Tag: joe biden

How the uncommitted vote against Biden’s Gaza policy is going ‘national’ | Joe Biden News

Washington, DC – The organisers of Listen to Michigan — an effort to protest Joe Biden’s policy towards Israel’s war in Gaza — have a message for the United States president: The conflict is not a “niche” issue for only some segments of the political left.

Listen to Michigan emerged earlier this year as a grassroots movement focused on the state’s primary. It called on voters to cast “uncommitted votes” instead of backing Biden’s reelection effort, in an attempt to signal displeasure over the president’s stance on the war.

But that movement has kicked off a domino effect in other key states, with similar “protest votes” emerging. On Monday, Listen to Michigan unveiled plans to take its campaign to the national stage.

“Since we launched our campaign in Michigan, critics have gone out of their way to minimise the momentum of ‘uncommitted’ and Listen to Michigan and what this movement has gained as a niche issue of the left,” Layla Elabed, a key Michigan organiser, said during a news conference on Monday.

“Today, we launched our national movement to let you all know uncommitted voters aren’t going anywhere, and we aren’t backing down until we achieve a permanent ceasefire.”

Organisers said the announcement serves to dispel perceptions that Listen to Michigan was a one-off phenomenon, only applicable to the state where it was founded.

They hope to mobilise voters in other state primaries, to send a strong message before the general election that the war is unacceptable.

A movement born in Michigan

Michigan, itself a key battleground state, is home to large Arab and Muslim populations that have become increasingly politically engaged in recent years.

But the war in Gaza has been a particularly galvanising issue. The death toll in the Palestinian enclave has spiralled to more than 31,700, as Israel continues its months-long bombardment and siege.

United Nations experts have warned that parts of Gaza are on the brink of famine. Still, the Biden administration and other top Washington officials have pledged steadfast support to Israel, despite the human rights concerns its military actions have prompted.

The Listen to Michigan campaign aimed to muster 10,000 “uncommitted” votes in protest of Biden’s support for Israel. Instead, on February 27, Michigan saw 101,000 ballots cast for “uncommitted” in the Democratic primary — smashing the organisers’ goals. “Uncommitted” accounted for 13 percent of the total vote.

But as primary elections continued in other states, some organisers were sceptical that Michigan’s success could be replicated elsewhere. Would the protest spread beyond Arab and Muslim communities?

The Minnesota primary on March 5 offered an answer. There, a whopping 19 percent of Democratic primary voters — approximately 46,000 people — chose “uncommitted” in the state’s primary.

Activists in the state said the “uncommitted” turnout was all the more impressive because of how little time they had to organise: It was an eight-day, mad-dash effort.

Other states — notably Hawaii, Washington, North Carolina and Massachusetts — have also shown promising turnouts. Write-in and ballot-spoiling efforts have even sprouted in states that do not have an “uncommitted” option.

Michigan organiser Lexi Zeidan estimated that more than half a million “uncommitted” votes have been cast nationwide so far, though it is not possible to determine how many were in protest of Biden’s Gaza policy.

“Michigan led with courage that has inspired the uncommitted movement coast to coast with over 500,000 uncommitted voters,” Zeidan said at Monday’s news conference.

She warned that opposition to the presumptive Republican nominee, Donald Trump, will not be enough to rally Democrats to Biden’s side.

“As we launch the Uncommitted National Movement, we send yet another resounding message that this pressure will continue to be sustained, that you cannot weaponise fear of Trump against the very real actions of Biden.”

Eyes on Wisconsin, DNC

The Uncommitted National Movement will remain focused on the primary season, which runs until the Democratic National Convention in August.

It has also sought to distinguish itself from the Abandon Biden campaign, another grassroots effort to reject the incumbent president’s support for Israel.

Unlike the Abandon Biden campaign — which has pledged to boycott the president in the general election as well — organisers for the Uncommitted National Movement said they have not ruled out eventually supporting Biden.

“Once [Biden] has called for a permanent ceasefire, then we can talk about November,” said Abbas Alawieh, a Michigan organiser and former Congressional staffer.

“Until then, the level of pain that our community is experiencing is so excruciating that it is inappropriate to come and ask us for our votes in November while the blood is still being shed,” he said. “Stop funding the killing, then we can talk about November.”

In the meantime, the Uncommitted National Movement is focusing on the April 2 primary in Wisconsin, another Midwestern state that will be key to Biden’s reelection campaign.

Biden beat Trump in Wisconsin by just 20,682 votes in 2020, one of the slightest margins of any state. Organisers believe a strong “uncommitted” showing could be another resounding example of Biden’s vulnerability in Midwestern swing states.

“As a Palestinian American, a longtime organiser in Milwaukee, and as the former digital organising director of Biden’s 2020 Wisconsin campaign, I led the way for Biden’s victory when he won here by only 20,000 votes,” Heba Mohammad, a spokesperson for Listen to Wisconsin, told reporters.

“As people of conscience and pro-democracy, pro-peace, pro-justice voters, we are going to use this primary to call for an end to the genocide right now.”

A ‘real’ electoral problem

The national “uncommitted” campaign is also seeking to leverage its influence at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago.

So far, uncommitted votes will be represented at the convention by a total of 20 delegates: 11 delegates from Minnesota, seven from Hawaii and two from Michigan.

Those delegates were won in the state primary votes. Ultimately, the candidate with the most delegates from the state primaries receives their party’s nomination at the convention.

There are about 3,900 delegates available, and Biden has already broken the threshold of 1,968 needed to be named the party’s presidential nominee.

Nevertheless, Alawieh said the movement is working with state-level leadership for the Democratic Party to ensure that the “uncommitted” delegates can represent their message at the convention.

“Our intention is to coalesce and be in a coalition and community come August so that we speak with one loud, antiwar voice,” he said.

