Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s recent visit to Washington highlighted the growing rift between Israel and the United States, particularly within the Democratic Party. This alliance, once solid, now faces significant discord over three critical issues: ending the war in Gaza, addressing the humanitarian crisis, and recognizing Palestinian self-determination.

Netanyahu’s alignment with the Republican Party has deepened partisan divides in US politics. Many Democrats increasingly oppose his hardline policies toward Palestinians. Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi panned Netanyahu’s July 24 speech to Congress as the "worst" by any foreign leader to the legislative body in US history. This sentiment reflects the broader discontent within the party with the Israeli prime minister’s leadership and handling of the war in Gaza, and especially the extremely high death toll among Palestinians in the devastated coastal strip, now totaling more than 39,000, according to Gaza’s Health Ministry.

The depth of dissatisfaction among Democrats was clear when over 130 lawmakers from the party boycotted Netanyahu’s speech, a significant increase from the 58 who did so in 2015. Vice President Kamala Harris, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, also stayed away, citing a scheduling conflict. This mass boycott underscores the profound estrangement from Netanyahu’s policies among many Democrats and signals a growing debate within the party over the US stance on Israel. Notably, even many Israelis were urging members of Congress to boycott Netanyahu’s speech, and many of those who did so are listening to Israelis and their concerns. In a letter to US congressional leaders, senior Israeli figures, including former national security officials, accused Netanyahu of jeopardizing both Israeli and American national security, focusing solely on his political survival rather than addressing the root causes of the conflict.

The need to end the war in Gaza is a significant point of divergence. President Joe Biden, during his meeting with Netanyahu at the White House, emphasized the need to reach a cease-fire deal “as soon as possible” to allow the release of hostages held by Hamas and facilitate the supply of humanitarian aid to Gaza. This approach contrasts starkly with Netanyahu’s agenda and his speech to Congress, which prioritize continued military operations until Hamas is fully defeated. Netanyahu has shown little urgency in pursuing a cease-fire, prioritizing military action over diplomacy, and has not presented a clear plan to end the war or on what would come afterwards.

In contrast to Netanyahu's false claims about Israel limiting civilian casualties and allowing sufficient humanitarian aid to enter Gaza during his speech in Washington, the Democratic Party, including figures like Vice President Harris, has become increasingly vocal about the humanitarian catastrophe unfolding there. She emphasized her commitment to speaking out against his congressional address, where he claimed there were almost no civilian casualties in Rafah, which she considers misinformation.

While both Biden and Harris have called for an immediate cease-fire in Gaza to alleviate the suffering of innocent civilians and address the dire humanitarian situation, Harris's tone, emphasis, and expressions of empathy stood out. Her firm stance and compassionate approach marked a notable first in addressing the crisis with such urgency and care. She emphasized that "how [Israel] defends itself matters," signaling a potential shift toward a more balanced approach that takes into account both Israeli security and Palestinian humanitarian needs. Her statement suggests an effort to change current policy to better address the complexities of the situation. Harris also indirectly challenged Netanyahu by saying, “I will not be silent,” signaling her disagreements with him on the human toll of the war and the severity of the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

The issue of Palestinian self-determination is another major area of discord. Netanyahu’s administration has consistently opposed the establishment of a Palestinian state, recently underscored by the Knesset’s overwhelming vote against Palestinian statehood. This stance starkly contrasts with the Democratic Party’s support for a two-state solution as a cornerstone of US policy in the Middle East. Vice President Harris has challenged Netanyahu’s government on this point, stating that the Palestinian people need the chance to “exercise their right to freedom, dignity, and self-determination.” Their disagreements will likely persist, impacting US-Israeli relations and making it clear to both parties that Israel is not interested in a two-state solution, especially if Harris is elected president in November.

The impact of Netanyahu’s visit extends beyond US-Israel relations as well. For Palestinians, it presents a critical opportunity to leverage the growing dissatisfaction with Netanyahu’s policies within the Democratic Party. For this to happen, however, Palestinians will need to present a united front, prioritizing their people's needs over individual and partisan political interests. Unity and cohesive action can amplify their voice and influence US policy, particularly as the Democratic Party reevaluates its stance on Israel.

The recent Beijing Declaration of Principles, signed by the leaders of all of the main Palestinian factions in the Chinese capital last week, demonstrates that Palestinian factions can unite around a common cause. This unity must begin now and all efforts directed toward ending the Gaza conflict and advocating for a just peace. By aligning their efforts and speaking with one voice, Palestinians can encourage a possible future Harris administration to hold Israel accountable, not just in rhetoric but through concrete actions.

As the 2024 US elections approach, Palestinians must capitalize on this momentum to influence the Democratic Party’s platform and policies. The time is ripe for a strategic push that aligns Palestinian aspirations with the evolving US political landscape. Netanyahu’s visit has exposed the rift between Israel and the Democratic Party, but it also offers a glimmer of hope for a more balanced and just approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The path forward requires Palestinian unity and international advocacy. Without Palestinian unity, reconstruction and rehabilitation in Gaza are impossible. By presenting a unified stance and clearly articulating their demands for statehood and humanitarian relief, Palestinians can transform this moment of political divergence into an opportunity for lasting change.

For Israelis, there is a parallel opportunity. Polls indicate that a majority of Israelis want Netanyahu out of office, reflecting a significant shift in public opinion about his policies and their impact on Israel's future. His reception at home and abroad suggests a different reality than the one he presents. Israelis and Palestinians, for the first time in a long while, share a common goal: seeking a change in leadership. This shared desire for change holds the potential to foster a new era of peace and cooperation.

Americans must seize this opportunity. The international community, especially the US, needs to recognize the urgency of addressing these issues to pave the way for a peaceful and just resolution to the conflict. By supporting efforts to end the war and promote Palestinian self-determination, Americans can play a pivotal role in fostering a more balanced and equitable future for both Israelis and Palestinians. The time for decisive action is now, and the chance to make a lasting impact should not be missed.

 

Carol Daniel Kasbari, Ph.D, is a Conflict Resolution Specialist, Professor at George Mason's School of Conflict Resolution, and and a Non-Resident Scholar with MEI's Program on Palestine and Palestinian-Israeli Affairs.

Photo by Hu Yousong/Xinhua via Getty Images


The Middle East Institute (MEI) is an independent, non-partisan, non-for-profit, educational organization. It does not engage in advocacy and its scholars’ opinions are their own. MEI welcomes financial donations, but retains sole editorial control over its work and its publications reflect only the authors’ views. For a listing of MEI donors, please click here.