Last December, Vice President Kamala Harris flew to a climate conference in Dubai and quickly huddled with the leaders of three Arab nations to discuss Israel’s war against Hamas in the Gaza Strip.
The conflict, by then, was still weeks old, ignited by a terrorist attack in which militants killed roughly 1,200 people in Israel and took hundreds hostage. Ms. Harris saw a diplomatic opening for herself: to be the face of the future, and not of the current war. She told the assembled leaders, “The phase of fighting will end and we will begin implementing our plans for the day after.”
Planning for the phase after the war might have seemed rhetorically out of step with President Biden, who was managing growing domestic opposition to the conflict with his embrace of Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister. But the visit publicly established Ms. Harris as a more compassionate voice for the administration, and she has publicly and privately been more empathetic than Mr. Biden about the plight of Palestinians in Gaza.
Still, according to U.S. officials and campaign advisers, the empathy she has expressed as vice president should not be confused with willingness to break from American foreign policy toward Israel as a presidential candidate.
I’ve leaned so much from example here, and other media, how genocide can be normalized and ignored.
Ignore in one location, and it’s not hard to imagine being ignored elsewhere later. It’s not so much as a moral irritation for me to see the reporting, as hearing a promise of violence closer home. Should circumstances permit. A wake up call.
But this did not come out of a vacuum