Speaking to Al Jazeera, James Zogby, the president of the Arab American Institute in Washington, DC, said that any delegates representing the movement will be largely symbolic, as they will likely be constrained by the convention’s tight rules.

That means it will be difficult for them to introduce any positions or to take the stage at the Democratic convention without first gaining wider support from other delegates. Large swathes of the party remain staunchly pro-Israel, although there has been some softening in recent months.

Still, Zogby said the “uncommitted” movement has exposed real vulnerability in Biden’s campaign.

“Uncommitted” votes in Michigan and Minnesota surpassed the margin of victory in those states in recent presidential races. Polls currently show a close race between Biden and Trump, with just a handful of states likely to make the difference.

The situation is indicative of a larger problem for the Democratic Party, Zogby added, saying it had pivoted away from “bread-and-butter, household and community-based issues”.

“We are losing — as we see in the polls — a percentage of Black, Latino, Asian and young voters because of Gaza,” he said, “and because they have other issues that we’re not addressing”.

“If you lose two-thirds of the Arab vote, that’s one thing. That’ll only kill you in Michigan,” Zogby added. “But you lose 5, 10 percent of these minority voters or young voters nationally, then you’re dead in the water.”

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Advocates fear special US visas for Afghans could run out despite dangers | Taliban News

Washington, DC – As the United States withdrew its troops from Afghanistan in 2021, millions of Afghans faced the prospect of life once more under Taliban rule.

For thousands among them, the danger was particularly acute: They had worked with the departing Americans and could be subject to Taliban reprisals as a result.

But a long-running US programme offered the possibility of life abroad: Translators, contractors and other Afghan employees with direct ties to the US military were eligible for a Special Immigrant Visa, or SIV.

Now, less than three years later, advocates fear this narrow immigration pathway — a cornerstone of Washington’s relief efforts — could quietly fall victim to deadlock in the US Congress.

The legislature must pass a set of budget appropriations bills before March 22 in order to avert a government shutdown. But critics fear the package will pass without authorisation for more Special Immigrant Visas for Afghans, leaving them with even fewer options to escape the threats they may face.

On Thursday, a bipartisan group of legislators sent a letter (PDF) to top Senate leaders urging them to include the provision for Special Immigrant Visas in the final version of the appropriations bills.

Senator Jeanne Shaheen, one of the letter’s signatories, told Al Jazeera in a statement that Afghans connected to the US military remain “at grave risk, as the Taliban continue to hunt for them”.

“For two decades, the US military mission in Afghanistan relied on trusted Afghan allies who stood shoulder-to-shoulder with American troops,” said Shaheen. “We promised to protect them — just as they did for us.”

US Senator Jeanne Shaheen has pushed for 20,000 additional Special Immigrant Visas for Afghans to be authorised this year [Amanda Andrade-Rhoades/Reuters]

Protecting Afghan allies

Shaheen is one of 13 senators pushing for 20,000 more Special Immigrant Visas to be included for Afghans in the 2024 State and Foreign Operations (SFOPS) appropriations bill, part of the budget package that needs to pass this month.

But immigration is a hot-button issue in the US election year, and advocates worry anti-immigrant sentiment could scuttle attempts to increase access.

Revised drafts of the Afghan Allies Protection Act — which sets the parameters for the Special Immigrant Visas — were introduced in both the House and Senate last year. But while the Senate Appropriations Committee authorised the 20,000 additional visas, the Republican-controlled House has not approved more on its end.

Because the visa programme for Afghans — first established in 2009 — was considered temporary, Congress has to regularly extend its mandate and adjust the number of visas available.

Currently, there are just 7,000 special visas left for principal applicants, but advocates say there are more than 140,000 pending applicants, with at least 20,000 nearing the final stages of the process.

The current processing rate is about 1,000 applicants a month, which means the visas are set to run out around August — the month that marks the third anniversary of the US troop withdrawal. Without further legislation, it is unclear what would happen next.

“I’m just mystified by this whole thing,” Kim Staffieri, the executive director of the Association of Wartime Allies (AWA), told Al Jazeera. Her organisation helps Afghans associated with the US military with their visa applications.

“I’ve been doing this for seven, eight years, and have never come to the point of worrying about running out of [SIVs] ever,” she said.

Few options for Afghans

The possibility that the programme could run out of visas has left Afghans like Abdulrahman Safi feeling betrayed.

Safi, 35, worked with both the US military and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in Afghanistan, before fleeing on an evacuation flight to the US in 2021.

“We come here with all these promises: ‘We won’t leave you behind,’” Safi told Al Jazeera. “Now it feels like none of that matters.”

Safi is one of the tens of thousands of Afghans who have applied for Special Immigrant Visas. The shortage, however, only compounds existing problems with the programme: Critics say it has been dysfunctional for years.

The spike in applications following the 2021 troop withdrawal, advocates add, has only amplified the mile-high application backlog.

There are relatively few options outside of the Special Immigrant Visas — and they too suffer from long wait times and tight caps on the number of applicants admitted.

Some Afghans who evacuated in 2021 were granted humanitarian parole, a temporary status with no pathway to permanent residency or citizenship. Others have applied for asylum status, although that process is likewise backlogged and can take years, with no guarantee of success.

A victim of partisanship

Support for the special visa programme has historically been bipartisan in the US, due in no small part to widespread advocacy from veterans groups, according to Adam Bates, a supervisory policy counsel at the International Refugee Assistance Project (IRAP).

In many ways, he said, the programme has been “compartmentalised away from the broader immigration debate”.

“The Afghan SIV program has been around since 2009. For that entire time period, it has enjoyed widespread bipartisan support,” said Bates. “It had support across presidential administrations, even during the [Donald] Trump administration.”

Bates is among the advocates who worry the programme may be falling victim to partisanship in Congress, heightened by November’s impending general elections. The immigration debate has played a prominent role in campaigns so far.

