Palestinian rights advocates demand action as the vice president and presidential candidate expresses sympathy for Gaza.

Washington, DC – Vice President Kamala Harris says she will “not be silent” in the face of Palestinian suffering, as Israel’s war in Gaza rages on.

But Palestinian rights advocates want to know exactly what that means for United States foreign policy.

The vice president — and the Democrats’ likely nominee for the presidency — emphasised the plight of Palestinians in Gaza after meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Thursday. Nevertheless, she pledged ongoing support for Israel.

Activists say expressing sympathy for Palestinians without pursuing a meaningful shift away from the US’s policy of unconditional military and diplomatic support will not help Harris win back voters alienated by President Joe Biden’s approach to the war.

“Without an actual commitment to stop killing the children of Gaza, I don’t care about her empathy for them,” said Eman Abdelhadi, a sociologist at the University of Chicago. She stressed that the US bears “responsibility” for the atrocities committed against Palestinians.

“To be empathetic to someone that you’re shooting in the head is not exactly laudable. We don’t need empathy from these people. We need them to stop providing the weapons and the money that is actively killing the people that they’re supposedly empathising with.”

  • Carrolade@lemmy.worldEnglish
    92·
    4 months ago

    That’s funny, if you scroll up just a little bit you will see my criticisms of Israeli settlements and violence in the West Bank.

    I simply do not think hamas are some sort of heroes, when they are absolutely demons. The IDF fighting hamas is two evils fighting each other. Siding with either is picking your favorite evil.

    edit because up and down are different directions

    • Eldritch@lemmy.worldEnglish
      13·
      4 months ago

      Just pointing this out as a public service message. Linky is a well-known bad faith poster. Likely not even from any of the countries involved. And speaking from a position of extreme privilege. Hence why they can argue for unrealistic positions and against the best options we have. But not worry about suffering negative consequences from it.