Dr. Adam McConnel argues that if Kamala Harris is elected, her policies regarding the genocide in Gaza will likely mirror those of the Biden administration, emphasizing continued support for Israel while revealing the limitations both major U.S. political parties face in addressing Palestinian issues due to public sentiment and electoral strategy.
In an interview, Dr. Adam McConnel discusses the potential impact of the upcoming U.S. presidential elections on policies regarding the genocide in Gaza. He believes that if Kamala Harris is elected, her policies will likely align closely with those of the Biden administration, maintaining support for Israel. McConnel expresses skepticism about significant changes, citing Harris’s previous statements on arms support and her political strategy. He also reflects on the historical context of U.S.-Turkey relations and the complexities of American foreign policy, suggesting that both major political parties are constrained by public sentiment and electoral considerations. Overall, he sees little hope for a shift toward a more equitable approach to the Palestinian cause under either candidate.
Dr. Adam McConnel, born in Idaho and living in Turkey since 1999, currently teaches Turkish history at Sabancı University. Known for his research papers on Turkish history, Turkish-American relations, and contemporary world history, McConnel discussed the genocide in Gaza, Turkey-U.S. relations from the past to the present, and the upcoming presidential elections in America.
Hello, Professor. I’d like to start my questions with the American presidential elections and the genocide in Gaza. Do you think that if Kamala Harris is elected, she will develop different policies regarding the genocide in Gaza compared to the Biden administration? What do you think these differences might be?
First of all, thank you for inviting me. I don’t think there will be significant differences because on August 29, Harris clearly stated in an interview with CNN that she would not pursue a different policy regarding this issue and would continue to provide weapons to Israel. She likely believes that if she spoke differently, she would receive fewer votes from the American public, which is part of her electoral strategy.
In this sense, the maneuvering space for presidential candidates is quite limited on this issue. However, Harris’s not going to applaud Netanyahu in Congress, and the fact that we haven’t seen her at any major Zionist events, despite her Jewish heritage, suggests that she may be trying to ‘stay distant’ where the system allows.
THEY HAVE TO SUPPORT ISRAEL
The majority of American society supports Israel unconditionally, so to gain votes from those people, she has to follow such a policy, at least echoing what Biden has said. Although the process after the elections will be different, I don’t expect her to take a very significant political stance. Yes, she is certainly not as fervent a supporter of Israel as Trump, but she does not speak like a passionate advocate for Israel, which is clear. However, the crucial issue is the arms embargo, and she is not different from Biden on this. On the other hand, we understand that she feels compelled to speak this way.
-Have you observed any changes with Trump? Or do you think the post-trial Trump will be different?
Before the trial, Trump declared Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. He has always been like this; I don’t see any difference.
-The West had ties with Fatah and the PLO until recently, and the Democrats in the West really had a cause for the Palestinian issue. What do you think happened afterward?
The 2006 elections were a turning point because Hamas won the election democratically, but the U.S. and Israel chose not to recognize it. From that point on, everything went downhill step by step. For the past 18 years, Hamas has been governing Gaza, and the Democrats have recently grown closer to Israel. Now, during the Biden administration, as I have written in my articles, they actually have a significant instrument to stop Israel: the arms embargo. Yet they are not using it and do not want to use it. This is the main factor that allows Netanyahu to speak so freely.
-So, can anything be achieved from the International Criminal Court process? We know these types of trials take a long time, as seen with Bosnia. Even if it takes a long time, can a result be achieved, and do you find this effort sincere?
It’s really hard to predict; I find the effort sincere. For instance, if the court issued an arrest warrant, who would arrest Netanyahu today? But it is still valuable as a first example. Just like Baltasar Garzón’s arrest of Pinochet in the UK, it was significant even though he was released and returned to Chile 1.5 years later. So, this process can contribute to the future.
-Do you think Islamophobia is behind the Democrats’ disengagement from the Palestinian cause? Do Democrats and Republicans unite in Islamophobia?
BIDEN’S POLICY IS CONTRADICTORY
There may be individuals within the Democrats who are Islamophobic, but it’s hard to say that this attitude is widespread and effective among them. However, half of the population in America is Republican, and this attitude is very common and strong among them; that is certain. Ultimately, the Democrats are also trying to win elections and attract votes from Republicans. Perhaps this is why we see such an attitude and rhetoric. For instance, Biden rightly criticizes Islamophobia from time to time. In this sense, what they do contradicts what they say.
