As the beleaguered Biden administration and Kamala Harris’s doomed campaign continue to spiral, few pundits have dared to challenge their unyielding belief in militarism as a political necessity and a crucial implement of U.S. foreign policy. Harris’s pledge at the Democratic National Convention of maintaining ‘the strongest, most lethal fighting force in the world’ was a mere checking of the box, a ritualistic performance. This empty rhetoric has only contributed to the weakening of the Democratic Party’s base, as they struggle to gain support from voters disillusioned by the party’s hawkish image.
This image of the Democratic party as a war-mongering entity is particularly prevalent among the younger demographic and a significant portion of African Americans. A particularly damning event was President Biden’s unwavering support for the Israeli war in Gaza. Not only was this seen as a moral failing by many, but when Harris followed suit and remained loyal during her ill-fated fall campaign, her credibility plummeted.
The actions of the Democratic administration in recent weeks haven’t done much to assuage these fears. Biden’s claimed 30-day deadline for Israel to start allowing adequate food into Gaza came and went shortly after the election — with no noticeable change on Israel’s part. Furthermore, the crisis in Gaza continued to escalate to dreadful new heights, despite the White House’s ill-conceived claims to the contrary.
The continuously worsening situation for Palestinian civilians in Gaza was such that 40% of Senate Democrats voted for Sen. Bernie Sanders’ post-election resolution to block $20 billion in military aid to Israel. Yet, confounding all reason, Biden authorized an additional $680 million in arms sales to Israel by the end of November. Meanwhile, the emerging voices of dissent among congressional Democrats were rendered ineffective against the Republican’s united front supporting Israel.
Biden’s policies towards the war in Ukraine have seen very little opposition from Democratic lawmakers. It was a mere two years back when 30 progressive House Democrats proposed ‘a proactive diplomatic push’ as a potential solution for the ongoing conflict. However, they were swiftly shut down by the hawkish leaders within their own party, clearly illustrating the deep-rooted problems in diplomatic approaches to peace.
Few Democrats dared to voice any substantial disagreements with the open-ended military aid to the Kyiv government. The administration continuously crossed its own red lines pertaining to matters like green-lighting longer-range Ukrainian missile strikes into Russia without facing much of a challenge from Democrats. When it comes to the war in Ukraine, ‘diplomacy’ has become akin to a dirty word among high-ranking Democrats.
Despite the lack of interest from party leaders, the administration has not hesitated to ramp up war efforts, often touting it as beneficial to the U.S. economy. Democratic constituents seem to be merely tagging along, their opinions overlooked or dismissed by those at the helm.
Democratic attitudes towards foreign policy continue to diverge from those of their constituents. An overwhelmingly large majority of Democrats favor an U.S. arms embargo against Israel. Moreover, a significant proportion of Democrats advocated for making military aid to Ukraine conditional on diplomatic talks – a stance vehemently rejected by the administration.
President Biden and his secretary of State, Antony Blinken, are known for advocating a ‘rules-based order’ to prevent cross-border aggression. Ironically, they seem comfortable with bypassing these rules whenever it suits their purposes. Evidence of this can be seen in the various U.S. bombing attacks launched on Yemen, Syria, and Iraq in this year alone, often without any significant objections from leaders within Biden’s party.
The image of the Democratic Party as a party of war is one they have rightfully earned. To alter this perception will necessitate an honest evaluation of their actions in the 21st century. The sad reality is that their choices have perpetuated this perception over the last couple of decades.
When Barack Obama assumed the presidency in 2009, he ensured that the ‘war on terror’ became a bipartisan effort. His decision to triple the number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan to 100,000 in 2010, served only to escalate a war causing widespread devastation in rural areas.
As the war in Iraq persisted, the number of U.S. troops on the ground saw a slow decrease. Instead of working towards peace, Obama decided to increase drone attacks in Yemen, Pakistan and Somalia. The U.S. led NATO’s seven-month bombing onslaught of Libya in 2011, resulting in a fallout of terrorism spreading far beyond Libya’s borders.
The most influential Democrats seem to be following a narrative controlled by the media, mega-donors, military contractors and establishment-backed think tanks. With the military budget inching towards $1 trillion, and multi-billion dollar weapon deliveries to allied nations, corporations, big and small, are cashing in on the grave business of war.
An example can be seen in the appointment of Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, who once served on the board of Raytheon Technologies (now RTX), one of the leading military contractors. Yet Democrats, long haunted by the fear of being labeled ‘soft on defense’ by Republicans, continue to embrace militaristic stances.
With the spectacular failure of Harris’s campaign, the Democratic Party is in desperate need of strong leadership. The Democratic National Committee’s choice for its new head in February has the potential to provide much needed change. The challenge, however, is to confront the party’s historic fixation with militarism.
A shift in the Democratic Party’s war-centric culture is necessary but will only be possible if elected Democrats are willing to challenge their preconceived notions and assumptions which resonate with Martin Luther King Jr.’s warning about ‘the madness of militarism.’
Biden and Harris: The Ineffective Champions of Militarism appeared first on Real News Now.
About Author