Joseph Azam, a lawyer and board member for the Afghan-American Foundation, told Al Jazeera he fears other issues are overshadowing the Special Immigrant Visa programme for Afghans.

“For whatever reason — because we’re in election year, there are other things going on in the world, or people are just not paying attention — this programme has gotten to the point of almost withering away,” he said.

“That would be catastrophic for the tens of thousands of Afghans who have been left behind, who are in hiding with their families and were some of the first on the kill list for the Taliban when they took over.”

Azam noted that no legislators have spoken out in opposition to the Afghan programme, but he nevertheless feared that the visas could become a political tool during the election season.

President Joe Biden has been widely criticised for his handling of the chaotic troop withdrawal from Afghanistan, and Azam said the episode could be used as a “cudgel” for his critics in Congress.

“Perhaps there’s a sense that, if they passed [the additional SIVs], it would kind of address some part of the wound,” he said.

Azam added that politicians might be seeking to avoid perceptions that they are lax on immigration. “Immigrant populations — particularly from that part of the world — are very convenient boogeyman during an election year.”

‘A backstab’ to Afghans

Helal Massomi, the Afghan policy adviser for the nonprofit Global Refuge group, is herself an evacuee who fled to safety in the US. She previously held an advisory role in the US-backed Afghan government, helping to lead peace talks before the Taliban takeover.

She worried that Congress’s apparent indifference to the Afghans who worked with the US military could be a canary in the coal mine. If Congress will not act to protect those Afghans, she wondered, will it act to protect any Afghans in vulnerable situations?

“This shows that, with every day that passes, the commitment that was out there for standing by the allies — the Afghan allies — is fading away,” she told Al Jazeera.

Massomi has recently led efforts to pass legislation that would create a pathway to residency for the Afghans evacuated to the US. But those bills have languished in Congress amid Republican opposition.

She has also pushed for more immigration pathways for vulnerable Afghans outside of the US. That includes an expansion of the Priority 2 (P-2) programme, which was set up to offer access to Afghans who worked with US-based organisations but do not qualify for Special Immigrant Visas.

She noted that some of the most vocal critics of Biden’s Afghan policy have remained silent on the issue of approving more SIVs.

“I completely support criticism towards the administration,” she said. “But you can’t do it if you yourself are in inaction.”

The message that inaction sends is chilling, she added. “I think it’s a backstab to the Afghans who stood by the army and the American citizens in Afghanistan.”

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

US Senate leader Chuck Schumer calls for new Israel elections amid Gaza war | Israel War on Gaza News

The top legislator in the United States Senate, Chuck Schumer, has offered his most strident criticism of Israel since the war in Gaza began, calling for a leadership shake-up in the country.

On Thursday, Schumer, a Jewish-American Democrat, took direct aim at Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in a speech from the US Senate floor, saying the Israeli leader has been “too willing to tolerate the civilian toll in Gaza”.

Schumer pushed Israel to hold elections to replace Netanyahu and said the prime minister had “lost his way” in his pursuit of “political survival”.

“There needs to be a fresh debate about the future of Israel after October 7,” Schumer said, referring to the date when the Palestinian group Hamas launched an attack on southern Israel, spurring the present-day war.

“As a democracy, Israel has the right to choose its own leaders, and we should let the chips fall where they may,” Schumer continued. “But the important thing is that Israelis are given a choice.”

Schumer, the Senate majority leader, did not suggest a timeline for any eventual vote, though.

More than 31,341 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza since the start of the war, many of them children. The spiralling death toll has prompted widespread condemnation and fears of genocide in the territory.

But President Joe Biden and other prominent US leaders have largely been circumspect in their criticism of Israel’s military campaign. The US is a longtime ally of Israel, and it contributes approximately $3.8bn in aid to the country every year.

Still, Schumer’s words — and more vocal criticisms from Biden himself — have signalled a shift in the approach Democratic leadership is taking towards Israel, amid mounting public pressure to seek a permanent ceasefire.

“We should not let the complexities of this conflict stop us from stating the plain truth: Palestinian civilians do not deserve to suffer for the sins of Hamas, and Israel has a moral obligation to do better,” Schumer said in his speech. “The United States has an obligation to do better.”

Schumer added that Netanyahu was one of several “major obstacles” to a two-state solution that might eventually resolve the conflict. Netanyahu has repeatedly rejected the notion of a two-state solution, despite the Biden administration insisting it should be a cornerstone of any post-war plans.

Given the Israeli government’s refusal so far to change course, Schumer hinted that the US may be forced to “play a more active role in shaping Israeli policy by using leverage”.

Response to Schumer’s speech

The speech marks one of the most direct and biting speeches given by a high-ranking US political leader during the war’s first five months.

And it quickly prompted a response, both from the Israeli government and the Biden administration.

Speaking to reporters on Thursday, US Department of State spokesperson Matthew Miller said Schumer’s comments were his own and did not represent the stance of the administration.

“There are a number of things we wanted to see Israel do differently,” Miller acknowledged nevertheless.

Far-right Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich weighed in as well, condemning Schumer’s remarks.

“We expect the largest democracy in the world to respect Israeli democracy,” Smotrich said.

US Republicans, for their part, used the speech to blast the Democratic leadership. Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell, for instance, described Schumer’s call for new elections in Israel “grotesque and hypocritical”.

“The Jewish state of Israel deserves an ally that acts like one,” McConnell said.

Critics push for action

Schumer attempted to preemptively fend off such criticism during his speech, underscoring his pro-Israel bona fides. As the highest-ranking Jewish person in US government, he also drew on his family’s history with the Holocaust to underscore his sympathy for the Israeli plight.

“If the events of the last few months have made anything clear, it is that Israel is surrounded by vicious enemies, and there are many people around the world who excuse and even support their aims to expel and kill Jews living in their hard-won land of refuge,” Schumer said.

