US Democratic Party Has Not Truly Shifted Its Stance on Israel

The recent victories of Democratic candidates critical of Israel in the primaries have generated much anticipation. Abdul El-Sayed clinched the Democratic nomination for a Senate seat in Michigan after AIPAC and its allies spent over $54 million to defeat him, in the most expensive Senate primary in U.S. history. In New Jersey, Dr. Adam Hamawy, who volunteered to remain in Gaza until his entire team was evacuated, won a 12-candidate House primary.

Such breakthroughs would have seemed nearly impossible years ago. For many on the left, their grassroots efforts appear to be paying off. But any talk of a "shift" in the Democratic Party's stance on Israel remains premature. Party leadership is still steadfastly pro-Israel, even if their tone is more critical than before the midterms. We should not mistake campaign-season sympathy for a human-rights awakening on Palestine.

Polls show an undeniable change in attitudes toward Israel. A May New York Times/Siena survey found nearly three-quarters of Democratic voters oppose aid to Israel. Another Quinnipiac University poll found 66% of Democratic voters believe the U.S. is too supportive of Israel. An April Pew Research poll found 80% of Democratic voters hold an unfavorable view of Israel, up from 53% in 2022.

These numbers have made Democratic leaders realize that openly supporting Israel is becoming politically costly. Democratic voters, who have followed the Gaza war through live streams, no longer see Palestine as a secondary issue in their political and moral choices. This realization comes after Democratic leaders in 2024 attacked student protesters against Israel's military campaign at universities across the U.S. Many prominent Democratic lawmakers called the Columbia University encampments breeding grounds for "anti-Israel, antisemitic activists" and "fertile ground" for antisemitic attacks, urging the university to disperse them.

Today, some of these leaders sound conciliatory. Former presidential candidate Kamala Harris, who lost partly due to the Biden administration's support and funding of Israel's military campaign in Gaza, now expresses regret for not pressuring Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu harder. Former State Department spokesman Matthew Miller admitted Israel "unquestionably" committed war crimes in Gaza. Yet, there is little substantive change beyond statements and electoral strategy.

Some point to the July 15 House vote to cut the annual $3.3 billion in military aid to Israel as a clear break in the bipartisan consensus. Nearly half of House Democrats supported the measure, including former Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi. But enough Democrats voted against it alongside Republicans. This vote is politically useful precisely because it carries no real weight. The 103 Democratic votes to cut aid give the party something to campaign on, while ensuring Israel still has weapons to continue its military operations.

The Democrats have also shown little interest in cutting ties with AIPAC. In April, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) rejected even a symbolic resolution condemning the lobbying group's interference in primaries. AIPAC has responded by obscuring its spending. Its super PAC has funneled millions of dollars through other organizations whose financial disclosures only come after voters cast ballots. It has also directed donors through candidate-specific portals, leaving individual names rather than "AIPAC" in public filings.

Having spent over $100 million on this midterm cycle, AIPAC will continue to influence Democratic congressional politics to secure Israel's interests. While some primary losses are significant, we should remember the limits of those victories. Elected progressive lawmakers, though critical of Israel, are not yet ready to fully acknowledge Palestinian rights.

Rep. Ro Khanna, who has called for cutting aid to Israel and ending Iron Dome funding, even visited the West Bank and witnessed settler violence. But when he stood before the DNC and called for zero aid to Israel, he still began with an unconditional condemnation of the Hamas attack and refused to say Palestinians have a right to self-defense. Brad Lander, who won a primary in New York in June, called what is happening in Gaza genocide, but he describes himself as a "liberal Zionist" and does not support the BDS movement.

Prominent progressive politicians like Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez also show only partial solidarity with Palestinians. On the Palestinian side, many feel they have buried too many dead to be grateful for crumbs of solidarity from politicians using their cause to win elections. That is true. But achieving real change in the Democratic Party could greatly help the Palestinian struggle for freedom.

So we should support every progressive candidate willing to confront AIPAC and Israel in the November elections, because each seat gained is a potential vote for Palestinian human rights in Congress. Movements build power by turning every election into a lever for the next struggle and continuing to pressure elected officials even after they take office. We must reject any Democratic effort to merely pay lip service to Palestine; we must keep pushing for real action on Israel.