-Isn’t it actually a form of Islamophobia to abandon such a just cause just because Hamas won?
When Obama was elected for his first term, he gave a speech in Turkey announcing his desire to make a new beginning with Muslims, but by the end of his second term, a coup attempt occurred in Turkey. Recently, Jeff Flake admitted, “Obama was slow to condemn the coup.” Obama’s second term was filled with poor decisions regarding the Muslim world. This attitude of Obama actually represents the overall policy. Moreover, Biden not only failed to correct these mistakes but also insisted on them.
-Isn’t it strange that the West can remain so distant from understanding the values of the rest of the world after such a long period of colonialism?
HARRIS IS NO DIFFERENT FROM TRUMP
America is historically a country of immigrants, but right now, there is a policy against immigrants. In 2020, I thought Kamala Harris would be one of the important figures of the future. When I spoke with my relatives and friends in San Francisco, they described her as a “conservative Democrat.” I was happy when Harris became vice president; I thought it was a good development. But then in 2021, she went to Guatemala and told the people there, “don’t come.” Both of Harris’s parents were immigrants. How can she do something like that? It seems that she prioritizes politics over ideals and principles. Someone who has done this will do anything to win elections. After Biden withdrew from candidacy, there was a sense of excitement among people, including myself. Everyone expected a good performance from Kamala. They expected her to be very different from Biden, but so far she hasn’t said anything significantly different. However, reactions to Harris are very different. People either elevate her to a messianic level, placing her as the one who will solve all problems, or conversely, they completely undermine her.
OBAMA’S SECOND TERM WAS AWFUL
Obama also announced his support for Harris at the last minute. However, they are both Democrats and black politicians. This is not something commonly seen in American history; one would expect greater solidarity among them…
Obama’s second term was a total disappointment for me. He did not understand the U.S.’s real interests in foreign policy and was unable to make tough decisions, as in Syria. While trying to be different from the Bush administration, he repeated the same mistakes. Then there was cooperation with the PKK…
-It seems he tried to cover up that lack of support and delay somewhat with Michelle Obama’s speech at the Convention…
But look at the names who spoke at the Convention: Obama, Clinton, Biden… Is there any sign of change? It looks more like a ‘full speed ahead’ continuity rather than change. I find this frightening because it leads to a dead end.
-This is also a reflection of the Democrats’ effort to mainstream all of them, isn’t it?
Of course… For instance, at that Convention, those on the left supporting Gaza were completely silenced; they were pushed aside as much as possible.
-Interestingly, there were enough Gaza supporters to shout slogans against the genocide and disrupt Harris’s speech. But Harris ultimately responded by saying, ‘If I don’t come, Trump will win.’
Yes, they have a stance like, everyone better behave; if we lose, Trump will win. They say it will be worse if Trump comes, but they can’t say it will be better if they win. This is not a refreshing political stance. For this reason, I have no great expectations. I believe the ‘non-core Democrat’ votes will increase Jill Stein’s votes, but in America’s political history, third parties have never succeeded, with the only exception being the weakening and fragmentation of the structure that produced the current Republican Party in the 1850s.
-I’m curious: I don’t see any efforts to gain Muslim votes. I’m asking for the Democrats; of course, such a thing is not the case for the Republicans…
There were efforts before Gaza, but now Gaza has overshadowed everything. It was clear that there would not be a strong positive movement towards Muslims from the Democrats. I don’t expect anything at all now. Some of the non-core Democrat votes are already detached from the Democrats.
-Do you think Trump has a chance to win?
Trump still seems to have a very high chance. It will be a close fight, but it looks like Trump could win. It’s said that the team Trump has formed for this election period is more consistent and harmonious. Normally, Trump is pragmatic and changes his speeches based on the audience rather than sticking to a specific program and principles, but if he is elected with this team, it is thought he could present a more consistent attitude at least in the first months.
If Trump is elected, I do not expect a significantly different U.S.-Turkey relationship than during his first term; the picture will likely be similar. As you know, Trump made major moves against Turkey, but he had a good personal relationship with Erdoğan. While getting along well with Erdoğan, he also took actions aimed at undermining the Turkish economy. If Trump and Erdoğan can establish a good relationship and develop a more consistent approach, this might strengthen Turkey’s potential role as a mediator in stopping the genocide in Gaza.
If Harris is elected, it seems the Biden line will continue. In this sense, U.S.-Turkey relations will likely follow a trajectory similar to that of the Biden administration.