But while Schumer and other top Democratic leaders have remained stalwart in their support of Israel, their rhetoric has shifted in recent weeks to be increasingly critical of its military campaign.

Biden, for instance, has warned Israel about pursuing a ground operation in the southern city of Rafah, calling it a “red line“. Officials have also denounced Israeli impediments to the distribution of aid in Gaza.

Still, critics of the administration have said such words are empty without more material action.

Earlier this week, for instance, eight US senators — including Vermont’s Bernie Sanders — issued a letter to the president calling on him to premise aid to Israel on the condition that access to humanitarian aid in Gaza be expanded — and any impediments removed.

Settler sanctions

Schumer’s speech on Thursday also came as the US announced more sanctions on Israeli settlers and illegal outposts in the occupied West Bank — one area the Biden administration has shown more willingness to act.

The US Department of State said the outposts known as Moshes Farm and Zvis Farm had been bases for violence against Palestinians. Thursday’s sanctions also targeted three illegal Israeli settlers.

The administration in February imposed sanctions on four Israeli men it accused of being involved in settler violence in the occupied West Bank, which has surged since October 7.

“It is critical that Israel take additional action to stop settler violence and hold accountable those responsible for it, not just for the sake of the victims of this violence, but for Israel’s own security and standing in the world,” Miller, the State Department spokesman, told reporters.

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Biden, Trump set for US election rematch after clinching party nominations | US Election 2024 News

Expected wins at Georgia, Mississippi and Washington give each contender the delegate count needed to claim nomination at party convention.

United States President Joe Biden and his predecessor, Donald Trump, are set for an election rematch in November after clinching their respective parties’ nominations.

Primary elections in Georgia, Mississippi and Washington on Tuesday handed Biden the Democratic nomination and Trump the nod from the Republican Party.

Biden, who had no serious competition in his party, reached the required 1,968-delegate threshold to be nominated while Trump, whose last rival Nikki Haley withdrew from the race last week, also passed the mark of 1,215 delegates needed. Both will be officially nominated at their parties’ conventions in August and July, respectively.

The widely expected results set up the first US presidential election rematch in nearly 70 years, as well as a contest between two candidates that opinion polls suggest that many voters do not want.

At 81, Biden is already the oldest president in US history, while the 77-year-old Trump is facing 91 felony counts in four criminal cases, involving his handling of classified documents and his attempt to overturn the 2020 election, among other alleged crimes.

Their rematch will almost certainly deepen the country’s political and cultural divides over the eight-month grind that lies ahead until the November 5 election.

In a statement, Biden celebrated the nomination while casting Trump as a serious threat to democracy, accusing him of “running a campaign of resentment, revenge, and retribution that threatens the very idea of America”.

Trump, in a video posted on social media, celebrated what he called “a great day of victory”.

“But now we have to get back to work because we have the worst president in the history of our country,” Trump said of Biden. “So, we’re not going to take time to celebrate. We’ll celebrate in eight months when the election is over.”

Brendon O’Connor, a professor at the United States Studies Centre at the University of Sydney, said it was “remarkable” that the Republican Party put Trump forward for a third election in a row after losing the last contest to Biden in 2019.

“Usually, that’s a sign that you should look for a new candidate,” O’Connor told Al Jazeera.

“I think that [Trump] brings fear to his colleagues [in the Republican Party], challenging him is very hard because of his bullying, name-calling way. His supporters are incredibly loyal and vicious against those who challenge Trump within the party,” he said.

In terms of Biden, O’Connor noted that the history of US elections shows that that an incumbent president would not be challenged if they decided to run again for the presidency.

“Once you’ve won a presidential election once, you’d want to win it twice and be a two-term president. That’s usually a mark of success. So, Biden, despite being 81 years old, I think would want that place in the history,” he said.

Biden, who would be 86 years old at the end of his next term, is working to assure a sceptical electorate that he’s still physically and mentally able to thrive in the job.

He is also dealing with additional dissension within his party’s progressive base, furious that he has not done more to stop Israel’s war on Gaza.

The last repeat presidential matchup took place in 1956, when Republican President Dwight Eisenhower defeated former Illinois Governor Adlai Stevenson, a Democrat, for the second time.

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

US senators call on Biden to condition Israel aid on humanitarian access | Israel War on Gaza News

Eight United States senators have sent a letter to President Joe Biden calling on him to offer Israel an ultimatum: Expand aid to Gaza or lose US military assistance.

The letter, released on Tuesday, is the latest effort by US legislators to question ongoing US support for Israel amid its war in Gaza. It also comes as Biden himself has shown more willingness to openly criticise Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, both former presidential candidates, were among the senators who signed the letter. Other signatories include Hawaii’s Mazie Hirono, Maryland’s Chris Van Hollen and Oregon’s Jeff Merkley.

They called on Biden to comply with Section 620I of the Foreign Assistance Act, which bars aid to countries that restrict access to humanitarian assistance.

“According to public reporting and your own statements, the Netanyahu government is in violation of this law,” the eight senators said in the letter.

“Given this reality, we urge you to make it clear to the Netanyahu government that failure to immediately and dramatically expand humanitarian access and facilitate safe aid deliveries throughout Gaza will lead to serious consequences, as specified under existing US law.”

Israel has denied blocking humanitarian assistance for Gaza, but international workers have accused Israeli authorities of making aid delivery difficult, through ongoing violence, closed border crossings and other impediments.

In February, for instance, United Nations workers accused Israel’s navy of firing on a convoy carrying food into northern Gaza. The Palestinian enclave has been under siege since October 7, with limited access to food, water and other basic supplies.

More than 31,180 Palestinians have died in Israel’s military campaign, and more are at risk of starvation and malnutrition, according to experts.

“The United States should not provide military assistance to any country that interferes with US humanitarian assistance,” the senators said in their letter.

“Federal law is clear, and given the urgency of the crisis in Gaza and the repeated refusal of Prime Minister Netanyahu to address US concerns on this issue, immediate action is necessary to secure a change in policy by his government.”

