There was a moment during last week’s Democratic National Convention — at which U.S. Vice- President Kamala Harris was confirmed as the party’s presidential candidate — when it looked as the unprecedented show of unity might come undone.
Following the historic decision by President Joe Biden to stand down as his party’s nominee, the party moved en masse to embrace Harris and her vice-presidential running mate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz. However, when convention organizers decided not to allow a Palestinian speaker to address the convention, Muslim Women for Harris-Walz — a group associated with the powerful Uncommitted National Movement — announced it was rescinding its support for the Democratic ticket.
For months now, the Democratic party has been embroiled in a divisive debate over the war in Gaza, which was triggered by an incursion into Israel by Hamas-led Palestinian groups that killed more than 1,200 people and saw hundreds more taken hostage.
Since the attacks, the Biden administration has, largely, supported Israel’s right to defend itself, while trying to negotiate a ceasefire. Biden has also continued to allow billions of dollars in armaments to be shipped to Israel.
As the Israeli counter-offensive has escalated — an estimated 40,000 Palestinians have been killed — there have been renewed calls for Biden to condemn Israel and stop further arms shipments.
The problem for Biden, and now Harris and Walz, is that eight in 10 Democrats support a ceasefire in Gaza and slightly more than half of all Americans now support an arms embargo. Thus, the threat to Democratic political fortunes is very real.
However, as the race between Harris and the Republican party’s candidate, former president Donald Trump, tightens, Muslim Women for Harris-Walz have had a change of heart.
“As a result of the November elections, we will either have Kamala Harris or Donald Trump as our next president — and we pray for the sake of all of us here and abroad that it is Kamala Harris.”
The about-face by this group prompts an age-old question: is being politically pragmatic always a betrayal of principles?
Voters must, at some point, rely on principle when deciding who gets their support. But as the Muslim Women for Harris-Walz posited, what if a vote that is consistent with personal principle ends up bringing about an even worse result?
That is the exact dilemma facing Canada’s Liberal party.
In Montreal, 52 staff working for Liberal cabinet ministers — many of Arab or Muslim origin — wrote a letter to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announcing they “could not in good conscience” support the party’s byelection campaign in LaSalle-Emard-Verdun.
Paid political staff are often conscripted to spend their own time outside of working hours making phone calls or canvassing door-to-door to support election campaigns. The loss of these 52 staffers is a significant blow to the Liberals at the worst possible time.
A week before the staffer uprising, a meeting between Trudeau and Muslim leaders in Quebec was called, but many of the people invited refused to attend. Some of those leaders said Trudeau has betrayed them by not taking a clear stand on Gaza.
As is the case in the U.S., Trudeau has tried to stick to the middle ground, denouncing Hamas for the initial attacks, and pledging support for an immediate ceasefire. However, in many respects, he has gone much further in denouncing the situation.
Trudeau and many in his Liberal caucus voted in March to support an NDP motion to end arms exports to Israel, while also also signing two joint statements with the prime ministers of Australia and New Zealand calling the death and destruction being inflicted on Palestinian people “catastrophic” and “unacceptable.”
However, at the same time, Trudeau was severely criticized when it was learned a Canadian arms manufacturer was allowed to send weapons to the U.S. to be included in a multibillion-dollar shipment destined for Israel.
Only Muslim Canadians and their allies can determine whether Trudeau’s words and deeds are acceptable. But it would not be wrong for those same people to inject a modicum of pragmatism into their final decision-making.
A loss in Montreal would likely push a Liberal party that is teetering on the edge of disaster into a political void and, regardless of who wins, provide Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre with a huge boost.
Poilievre is very clearly pro-Israel, as demonstrated by an April speech to the congregation of a Montreal-area synagogue. At the time, Poilievre had said very little of substance about the war in Gaza, but in the speech he made it clear he unequivocally supported “the courageous (Israeli Defence Forces)” launching strikes in south Lebanon and promised “a full-scale campaign to criminalize Hezbollah.”
Poilievre also described the Israeli people as a “true Indigenous people,” failing to acknowledge that Palestinians, as well, have legitimate claims to indigeneity in the region.
This not an argument that anyone for whom Gaza is a watershed issue should vote for one party, or against another. It is, however, an acknowledgement that Newton’s Third Law of Motion applies just as much to politics as it does to physics.
Any action by a voter will have an equal and opposite reaction. One that the original voter may not have desired.
dan.lett@winnipegfreepress.com
Dan Lett
Columnist
Dan Lett is a columnist for the Free Press, providing opinion and commentary on politics in Winnipeg and beyond. Born and raised in Toronto, Dan joined the Free Press in 1986. Read more about Dan.
Dan’s columns are built on facts and reactions, but offer his personal views through arguments and analysis. The Free Press’ editing team reviews Dan’s columns before they are posted online or published in print — part of the our tradition, since 1872, of producing reliable independent journalism. Read more about Free Press’s history and mandate, and learn how our newsroom operates.
Our newsroom depends on a growing audience of readers to power our journalism. If you are not a paid reader, please consider becoming a subscriber.
Our newsroom depends on its audience of readers to power our journalism. Thank you for your support.