Rather than believing this is an existential conflict that requires a clear winner on either side, she claimed it is not, in fact, a “binary” issue. The thousands of protesters in DC a day earlier, including musician Dave Matthews, would beg to disagree.
Last week, Vice President Kamala Harris addressed the ongoing war in Gaza between Hamas and Israel for the first time as the presumptive Democrat nominee for President. Largely following President Biden’s lead, she began with a full throated denunciation of Hamas and the horrors committed on October 7, 2023, claiming she fully supported Israel’s right to defend itself before launching into a litany of tragedies the Jewish state has caused while exercising that very right. “The images of dead children and desperate hungry people fleeing for safety, sometimes displaced for the second, third or fourth time. We cannot look away in the face of these tragedies,” she declared. “We cannot allow ourselves to become numb to the suffering. And I will not be silent.” The Vice President further insisted that “it is time for this war to end and end in a way where Israel is secure, all the hostages are released, the suffering of Palestinians in Gaza ends, and the Palestinian people can exercise their right to freedom, dignity and self-determination.” She went so far as to claim that she and President Biden have some kind of workable peace plan that, presumably, would achieve these goals and ensure Israel remains secure. Previously, the President himself has described this “plan,” “The first phase would last for six weeks. Here’s what it would include: a full and complete ceasefire; a withdrawal of Israeli forces from all populated areas of Gaza; a release of a number of hostages — including women, the elderly, the wounded — in exchange for the release of hundreds of Palestinian prisoners. There are American hostages who would be released at this stage, and we want them home. Additional [sic], some remains of hostages who have been killed would be returned to their families, bringing some degree of closure to their terrible grief. Palestinians — civilians — would return to their homes and neighborhoods in all areas of Gaza, including in the north. Humanitarian assistance would surge with 600 trucks carrying aid into Gaza every single day. During the six weeks of ph- — of phase one, Israel and Hamas would negotiate the necessary arrangements to get to phase two, which is a permanent end to hostol- — to hostilities. Then phase two: There would be an exchange for the release of all remaining living hostages, including male soldiers; Israeli forces would withdraw from Gaza; and as long as Hamas lives up to its commitments, a temporary ceasefire would become, in the words of the propo- — the Israeli proposal, ‘the cessation of hostilities permanently,’ end of quote. ‘Cessation of hostilities permanently.’ Finally, in phase three, a major reconstruction plan for Ga- — for Gaza wou- — would commence. And any final remains of hostages who have been killed would be returned to their families.”
In other words, the peace plan, originally created by President Biden, and now formally endorsed by Vice President Harris, wouldn’t require the destruction of Hamas or even its expulsion from Gaza. Hamas would instead remain in control of the strip under the very terms they are proposing, despite a long track record of violating every previous agreement and launching the most savage and deadly attack on the Jewish people since the Holocaust. In fact, they would be allowed to continue to operate without any changes at all, merely promises they would not unleash such atrocities in the future. (Anyone who supports this plan, should ask themselves if there was any doubt Hamas would have killed more on October 7 and what they might do if they got their hands on a more destructive weapon like a dirty bomb.) Regardless, Vice President Harris concluded her speech by claiming that the vast majority of people, whether supporters of Israel or Palestine, have it wrong. Rather than believing this is an existential conflict that requires a clear winner on either side, she claimed it is not, in fact, a “binary” issue. It “is important for the American people to remember, the war in Gaza is not a binary issue,” she said in no uncertain terms. “However, too often the conversation is binary when the reality is anything but. So I ask my fellow Americans to help encourage efforts to acknowledge the complexity, the nuance, and the history of the region. Let us all condemn terrorism and violence. Let us all do what we can to prevent the suffering of innocent civilians. And let us condemn antisemitism, Islamophobia and hate of any kind. And let us work to unite our country,” she continued. A day earlier, however, it should have been clear to all precisely how binary this issue truly is and for what reasons it must be so. As Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke to both houses of Congress, which the Vice President chose not to attend, chaos unfolded in the streets of Washington, DC, complete with over a thousand arrests. At Union Station, pro-Palestinian – and actual pro-Hamas – protesters tore down American flags, burned them, and replaced them with a Palestinian ones. According to NBC News, “Waving flags and chanting, the protesters clashed with Capitol Police at barricades set up near the Capitol and then grew more heated when they reached Union Station, a few blocks away. Protesters vandalized statues in front of Union Station (a major Amtrak stop), removed and burned the American flags from the flagpoles and replaced them with Palestinian flags. Several flash bangs were heard, believed to be set off by protesters in the middle of Massachusetts Avenue, one of the main streets that feed a circle in front of the train station. In several instances, police deployed pepper spray against the protesters, and several were arrested.”