The UN has said regular ground deliveries equalling about 300 trucks a day are needed to meet the needs of Gaza’s population. Currently, a maximum of 150 are reaching the territory each day.

The Biden administration announced last week that it would set up a temporary pier off the coast of Gaza to deliver more aid by sea, although construction is expected to take several weeks. The US also recently began airdropping aid into the enclave.

Biden, meanwhile, has made contradictory statements about how he intends to approach the mounting concerns over Israel’s military actions.

On Saturday, for instance, he said that an invasion of the southern city of Rafah would be a “red line” for Israel not to cross. Still, he said he would never “leave Israel” nor “cut off all weapons” for the country.

Israel receives $3.8bn in military financing and missile defence assistance from the US every year, and the country enjoys widespread bipartisan support in the US Congress.

Still, a growing number of lawmakers, particularly on the left, have been willing to lodge criticism against the “ironclad” US ally.

Progressive legislators in the US House of Representatives, including Cori Bush and Rashida Tlaib, were among the first Congress members to call for a ceasefire in October last year.

Those calls have since been reflected in the Senate. In January, Senator Sanders introduced a resolution that called on the US State Department to produce a report within 30 days examining whether Israel has committed human rights violations in its campaign in Gaza.

The resolution, however, failed to pass the chamber, with a vote of 72 to 11 against it.

Still, pressure has been building to premise ongoing US aid to Israel on the condition that humanitarian law is complied with.

In February, Biden’s White House released a national security memorandum requiring countries that receive US weapons to provide written statements that they are acting within international law.

But that measure has fallen short of the leverage critics hope the US will exercise over Israel.

The Biden administration, meanwhile, has circumvented Congress to approve emergency arms transfers to Israel. It also continues to pursue more than $14bn in supplemental aid for the country.

In an interview on Al Jazeera’s Bottom Line programme on Saturday, Senator Van Hollen said it was time for the Biden administration to send a message to Israel: “If you continue to ignore us, there will be consequences.”

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Gaza war: How Biden adopted call for ‘ceasefire’ without shifting policy | Israel War on Gaza News

Washington, DC – Cheers erupted when United States Vice President Kamala Harris called for an “immediate ceasefire” in Gaza earlier this month.

But while her words seemed to echo calls for an end to Israel’s war, critics say she fell short of announcing a real policy shift.

Speaking in Selma, Alabama, on March 3 to commemorate a 1965 civil rights march, Harris drew attention to the ongoing human rights crisis in Gaza, which has been the subject of a relentless Israeli bombing campaign since October.

“Given the immense scale of suffering in Gaza, there must be an immediate ceasefire,” she said, adding: “for at least the next six weeks”.

The administration of US President Joe Biden had largely avoided calling for a ceasefire up to that point. Still, Palestinian rights advocates have zeroed in on Washington’s language to highlight how, while the administration’s choice of words may have changed, its position has not.

Biden and his officials have long called for a pause in the fighting to get Israeli captives out of Gaza and more aid into the territory. But they have stopped short of pushing for an end to Israel’s military offensive.

Sandra Tamari, the executive director of the Adalah Justice Project advocacy group, said Biden’s position does not satisfy their rallying cry for a permanent ceasefire in Gaza.

“As a Palestinian, I feel gaslighted every day by this administration,” Tamari told Al Jazeera. “Biden really thinks that we’re stupid and that we can’t see through this propaganda.”

Pause versus permanent ceasefire

The US government has been working to secure a deal that would see a temporary suspension of the fighting, in exchange for the release of the nearly 130 Israelis held captive in Gaza by Hamas and other groups. Washington has also said such a pause would increase the flow of humanitarian aid to the besieged Palestinian territory.

Biden’s Democratic allies have cited his efforts to strike a truce as a rebuttal to criticisms that he has not gone far enough to end Israel’s war in Gaza.

“Is the #CeasefireNow chorus going to pressure Hamas to enter into a ceasefire?” US Congressman Ritchie Torres asked on social media last month, commenting on a New York Times headline that described Hamas as “dashing Biden’s hopes of a near-term deal”.

But rights advocates have tried to highlight the difference between Biden’s push for a temporary truce and the enduring peace they seek. That is why many activists have been adding the qualifiers “lasting” and “permanent” to their demands for a ceasefire.

Beth Miller, the political director for Jewish Voice for Peace Action, said it is “unacceptable” that Biden is only calling for a pause in the fighting while refusing to use US leverage to end Israel’s war. The US, after all, sends billions of dollars worth of aid and weapons to Israel each year.

“We are calling for an immediate and permanent ceasefire that will end the bombardment and the killing of Palestinians in Gaza. That is what we are demanding when we are calling for a ceasefire,” Miller told Al Jazeera.

“That is the only way to prevent and to stop this unfolding genocide. It is the only way for hostages to be released. It is the only way for the siege to be lifted and for there to be moving forward a path where people can actually live in peace and in justice.”

Democratic US Congresswoman Cori Bush (right) holds a sign saying ‘Lasting Ceasefire Now’ as President Joe Biden delivers the State of the Union address on March 7 [Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP]

For now, though, the Biden administration has yet to call for an end to the war. In a Ramadan message on Tuesday, Secretary of State Antony Blinken referred to a possible truce as a ceasefire.

“The humanitarian situation in Gaza is heartbreaking,” Blinken said in a statement.

“As we deliver additional aid to Gaza, we will continue to work non-stop to establish an immediate and sustained ceasefire for at least six weeks as part of a deal that releases hostages.”

Earlier this year, however, the Biden administration put forward a different definition for a ceasefire.

The White House’s National Security Council spokesman John Kirby told reporters on January 22 that the US only wants a temporary pause to the fighting — something he framed as distinct from calls for a ceasefire.

