Vice President Kamala Harris told pro-Palestine protesters at an August 9 Arizona campaign rally that “now is the time to get a ceasefire deal” in Gaza.

This came two days after the presidential candidate went viral for denouncing and dismissing two pro-Palestine supporters in Detroit, Michigan. 

In the footage from the August 7 Detroit rally, Harris became frustrated with protesters after they shouted, “Kamala, Kamala you can’t hide, we won’t vote for genocide.”

She responded sternly, “You know what, if you want Donald Trump to win, then say that. Otherwise, I’m speaking.” 

Meanwhile, the Biden-Harris administration is set to release $3.5 billion to Israel to spend on U.S. weapons and military equipment.

Harris’ adviser, Phil Gordon, posted on social media that her position has always been to “ensure Israel is able to defend itself against Iran and Iran-backed terrorist groups” and that “she does not support an arms embargo on Israel.”

The inconsistency in Harris’ words and actions, as well as her significant role in the administration’s support for Israel, affirm that her foreign policy will not differ much from Biden’s.

This is why some U.S. voters are refusing to vote at all if there is no change in her foreign policy approach. 

Uncommitted Movement Leaders Meet Harris 

The Uncommitted movement co-founders, Layla Elabed and Abbas Alawieh, represent Michigan voters who refused to vote for Biden because of his unconditional support for Israel. They had a brief meeting with Harris and Tim Walz before the Detroit rally. 

According to a released statement, Elabed and Alawieh “presented their concerns about the U.S. supplying weapons for Israel’s war and occupation against Palestinians,” and Harris “shared her sympathies.” 

Earlier this year, more than 100,000 people in the Michigan primary voted “uncommitted” due to Biden’s support for Israel, and more than 700,000 Democrats nationwide voted “uncommitted,” “uninstructed,” or “no preference.”

The Arab-American and Muslim communities present a real threat to the Democratic party this year, particularly in Michigan.

According to the release, Elabed and Alawieh told Harris that the movement would support her presidential bid if she changes her policy. 

“Our voters need to see you turn a new page on Gaza policy that includes embracing an arms embargo to save lives,” Alawieh, a delegate to the Democratic National Convention, said.

“Michigan voters want to support you, but we need a policy that will save lives in Gaza right now,” Elabed told Harris. “I meet with community members every day in Michigan who are losing tens and hundreds of family members in Gaza. Right now, we need an arms embargo.”

Right after this conversation, Harris dismissed pro-Palestine protesters in Michigan, home to the largest Arab and Muslim population in the country. 

“Lack of Accountability and Leadership” 

Salma Hamamy and Zainab Hakim, the two Michigan activists who called out Harris for her complicity in Israel’s genocide, were forced out of the venue in Detroit. They were not members of the Uncommitted movement.

In an interview, Hamamy called Harris’ words a “questionable response to people who are saying, we want an end to the genocide.”

 “When people are demanding a ceasefire and arms embargo and an end to the genocide and you say that we want Donald Trump to step in—it just shows a lack of accountability,” she said. “It shows a lack of leadership, a lack of responsibility, and a lack of ownership.”

Hakim said she was surprised by those who believed Harris’ words at the rally revealed her true colors and would be the cause for her loss in Michigan. 

“I think what was most surprising to me is the idea that this one sentence of hers—as opposed to her consistent, decades-long support for Israel—could be the thing for someone to feel like, yeah, maybe Kamala Harris isn’t a good person,” she explained. 

Hamamy added that it is evident that Kamala expressed sympathy to the Uncommitted campaign leaders because she worries they will not mobilize the community to vote for her.

“She says one thing to one person and changes the moment she gets on stage, and there are several cameras around—it was very clear,” she said.

“And to me, what I’m going to prioritize is what her policies stand for, and what she said to the entire crowd and to the entire audience when she was challenged and when we said we’re not going to vote for genocide, as opposed to what her response would be to people on the side in private.”

Victimizing a Woman of Color in Power

During her run for vice president in 2020, Harris made headlines for her catchphrase, “Mr. Vice President, I’m speaking.”

At the time, former Vice President Mike Pence interrupted Harris during a vice presidential debate a total of ten times, which sparked discussions about interrupting women of color. 

Some have compared Harris’ recent response to protesters at the Detroit rally to her 2020 catchphrase. 

The obvious difference, however, is that Harris currently holds the second highest position in the country, and was interrupted for a genocide her administration is funding. 

“It’s important to remember that this disruption was obviously about Harris and about election-related stuff,” Hakim said. 

 “What people seem to be forgetting is that she’s not just like some random person who decided to run for president,” Hakim added.

“She has been the vice president for all 300-plus days of this genocide and could have said something in all of that time. She deliberately chose not to do that.”

Harris Picks Walz as Running Mate

On August 1, Harris announced Minnesota Governor Tim Walz as her running mate. Walz and Josh Shapiro, the governor of Pennsylvania, were reportedly the finalists. 

The two governors are both supporters of Israel. To the public, Walz comes off as more moderate, while Shapiro has made openly insulting and racist comments that have outraged pro-Palestine protesters.

On August 2, CAIR Philadelphia called on Shapiro to apologize for the racist comments he made about Palestinians.

CAIR shared an excerpt from a 1993 opinion article by Shapiro, where he argued that there will be no peace in the Middle East because Palestinians are “too battle-minded.” 

 “Using history as precedent, peace between Arabs and Israelis is virtually impossible and will never come.” Shapiro wrote. “Palestinians will not coexist peacefully…They do not have the capabilities to establish their own homeland and make it successful even with the aid of Israel and the United States. They are too battle-minded to be able to establish a peaceful homeland of their own.”

Recently, Shapiro compared pro-Palestinian college students to the Ku Klux Klan, and supported a law that would punish institutions that divest from Israel.

Shapiro has also volunteered in the Israeli Army.

Walz: a Diplomatic Choice

Walz, on the other hand, has praised Minnesota Democrats who cast uncommitted ballots in the presidential primary as being “civically engaged.”

“This issue is a humanitarian crisis, they have every right to be heard,” Walz said. “These folks are asking for a change in course, they’re asking for more pressure to be put on.”

Walz also told Minnesota Public Radio in March that “you can hold competing things: that Israel has the right to defend itself, and the atrocities of October 7 are unacceptable, but Palestinian civilians being caught in this … has got to end.”

Walz’s moderate stance, however, does not mean he does not support Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestine. 

While serving in Congress from 2007 to 2019, he voted to condemn a United Nations resolution that said Israeli settlements in the West Bank are illegal. 

He has also met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. 

In an event held by the Jewish Community Relations Council earlier this year, Walz said that “the ability of Jewish people to self-determine themselves is foundational … The failure to recognize the state of Israel is taking away that self-determination. So it is anti-Semitic.”

Additionally, Walz has not addressed calls to divest from Israel.

All positions considered, Harris’ selection of Walz over Shapiro was a highly diplomatic choice, as Democrats have come to favor Walz’s progressivism and conciliatory approach, which is serving the Harris campaign by winning her more votes.