant it is controversial.