American Muslims and the Presidential Election: A Complex Dilemma
By Mohamad Hammoud
Lebanon - In every presidential election, American Muslims often face a difficult choice between two candidates, neither of whom fully represents their interests. This November presents a similar challenge. Former President Donald Trump, a staunch supporter of “Israel”, has made numerous derogatory remarks about Muslims and other non-white groups.
In contrast, Kamala Harris has expressed sympathy for the Palestinian people while simultaneously emphasizing her unwavering support for “Israel”. She has made it clear that she would never advocate for an arms embargo to pressure “Israel” to halt its actions in Gaza. Despite her background as a former prosecutor who prides herself on upholding the law, it seems she is willing to overlook legal principles that “Israel” is violating by killing innocent Palestinian civilians to avoid backlash from powerful pro-“Israel” lobbying groups like AIPAC.
Harris is acutely aware that many Muslims feel they have no viable alternative but to vote for her. On several occasions, she has posed the question to the “non-committed movement”: "Do you want Trump to be president?" Yet, even if Harris aspires to be an honest broker for peace between Arabs and “Israelis”, she faces significant challenges. To understand this, it is essential to explore the separation of powers in the United States.
American Separation of Powers: The President and Congress
The United States government is founded on the principle of separation of powers, which divides responsibilities among three branches: The President, Congress, and the judiciary. Each branch has distinct powers and responsibilities, designed to provide checks and balances on the others. However, this system often creates a dynamic tension between the President and Congress, each with its own powers, limitations, and interests.
The Role of the President and Congress
As the head of the executive branch, the President wields significant authority, including the power to enforce laws, command the military, and conduct foreign policy. However, the President does not possess absolute power. Many actions, particularly those involving legislation and budgetary matters, require the cooperation and approval of Congress.
Congress, composed of the Senate and the House of Representatives, holds the power to make laws, control federal spending, and oversee the executive branch. For the President to implement major policies or pass significant legislation, such as healthcare reform, he or she needs the support of Congress. Without this backing, even the most ambitious plans can be stalled or completely blocked.
The Need to Work with Congress
To illustrate how this balance of power plays out in practice, consider President Barack Obama's approach to “Israel” and Palestine. Obama entered office in 2009 with a reputation for being sympathetic to the Palestinian cause. His background and previous statements led many to believe he might adopt a more balanced approach to the “Israeli”-Palestinian conflict than his predecessors. He advocated for a two-state solution and criticized “Israel's” settlement policies in the occupied territories. However, the reality of governance often diverges from campaign rhetoric or personal sympathies. Despite his personal views, Obama ultimately supported “Israel” with unprecedented levels of military aid. In 2016, his administration signed a $38 billion military aid package for “Israel”, the largest in U.S. history at that time.
This decision was not solely a reflection of Obama's beliefs but rather a strategic move to secure broader support from Congress for his domestic policy agenda, particularly the Affordable Care Act [ACA], also known as Obamacare, to which Obama's legacy is closely tied. He recognized that Many members of Congress, influenced by powerful pro-“Israel” lobbying groups like AIPAC, were staunchly supportive of “Israel”. To ensure Congress would back his domestic priorities, including the ACA, Obama deemed it necessary to maintain strong ties with pro-“Israel” legislators and support Israel to get their votes.
This scenario highlights the complexities in the American separation of powers. The President may hold certain beliefs or policy goals, the need to collaborate with Congress often necessitates compromises. In Obama's case, despite his personal sympathy for the Palestinian cause, he concluded that bolstering U.S. support for “Israel” was essential to maintaining the political capital required to pass significant legislation.
Kamala Harris and the “Israeli”-Palestinian Conflict
Kamala Harris, who is married to Jewish attorney Douglas Emhoff, cannot be directly compared to Obama concerning her views on Palestine. She has consistently emphasized the importance of “Israel's” security and has pledged to continue supporting “Israel's” military capabilities. While she may not be as hostile as Trump or as staunchly Zionist as Biden, she is likely to remain aligned with AIPAC's agenda and continue supporting the state of “Israel”.
