Biden vs Harris on the Middle East: Same dance, different steps

The 2024 US election year has been one of the most tumultuous on record. The past two months have seen a shockingly lacklustre performance from President Joe Biden on the debate stage and his subsequent withdrawal from the ticket, an assassination attempt on former President and current Republican nominee Donald Trump, and the elevation of Vice President Kamala Harris to the Democratic nomination. The Harris campaign now has three months to sell its vision to the American people.
While domestic economic pressures will likely be the main focus of US voters in the election, the question of how America’s 47th president will dictate foreign policy will also be critical – both for Americans and all other peoples of the world who will be directly or indirectly affected by the new administration’s policies. Indeed, the next administration will have its hands full on the world stage, with ongoing wars in Ukraine and Gaza and growing US-China competition.
Looking towards the Middle East, Harris’s selection of Tim Walz as her running mate locks in the missing piece on her ticket and provides further insight into what her administration could mean for the region. A sparse record on foreign policy makes it difficult to ascertain Harris and Walz’s exact stances on various critical issues. Still, we have enough clues to paint a picture of their future Middle East policy which, despite some nuances, looks like it would mirror that of President Biden.
Harris’s carefully crafted “As Israel defends itself, it matters how” approach to Israel’s war on Gaza since October 7 and her recent declaration of “I will not be silent [on suffering in Gaza]” in the wake of Netanyahu’s Washington, DC, visit have created some distance between her views on the conflict versus those of Biden in the eyes of American voters. Reports that the National Security Council had to “tone down” her language during a speech delivered in March, in which she referred to the conditions in Gaza as “inhumane” and directed Israel to increase the flow of aid, further highlighted this distinction.
Although Harris has drawn a contrast with Biden through her slightly tougher rhetoric towards Israel on the growing death toll in Gaza and even did not preside over Netanyahu’s address to Congress on July 24, these choices do not hint at a deviation from ongoing, mainstream Democratic policy. After all, despite skipping his speech at Congress, Harris had a one-on-one meeting with the Israeli prime minister the next day, and publicly reaffirmed her ongoing support for Israel. In a campaign rally this week, Harris was interrupted by individuals protesting the war in Gaza, which she deflected from and said, “if you want Donald Trump to win then say that. Otherwise I’m speaking”. Her response was telling, and may indicate how she does not want the Gaza war to be one of the core issues of the campaign.
Regarding other US interests and ongoing tensions in the Middle East, there is further ambiguity about how Harris might respond as president. During her Senate tenure, Harris was a consistent voter against arms sales to Saudi Arabia and US support for the Saudi-led coalitions in the Yemeni civil war. In 2020, she stated that the Saudis have been strong partners in counterterror efforts, but the US must re-evaluate their relationship “to stand up for American values and interests”.
Serving as vice president during Biden’s attempts to secure normalisation between Tel Aviv and Riyadh, her position shifted, partly in response to the growing Chinese and Russian influence across the region. Her presidential goals would likely include strengthening US-Saudi security relations and collaborating with the kingdom on technology and energy transition initiatives.
In the context of the ongoing escalation between Iran and Israel following Israel’s recent assassinations of top Hezbollah and Hamas leaders, Harris’s Iran policy would likely entail a delicate balancing act. During her 2020 presidential election campaign, Harris stated that the US needs to renegotiate the Iran nuclear deal, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). Given Biden’s unsuccessful attempt to resuscitate the deal following the Trump administration’s controversial 2018 withdrawal and the 2020 assassination of General Qassem Soleimani – both of which Harris deemed “reckless” – her prospects of securing a new nuclear agreement with Iran have diminished.
Harris’s announcement of Minnesota Governor Tim Walz as her pick for vice president, a role primarily regarded as titular, only strengthens the perception that she plans to pursue a Middle East policy based on mainstream Democratic positions if elected president.
During his time as a congressman, Walz has consistently aligned himself with mainstream Democratic stances toward the Middle East, including support for the JCPOA, US withdrawal from Iraq, and US aid to Israel. He, however, opposed President Barack Obama’s air strikes in Syria and, like his running mate, resisted US support for Saudi-led operations in Yemen.
Since March, Walz has advocated for a ceasefire in Gaza and remained a proponent of a two-state solution. He has emphasised the need for increasing US humanitarian aid for Palestinians and argued for a distinction to be made between Palestinian civilians and Hamas. Walz will most likely follow Harris’s lead in pursuing a Middle East policy that – while more conciliatory in tone – is almost identical to Biden’s in its substance.
As the campaign gets into full swing, Harris has to carefully navigate a Democratic Party currently divided on the war in Gaza, from the progressive left who have “rebelled” against Biden’s stalwart position on Israel, to the mainstream of the party, which is comfortably pro-Israel in its stance. She is also cognisant of the power of pro-Israel lobbying organisations – particularly AIPAC, which has deployed an unprecedented $15m to defeat NYC Representative Jamal Bowman in his primary race. Missouri Representative Cori Bush, who has repeatedly called for a ceasefire in Gaza, has also just been defeated in her primary this week. Her opponent was backed by the United Democracy Project, which is AIPAC’s super PAC wing.
As these dynamics unfold within the Democratic Party, the distinction in tone between the Biden administration and a possible Harris administrations on the humanitarian crisis in Gaza does not mean that US policy towards the conflict will change. Despite her more impassioned speech, there is no evidence that the substance of Harris’s foreign policy would be any different from the established US stance.
Already, Trump is deploying attack lines against Harris, arguing that she is not adequately pro-Israel. Thus, as a candidate and as a potential president, Harris is unlikely to make a massive departure from Biden’s stated policy, which has included harsher rhetoric towards Netanyahu but continued support for Israel.
The election of the Harris ticket would represent a slew of “firsts” for the US presidential office: the first female president, the first South Asian president, and the first Jewish spouse of an American president. Amid this collection of milestones, the extent to which a Harris presidency signals the beginning of a new chapter for US-Middle East policy- though doubtful – remains to be seen.
The views expressed in this article are the authors’ own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.