“We don’t support a general ceasefire, which is usually put in place in the expectation that you’re going to end a conflict, that it’s going to lead to specific negotiations,” Kirby said at that time.

‘Not a ceasefire’

In recent weeks, Biden himself has been using the word ceasefire regularly while addressing the conflict.

“My national security adviser tells me that we’re close. We’re close. We’re not done yet. My hope is, by next Monday, we’ll have a ceasefire,” the US president said on February 26, while eating ice cream in New York.

Josh Ruebner, an adjunct lecturer at Georgetown University’s Justice and Peace programme, said the rhetorical shift within the administration shows it is responding to popular pressure in support of a ceasefire. But he emphasised that the term itself does not signal a policy shift.

“What the Biden administration is advocating for is a temporary pause in the fighting to last six weeks to get Israeli hostages out, to get the clock past the time when Ramadan is taking place, so that Israel can then resume its genocidal actions against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip,” Ruebner told Al Jazeera.

“And that, of course, is not a ceasefire at all.”

Usamah Andrabi, a spokesperson for Justice Democrats, a left-wing advocacy group, stressed that progressives have been calling for a lasting ceasefire that would not allow Israel to carry on “bombing and destroying Gaza” after a few weeks.

“The cause of this ethnic cleansing and genocide is Israel’s assault on the Palestinian people. And allowing that to continue in any fashion is unacceptable,” he told Al Jazeera.



Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

US prosecutor Robert Hur stands by assessment of Biden’s ‘poor memory’ | Joe Biden News

Special Counsel Robert Hur has defended his assessment of President Joe Biden’s “poor memory”, as he gave testimony before members of the United States Congress on Tuesday.

Hur told the House Judiciary Committee that the evaluation was fundamental to his investigation into whether the president intentionally hoarded classified documents during his time out of office.

“My task was to determine whether the president retained or disclosed national defence information willfully — meaning knowingly and with the intent to do something the law forbids,” Hur told the committee. “For that reason, I had to consider the president’s memory and overall mental state.”

Questions about Biden’s memory arose after Hur released a special report in February that described the president fumbling to recall details, including dates surrounding his son Beau’s death.

In the report, Hur wrote that Biden, 81, would present to a jury “as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory”. He did not recommend pressing charges.

Nevertheless, his conclusions elicited criticism from both Democrats and Republicans.

Democrats have accused the investigator of gratuitously referencing Biden’s age — which has become a charged election issue in 2024, as voters question whether he is fit for a second term.

Republicans, meanwhile, seized on Hur’s report to suggest Biden was getting preferential treatment compared with former President Donald Trump, who has been indicted on charges related to retaining classified documents.

Hur, a registered Republican, addressed the controversy in his testimony on Tuesday. “My assessment in the report about the relevance of the president’s memory was necessary and accurate and fair,” Hur told legislators. “I did not sanitise my explanation, nor did I disparage the president unfairly.”

Pushback on Capitol Hill

But top members of both parties in the House pushed back against Hur’s assessment on Tuesday.

“You cannot tell me you’re so naive as to think your words would not have created a political firestorm,” Representative Adam Schiff, a Democrat, said during the hearing, criticising Hur’s repeated invocation of Biden’s age.

“You were not born yesterday. You understood exactly what you were doing,” Schiff continued. “It was a choice. You certainly didn’t have to include that language.”

Also during the hearing, Representative Matt Gaetz and other members of the Republican Party accused Hur of using Biden’s memory as an excuse not to prosecute him.

They also sought to portray Hur’s assessment of Biden as part of a long-running double standard that targeted Trump unfairly.

In February’s report, Hur distinguished between Biden’s handling of classified documents and Trump’s, noting differences in the number of documents withheld and how they were returned.

“After being given multiple chances to return classified documents and avoid prosecution, Mr Trump allegedly did the opposite,” Hur pointed out. But Gaetz revisited that point in Tuesday’s hearing.

“Biden and Trump should have been treated equally,” Gaetz said. “They weren’t. And that is the double standard that I think a lot of Americans are concerned about.”

Trump also weighed in on the hearing. “The DOJ [Department of Justice] gave Biden, and virtually every other person and President, a free pass,” he posted on social media. “Me, I’m still fighting!!!”

For his part, Hur told legislators that “partisan politics had no place whatsoever in my work.”

More balanced view

Still, transcripts of the interviews Hur and his team had with Biden offer a more nuanced look at what happened, calling into question both Hur’s and Biden’s characterisations of how the events played out.

The partially redacted transcripts were released on Tuesday, before Hur’s scheduled appearance before the House committee.

They renewed scrutiny over one of the most high-profile descriptions in Hur’s original report: depicting Biden’s apparent confusion about the date of his son Beau’s death.

Hur used the instance as an example of the president’s alleged memory lapses. But Biden quickly condemned Hur for mischaracterising him, holding an impromptu press conference in February to express his outrage.

“How the hell dare he raise that?” Biden said at the time. “Frankly, when I was asked the question, I thought to myself it wasn’t any of their damn business.”

Tuesday’s transcripts show that Hur never directly asked Biden about his son. They also suggest Biden’s memory lapse was perhaps less significant than Hur detailed in the report.

The investigator present at the time asked Biden about where he kept the things that he was “actively working on” while he was living in a rental home in Virginia immediately after leaving the vice presidency in January 2017.

In that context, Biden brought up Beau’s illness and death as he talked about a book he had published later in 2017 about that period in his life.

“What month did Beau die?” Biden said aloud, adding, “Oh God, May 30th.”

A White House lawyer chimed in with the year, 2015.

“Was it 2015 he died?” Biden asked again.

He went on to recount in detail a story contained in the book — entitled Promise Me, Dad — about how his late son had encouraged him to remain engaged in public life after his vice presidency ended.