The mainstream media has done their best to hide, or at least minimize, the fact that some of the protesters voiced support for Hamas directly, not merely demand a “ceasefire” and relieve the suffering of the people in Gaza. Most ominously, one of the monuments in question was defaced with what can only be construed as a direct threat against America, emblazoned with graffiti that proclaimed “Hamas is coming.” Regardless, legendary jam-band leader and musician Dave Matthews, one of my personal favorites, who I actually saw for the seventh time last week in Camden, NJ, participated in the protests and gave an interview to Al Jazeera to explain his position, further illuminating the binary nature of this conflict even as he echoed some of the Vice President’s thoughts, claiming, “This has been an ongoing struggle for people that just want to have dignity and be able to live independent lives and dream of a better future. And this man [Prime Minister Netanyahu] is the pinnacle of the obstacle toward that freedom and that we have him visiting the country is obscene, it’s disgusting to show support for someone that doesn’t deserve our support.” “I’m ashamed that my tax dollars are going to this, the brutalizing of an entire people. It’s, it’s shameful, and I’m ashamed that our government is welcoming him here,” he added. Mr. Matthews and, presumably, the vast majority of the protesters, therefore, agree with Vice President Kamala Harris that the proposed ceasefire is not predicated on the destruction of Hamas or its removal from Gaza. The future of Hamas is irrelevant to their primary desire to end the conflict, which they believe would lead to alleviating the suffering. Though it’s rarely phrased this way, therein lies the binary nature of the choice. Supporters of Israel, myself included, believe the destruction of Hamas, or at the very least its expulsion from Gaza, is the primary concern, above and beyond all others. While we would prefer this was achieved with as little loss of life and suffering as possible, a failure to eradicate Hamas from the face of the Earth would be a failure to achieve anything meaningful. In our view, Hamas is a barbaric scourge comparable to the threat of the Nazis, and though they might lack the power of the German state in the lead up to World War II, they have the same goals with even more brutal methods – if such a thing is possible. The same way we would never have negotiated with Adolph Hitler or accepted anything except “unconditional surrender” during the most destructive war the world has ever known, even at the loss of hundreds of thousands of civilian lives, we cannot expect Israel to negotiate with Hamas or accept any ceasefire proposal that leaves Hamas in power in the Gaza Strip. This doesn’t mean Israel’s conduct is above reproach, anymore than our conduct in World War II was beyond criticism, but it does bring us back to a fundamentally binary choice. There are only two options, a world with Hamas or a world without it. Vice President Harris, President Joe Biden, Dave Matthews, and others are explicitly supporting a world with Hamas.
Moreover, the option, either Hamas or not Hamas, that one is willing to accept is based primarily on yet another altogether binary belief. Mr. Matthews and his fellow protestors clearly believe that Israel is the primary aggressor in this conflict, the colonizer as the Jewish state is so frequently referenced. As he described Prime Minister Netyanyahu and thus the country he represents, “this man is the pinnacle of the obstacle toward that freedom and that we have him visiting the country is obscene.” Vice President Harris herself alluded to this, vaguely when she mentioned the “complexity, the nuance, and the history of the region.” Supporters of Israel, however, believe that Hamas, Hezbollah (which launched a missile attack over the weekend killing multiple civilians including children), and other radical terrorists backed by Iran are primarily responsible for the continued conflict and the failure to deliver anything resembling freedom to the Palestinian people, nor do we believe the Palestinians themselves bear no responsibility after electing Hamas into power in the first place. While this doesn’t imply Israel is entirely blameless, it certainly connects directly to the second level question on what outcome we’d consider acceptable, the same way it does for those who disagree. Putting this another way, if you believe Israel has been repeatedly attacked by a terrorist controlled state, culminating in the atrocities of October 7, you are likely to also believe that Hamas must be destroyed for there to be an acceptable end to the war. Anything less would be surrender. Conversely, if you believe that Israel has been terrorizing innocent Palestinians for years, if not decades, making October 7 the ultimate backlash against such treatment, you are likely to support a ceasefire with Hamas, even if you also condemn the attack. My point here is not to debate which side is right or wrong, merely to suggest that contrary to Vice President Harris’ assertion this isn’t a binary choice, there most certainly are two distinct sides, hence the obvious passion on display by both sides. Sadly, this passion also makes the two sides irreconcilable, at least in my opinion, as is usually the case in matters of war and peace. If history is any indication, attempting to placate both sides of a conflict, as President Woodrow Wilson most dreadfully did in the early days of World War I, only serves to prolong it and ultimately lead to more death and destruction.
On a more positive note, I mentioned Mr. Matthews in particular in this post not to single him out, but rather to highlight that regardless of how strenuously we disagree on this and almost every other political issue, I remain a diehard fan and cannot wait to see him again in the near future. That he is progressive, and according to some commentators, the new face of famous musician who are progressive, doesn’t reduce the joy of hearing the opening chords to “Ants Marching” or “Jimmi Thing” on Friday night. Politicians like to speak about not letting our differences define us, while frequently doing everything possible to ensure that is exactly what happens, but I assure you, there was no difference in the passion of close to 20,000 fans in Camden, NJ whatever their political bent. There are things that tear us apart. There are also those that bring us together.
Confessions of a Conservative Atheist 