As US Vice President Kamala Harris steps into the spotlight to take over the Democratic ticket from President Biden, some on the left have so far withheld their support. Of central concern are her views on Palestine and the ongoing genocide in Gaza. Will she stake out a different policy than Biden when it comes to indiscriminate Israeli warfare on Palestinians, which has so far received unconditional US aid and political support?

For better or worse, much of Harris's positions on Palestine are presumed by proxy to Biden's. Indeed, Biden administration officials themselves have stated there is no daylight between hers and Biden's positions on Israel's war in Gaza. When pressed at public events this past month - prior to her candidacy - Harris restated Biden's position and endorsed a two-state solution.

But in March, she also came out publicly in favour of a ceasefire before Biden did, in what some assume was partially a test of her individual electoral and political salience.

Harris has certainly not been an avowed, true believer in Zionism the way Biden has historically been. As a US Senator, Harris opposed SB-1, an anti-Boycott, Divest and Sanctions (BDS) bill backed by the Zionist lobby, on constitutional free speech grounds.

Harris has also stopped short of ruling out consequences for Israeli forces when interviewed regarding Netanyahu's order to invade Rafah, a city dedicated as a safe zone for hundreds of thousands of displaced Palestinians from throughout the Gaza Strip and which Biden called a "red line."

That "red line" of Rafah proved largely superficial for Biden, who continued to supply weapons unconditionally as Israeli forces invaded the city. Soon after, Biden even sent US troops to support a covert massacre that killed over 200 Palestinians while retrieving Israeli hostages, in direct contravention of the diplomatic ceasefire exchanges Biden has purported to support.

Harris has not criticised any of Biden's or Israel's choices in Gaza, but she has been more explicit about "the scale of human suffering" among Palestinians, saying she "will not be silent" and that a two-state solution must ensure Palestinians "can exercise their right to freedom, dignity, and self determination."

At the same time, Harris has condemned protestors outside the war criminal Israeli PM Netanyahu's address to Congress on the basis of a few individuals (among thousands) burning the US flag. She also met with Netanyahu less than a week before the extrajudicial assassinations of key figures in both Hamas and Hezbollah, leaving doubts about Israeli and US commitments to a ceasefire, and the U.S.'s role in enabling regional aggression from Israel.

We do not yet have a full picture of Harris's personal foreign policy approach. Her management of the US-Mexico border did not reflect her statements in 2018 that she would consider abolishing ICE, or Immigration and Customs Enforcement, a controversial agency established after 9/11 which has a record of sometimes cruel immigrant detention practices and family separation.

She has also signalled she would continue Biden's asylum policy, which in fact borrows from Trump's virtual moratorium on asylum. Some feel that record is evidence enough that California's former "Top Cop" and lead prosecutor would favour military solutions over diplomacy across the board.

However, her personal team includes Philip Gordan as a national security advisor who served multiple Democratic administrations; Gordan supported the Iran Nuclear Deal which Trump dissolved and which Biden never renewed in favour of fostering Trump's normalisation and weapons agreements with Saudi Arabia and the UAE.

Gordon generally believes that decades of US interventionism has often misjudged the costs, consequences, and sustainability of such forceful strategy.

Still, he has by no means strayed from traditional pro-Israel policies that prioritise the US-Israel relationship with the same failed policies: treating the blockade of Gaza as an acceptable steady-state policy, focusing on bolstering Israeli military support, and suggesting some concessions for Palestinians but no serious action to stop settlement expansion or end the military occupation - all of which have led to escalations as Palestinians seek self-determination.

Indeed, those same policies formed the backdrop to the rise of the far-right Israeli regime, the attack of October 7th, and the present genocide. Gordon has said himself that Harris's support for Israel is "ironclad." Such policies would warrant serious reconsideration if Harris were to embrace a peace agenda.

Gaza votes

How important will these positions be for victory in November's election? Polling is likely to shift in the coming months as voters are more exposed to Harris's campaign. But so far, polls have been clear that Harris has little room for error and indeed, was even less popular than Biden or Trump earlier this year. The "battleground states" that will determine the election, like Arizona, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, will likely be won by ≤ 50,000 votes - between 0.5 and 2 percentage points at most.

Meanwhile, polling on 'Gaza votes' shows that the issue has become a point of no return for many progressives in their already hesitant support for the Democratic nominee, particularly one that represents continuity with the current Biden administration.

Upwards of 1 in 5 Democratic or Independent voters in each of those battleground states said they were less likely to vote for Biden on account of Gaza - but the vast majority, over 60%, strongly support an immediate ceasefire and over half support conditioning aid to the Israeli military.

That polling is explicit in asking voters what minimum policy changes would be needed to secure their votes, finding that an immediate and permanent ceasefire and ending military aid to Israel would secure the votes of over a fifth of Democrats and Independents in each of those key states.

In the coming month, it will be crucial for Harris to show her cards when it comes to Palestine and the genocide in Gaza: will she back a total halt on weapons to the far-right Israeli regime to finally end the bloodshed that has taken the lives of over 186,000 Palestinians, most of them innocent women and children? Will she back strict conditions on aid to Israel to hold the regime accountable for war crimes, apartheid policies, and an ever-expanding military occupation and theft of Palestinian land?

Several groups yesterday celebrated successful pro-Palestinian advocacy efforts to ensure Harris did not select a staunchly pro-Israel running mate like Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro. Instead, she nominated midwestern Governor Tim Walz, with signals that Shapiro's arendt Zionism was a liability.

On Palestine, Walz similarly supports a two-state solution and has even voted in favour of a Congressional resolution opposing UN efforts to label Jewish-only settlements on Palestinian land as illegal. But more recently, he signaled openness to the "uncommitted" anti-genocide protest movement and has comparatively better rhetoric regarding Palestinians. Harris's choice has provided some assurances to leftist voters concerned about Gaza, but most advocates emphasise that it changes little to end the US-enabled genocide and therefore, their votes.

If she fails to provide such assurances through either staff or policy promises, she risks alienating a key margin of voters in swing states in particular: those more than half a million who voted "uncommitted" or uninstructed in state primary elections, and who will easily extend their anger at unjust warfare to her, as accomplice to "Genocide Joe" Biden.

Harris will likely have to move beyond statements of sympathy to gain the support of a base that has watched over 80% of all homes in Gaza destroyed, all hospitals bombed, and over a million at risk of starvation because Israel has used hunger as a weapon of war. Many argue she will have to guarantee that no more bombs will be sent to Israel - to enforce compliance with an unconditional ceasefire.

From openDemocracy