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

‘Reject AIPAC’: US progressives join forces against pro-Israel lobby group | Politics News

Washington, DC – Prominent progressive organisations in the United States are joining together to push back against the political and electoral influence of the country’s most powerful pro-Israel lobby group, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).

More than 20 advocacy groups launched on Monday a formal coalition dubbed “Reject AIPAC” to organise against what they called AIPAC’s campaign to​​ silence the “growing dissent in Congress” against Israel’s war on Gaza.

The newly formed coalition cited reports that AIPAC is readying a $100m offensive through its electoral arms – AIPAC PAC and the United Democracy Project (UDP) – to take on a handful of progressives in Congress who called for a ceasefire in Gaza early in the war.

“Rejecting AIPAC is a crucial step in putting voters back at the center of our democracy,” the coalition said in a statement.

While individual candidates and organisations have previously criticised AIPAC’s involvement in US election campaigns, the coalition marks a collective and focused effort against the pro-Israel group.

Reject AIPAC includes mainstream left-wing groups, such as Justice Democrats and the Working Families Party, as well as organisations focused on Palestinian rights, including the US Campaign for Palestinian Rights Action, Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) Action and the IfNotNow Movement.

Beth Miller, political director at JVP Action, said the show of unity by progressive groups is “incredibly significant”.

She added that the coalition represents “a unified response” by the US political left “to the threat that AIPAC poses both to the work that progressive groups are building here at home and to Palestinian lives in Palestine”.

The coalition’s strategy

AIPAC, which is officially non-partisan, advocates unconditional US support for Israel and pushes back against any criticism of Israeli governments and their human rights record. The group’s uncompromising advocacy for Israel has also persisted unabashedly as Israeli politics tilted further to the right, with the current government waging the war on Gaza often described as the most far-right cabinet in Israeli history.

In the US, progressives say AIPAC’s targeting of left-wing candidates often advances right-wing priorities at home.

The anti-AIPAC coalition’s strategy, as outlined by its launch statement, is to back progressives targeted by AIPAC with an ad campaign, lobby against the group’s agenda in Congress and call on Democrats to renounce it.

And so, Reject AIPAC is urging politicians to sign a pledge against AIPAC support.

“For decades, [AIPAC] has been a hawkish, warmongering, and bullying force in US politics,” the pledge reads.

“AIPAC advocates for a US foreign policy directly at odds with human rights and international humanitarian law, and has supported an unconditional flow of US military funding and weapons to the Israeli government that have been used to support human rights violations against Palestinians.”

Long known as one of the most powerful special interest groups in Washington, AIPAC had formally stayed out of direct electioneering until 2022, when it formed a political action committee and an accompanying so-called “super PAC” to thwart the election of Israel critics.

AIPAC PAC and UDP focused on Democratic primaries in liberal-leaning congressional districts, where progressives are more likely to succeed.

They poured millions of dollars into races across the country, blanketing the airwaves with attacks against candidates critical of Israel, often focusing on issues that have nothing to do with foreign policy – a tactic that the group’s opponents describe as dishonest.

AIPAC did not return Al Jazeera’s request for comment by the time of publication.

‘Right-wing influence’

While AIPAC mostly focused on open seats in the last election cycle, it now appears to be gearing up to target incumbents, with key progressives in the House of Representatives in its crosshairs.

Progressives have been decrying the brute force of AIPAC’s election spending, which is partly fuelled by right-wing donors who have backed former President Donald Trump and other conservatives.

The pro-Israel lobby organisation has also endorsed dozens of Republicans in Congress, including many who refused to certify President Joe Biden’s election victory in 2020.

Usamah Andrabi, spokesperson for Justice Democrats, said many groups in the coalition have already been working against AIPAC and its “right-wing influence in Congress”.

“We wanted to come together to not only be more organised but to organise the Democratic Party, its voters and elected officials to once and for all reject the disruptive influence of the Republican mega donor-backed AIPAC on the Democratic primary process and our government’s policy towards Palestine and Israel,” Andrabi told Al Jazeera.

For a while, progressive Democrats had been on the offensive electorally. In 2018, Justice Democrats-backed Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, then 28 years old, defeated a top House Democrat who had been in office for nearly 20 years, shaking the party’s establishment.

That same year, Muslim-American progressives Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar were also elected to Congress. So was Ayanna Pressley, completing the so-called “Squad” of left-wing congresswomen.

Two years later, Cori Bush and Jamaal Bowman also successfully primaried powerful incumbent Democrats, growing the progressive base in Congress.

While focused on domestic US issues, like universal healthcare and economic, racial and environmental justice, that new wave of left-wing politicians also saw advocacy for Palestinian rights as part of its mandate.

Both chambers of Congress have remained overwhelmingly pro-Israel, but the rise of vocal left-wing lawmakers appeared to have spurred AIPAC to change track in its approach to elections.

‘David versus Goliath’

In 2022, AIPAC would spend millions on a single House primary race, tilting the scales in favour of its candidates. Still, the group suffered defeats that year.

For example, in Pennsylvania, candidate Summer Lee won against a massive late-spending onslaught by AIPAC backing her opponent, and she has gone on to become one of the most vocal supporters of Palestinian rights in Congress.

Reject AIPAC has said it will launch a “seven-figure electoral defence campaign” to back candidates targeted by AIPAC, but that would amount to a fraction of AIPAC’s war chest, which is expected to be nine figures.

Andrabi says progressives will never match AIPAC’s resources, but they can still win against the group.

“This has always been an unfair fight. This has always been a David versus Goliath fight,” he told Al Jazeera. “But that doesn’t mean it’s not worth fighting. And that doesn’t mean that we’re not going to win. We’ve shown time and time again that we can take on AIPAC, and that we can beat them.”

Andrabi added that the Democratic base overwhelmingly aligns with progressive positions in support of a ceasefire in Gaza and conditioning aid for Israel.

Miller, of JVP Action, also said that Reject AIPAC will not be able to match AIPAC dollar for dollar.

