Kamala Harris made headlines this week with a speech in which the US Vice President spoke about the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Gaza amidst Israel’s five month-long military operation.
“Our hearts break for… all the innocent people in Gaza who are suffering from what is clearly a humanitarian catastrophe,” Harris said to applause from the sympathetic crowd. “People in Gaza are starving. The conditions are inhumane. And our common humanity compels us to act.”
Harris said the Biden administration was committed to delivering more food aid to the territory and urged Hamas leaders to accept a temporary six-week “ceasefire” that has emerged from negotiations in recent days.
Dr. Hasan Unal, a professor of political science and international relations at Bashkent University in Ankara, Turkiye, joined Sputnik’s Fault Lines program on Wednesday to discuss the latest developments in the Palestine-Israel conflict and examine the significance of Harris’ proposal.
“They're acting like Kamala Harris went rogue,” said host Jamarl Thomas of Harris’ speech, which has been characterized in liberal media outlets as a break from official White House policy. “Kamala Harris just articulated [US President Joe] Biden's position, which is basically the Israeli position with the idea that they're going to occupy Gaza after the fact, or put in an administrator that they choose.”
“[A] six-week ceasefire isn't too bad altogether,” said Unal of the pause in fighting advocated by Harris Sunday. “But the condition is that Hamas will have to basically free all the hostages. I mean, what Hamas has as its trump card in its hands is the hostages. Hamas wants to negotiate the release of the Palestinians from Israeli prisons.”
“There are thousands of them and Israel doesn't seem to be coming around to the idea of doing that,” Unal noted.
Outrage was generated over Palestinians’ treatment in Israeli prisons late last year when the Palestinian man Farouq al-Khateeb was released after being held for months under what his family has called “spurious charges.” Khatib appeared gaunt and, according to his family, was unable to walk. The 30 year old reportedly lost some 55 pounds of weight during his months of imprisonment, weighing only 77 pounds after his release.
Palestinians are calling for the release of these thousands of civilians detained arbitrarily in Israeli prisons, who observers say have received far less attention in mainstream media than the Israeli captives held by Hamas.
Thomas noted the widespread skepticism over the United States as a supposedly honest broker in negotiations between Israel and Hamas, recalling that the country has purportedly stood for a “two-state solution” for decades but has failed to take action as Israel expands its presence in occupied Palestinian territory. Unal agreed, noting that a permanent ceasefire is necessary to rebuild Gaza after months of seemingly indiscriminate Israeli airstrikes. But in any case, Unal explained that a two-state solution would remain impossible as long as Israel continues its policy of building settlements in the occupied West Bank.
“What sort of a two-state [policy] can you have with all the settlers within the West Bank basically preventing some sort of a contiguous territory to come under the Palestinian Authority?” asked the expert.
Meanwhile Israel has refused to offer significant concessions on the issue of Palestinian prisoners. Hamas has called for the release of prominent Palestinian political leader Marwan Barghouti as a condition of any deal to end hostilities in Gaza. Israel has so far rejected the demand, perhaps in order to prevent the emergence of any Nelson Mandela-like figure who could rally the world behind the Palestinian cause.
The United States continues to provide Israel with billions of dollars in military aid each year, Thomas noted, even while claiming sympathy for the plight of the Palestinians.
“Other countries don't have the same sort of influence here in Washington [as Israel does],” said Unal. “There is a lobby in the United States, specifically on behalf of Israel, and they funnel lots of money, they have lots of influence, and the interesting thing about them is that their lobbying – or at least how our politicians respond to the lobbying – it is on both sides.”
“Democrats and Republicans respond pretty similarly,” he noted.