​​“Fast Genocide or Slow Genocide”: UBC Experts on U.S. Election’s Impact on Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

When asked about Harris and Trump's policies on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, a U.S. and global historian Dexter Fergie said: “One is fast genocide; the other, slow genocide.” He cautioned that neither candidate is likely to drive meaningful long-term progress for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Harris versus Trump: Differing Rhetorics with Insubstantial Change for Palestinians

Despite differing approaches to foreign policy, neither Kamala Harris nor Donald Trump is expected to bring substantial change to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the long term, according to these expert analyses. Dr. Stewart Prest, a lecturer in political science and international relations, observed that the Biden administration, which Harris is likely to emulate, has lacked robust accountability measures that could hold Israel accountable. “The Biden administration, and it seems like Harris is continuing this approach, is taking an approach of trying to encourage Israel to find a way to end its campaigns but is not willing to use any kind of teeth policy to compel Israel.” Prest elaborated that Harris's administration as vice president rhetorically encouraged de-escalation, improvement of human rights commitments, and anti-conflict negotiations, but lacked concrete policy measures implementation. However, Prest also criticized Trump’s first term as “wildly” ineffective noting his unpredictable and transactional approach. “With Trump in office, the first four years made it clear that effectively, power is the coin of the realm... There is an unpredictability and a lack of attachment to norms that would make any kind of long-term justice for Palestinians almost unattainable.” Dr. Philip Yoo, an Assistant Professor of Hebrew Bible and Jewish Studies, echoed these insights as Dr. Prest.  Dr.Yoo believes that Trump or Harris's presidency might not have an immediate impact on the long-standing and deeply complicated issue. Furthermore, he is skeptical about the ability of the Trump or Harris administration to effectively manage the conflict. "We are dealing with a question that has continued for decades now. To think that a single administration is going to solve it is a little on the very glass-half-full side of things.” Furthermore, he added, “Whatever happens with... this upcoming administration, they’re probably going to finish, and this will still be a very complicated issue”.

A Disappointed Vote for Harris?

Experts suggest that while neither candidate offers palatable solutions, Harris may represent a more favourable option for those advocating for peace. Dr. Prest emphasized that Harris’s rhetoric signals a willingness to promote peace, though “there is no material action to halt Israel’s current policies.” He argued that neither candidate is likely to significantly protect Palestinian interests in the short or medium term and suggested a "disappointed vote" for Harris, highlighting her adherence to a rule-governed global order, contrasting with Trump's transactional and unpredictable approach. He further noted Trump's tendency to favor strong leaders and personal relationships, which could lead to expanded support for Israel's strategies.

Dr. Yoo also highlighted that a Harris administration would be more accountable and diplomatic, contrasting with a second Trump administration's unpredictable and potentially harmful policies. He states: “I think a Harris administration can be held more accountable than a Trump administration, and I think that the actions or inactions of any administration is going to cater to a base” hinting that a Harris administration could be held more accountable on the national and global stage compared to Trump, whose administration would likely cater to his evangelical base and adopt a more insular, unpredictable foreign policy. He described this as potentially "more troubling" compared to what could be expected under Harris, who might rely more on multilateral efforts and fact-based approaches. 

Fergie’s insights also reflect on the shift in public opinion regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as mentioned public perception and long-term trends are changing there is a critical shift in public sentiment, especially among younger citizens of the United States. He notes that a growing demographic under 35, often exposed to unfiltered reports and images via social media, has become increasingly critical of Israeli policies. And Harris administration is more likely to be able to hear these younger generations compared to the Trump administration. Fergie also stresses the limitations of such expectations. 

While the current U.S. presidential candidates may not inspire optimism for those seeking a dramatic shift in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict the expert consensus is that a Harris administration could navigate the conflict more adeptly.