“AIPAC is funded by Republican billionaires and mega-donors,” she told Al Jazeera. “What we have on our side, though, is that what we are representing is what most American voters actually want.”

But with Congress backing Israel on a bipartisan basis as US-supplied bombs continue to drop on Gaza amid hunger in the territory because of the Israeli blockade, some Palestinian rights advocates are growing disillusioned with the entire political system.

Andrabi said that while apathy and frustration are understandable, advocates must use every tool at their disposal to push back against AIPAC’s influence and defend the human rights of Palestinians.

“At a lot of times, it feels like all hope is lost, but in our mind, this is a project that is absolutely worth fighting for because if we don’t, their power only grows and continues to expand,” he said.

Miller echoed his comments. “We cannot afford to step back from this. Right now, the US government is directly funding and fuelling the genocide of Palestinians,” she said. “We have to force demand and pressure change.”



Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

A State of the Union address or an early election campaign speech? | US Election 2024

Joe Biden lashes out at Donald Trump, who will almost certainly be his election rival again in November.

The president of the United States has made his case for another four years in the White House in a State of the Union address that sounded more like a campaign speech.

Joe Biden touted his achievements and took aim at his Republican rival Donald Trump.

Polls are predicting a close race for the election in November.

And Biden will have to work hard to convince undecided voters.

He’ll also have to overcome divisions within the Democratic Party over his support for Israel and its war on Gaza.

So, is he doing enough to win over voters so far?

And will pro-Palestine Democrats make a difference at the ballot box?

Presenter: Jonah Hull

Guests:

Anish Mohanty – Communications director of Gen-Z for Change, a collective of Gen-Z activists who leverage the power of social media to drive progressive change

Julie Norman – Associate professor in politics and international relations, University College London

Steve Herman – Voice of America’s chief national correspondent, who has covered both the Trump and Biden administrations

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

‘Incendiary and wrong’: Biden spurs anger for calling migrant ‘an illegal’ | Joe Biden News

Rights advocates have slammed United States President Joe Biden for referring to an undocumented immigrant as “an illegal” during his State of the Union address, accusing him of echoing the dehumanising rhetoric of his predecessor Donald Trump.

During Thursday’s speech at the US Capitol, Biden was heckled by Republicans over the killing of Laken Riley, a 22-year-old woman who was allegedly murdered by an undocumented immigrant.

Riley’s death has become a rallying cry for conservatives. “[Laken] Riley, an innocent young woman who was killed by an illegal. That’s right — but how many thousands of people are being killed by ‘legals’? To her parents I say, my heart goes out to you,” Biden said.

Rights advocates and progressive lawmakers have long condemned the use of the term “illegal” to refer to human beings who do not have immigration status in the US or who cross the border without permits in search of asylum.

“We remind President Biden that no human being is illegal –– and dangerous rhetoric inevitably leads to more violence against our community,” said Faisal Al-Juburi, chief external affairs officer at RAICES, an immigrant support and advocacy group in Texas.

Members from Biden’s own Democratic Party also condemned the president’s comment.

“Let me be clear: No human being is illegal,” Congresswoman Ilhan Omar wrote in a widely shared post on the social media platform X.

Joaquin Castro, a Democratic congressman from Texas, said that, while Biden’s address had “a lot of good” in it, “his rhetoric about immigrants was incendiary and wrong”.

“The rhetoric President Biden used tonight was dangerously close to language from Donald Trump that puts a target on the backs of Latinos everywhere,” Castro wrote on social media.

“Democrats shouldn’t be taking our cues from MAGA extremism,” he added, referring to Trump’s Make America Great Again movement.

The former Republican president — and presumed 2024 GOP nominee — pursued staunch anti-immigration policies during his term in the White House, including restrictions on the ability of asylum seekers to seek protection in the US.

Trump also continues to regularly use anti-immigrant rhetoric as he campaigns for a second term in the White House. He is widely expected to once again face off against Biden in November’s general election.

In a video posted on his Truth Social platform before the State of the Union, Trump attacked migrants and asylum seekers seeking protection in the US as “illegal alien criminals” and promised to oversee “the largest domestic deportation operation in American history” if he is re-elected.

Last year saw new records for irregular border crossings into the US. In the 2023 fiscal year, for example, US Customs and Border Protection documented 1,475,669 “encounters” with migrants and asylum seekers arriving irregularly across the southern border with Mexico. In December alone, there were 301,983 “encounters”.

That, in turn, has increased political pressure on the Biden administration to act, with Republicans and some Democrats criticising the president for failing to lower the numbers. Observers have said Trump and his allies are trying to make the situation into a winning election issue for the Republican Party.

Against that backdrop, Biden himself has pushed for Congress to pass a spending bill that would tighten border security and create new restrictions on asylum claims. Democrats have accused Republicans of stalling the legislation in a bid to help Trump with his re-election campaign.

During his State of the Union speech on Thursday night, Biden said the bill would allow Washington to hire more border officers and grant him the authority “to temporarily shut down the border when the number of migrants at the border is overwhelming”.

“My Republican friends, you owe it to the American people to get this bill done. We need to act,” he said. “We can fight about the border, or we can fix it. I’m ready to fix it. Send me the border bill now!”

Al-Juburi at RAICES, the immigrant rights group in Texas, said in a statement that Biden “embraced the toughest set of border security reforms we’ve ever seen in this country, formally adopting a more radical anti-immigrant position” in his speech.

“He succumbed to the pressures of a political climate that is increasingly hostile towards immigrant, refugee, and asylum-seeking people and families.”

The National Immigration Law Center also said Biden “missed an opportunity to distinguish himself” from Trump on immigration.

“Instead, he doubled down on the Senate’s failed border bill & parroted dehumanizing Republican rhetoric about immigrants,” the group said on social media, referring to the State of the Union. “We urge the President to do better.”



Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Exit mobile version