The candidates are current Vice President Kamala Harris representing the Democratic Party and former President Donald Trump, running on behalf of the Republican Party.
Middle East Policy
On the most basic level, our faculty experts predict that Middle East policy would remain constant between the two candidates. However, they agree that Trump may be more supportive of Israel and less sympathetic to the humanitarian crises in Palestine and Lebanon.
Mark Deets, assistant professor of history, expects Trump to cut back on some of the overseas assistance and aid: “Democrats generally spend more on development and Republicans on defense.” Deets explained that Harris is a “typical interventionist” who believes that American leadership is needed abroad, while Trump tends to take a “populist approach,” appealing to isolationists who believe the United States “should not be as involved in foreign affairs” with the exception of Israel.
Sean Lee, assistant professor of political science, corroborated this belief: “My suspicion is that U.S. policy would probably become less pro-Ukraine than it is right now if Trump wins the election, while the Middle East policy likely won’t change much.”
“Middle Eastern foreign policy can only move in one direction: the pro-Israel direction.”
Lee argued that, despite more humanitarian language surrounding President Joe Biden’s conduct, the Biden-Harris administration has not made an effort to enforce domestic U.S. law, much less international humanitarian law in Gaza. “Documents show that the Biden administration has gone against its own State Department experts who found that Israel is blocking humanitarian aid to Gaza in order to maintain arms transfers to Israel. Under Trump, the situation is likely to get worse,” Lee said.
For example, it wouldn’t surprise Lee to see Trump sign off on an annexation of the West Bank based on his 2020 “peace plan” to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Likewise, “to the extent that there’s any pressure now for Israel to not maintain a permanent presence in Gaza, I wouldn’t be shocked if that goes away under a Trump administration,” he added.
In a nutshell, Lee believes that “Middle Eastern foreign policy can only move in one direction: the pro-Israel direction.” And while Deets would like to see the United States backing off from its support for Israel, he doesn’t “see it happening anytime soon, regardless of who wins.”
The Arab-American Vote
Following the ongoing conflict in the Middle East, many predict that the Arab-American vote will be a toss up. “The Biden-Harris administration has disappointed so many on its Gaza policy that a number of people are going to step back and either cast a throwaway vote or a third-party vote,” Deets said, sharing that some of these protest votes may swing in Trump’s direction.
“The feeling of abandonment by both candidates is especially true with the younger generation,” Deets added. “They’re very upset with Democrats for their support of Israel.” They’re also skeptical of Trump for his extreme support of Israel during his term and repeated use of the word ‘Palestinian’ as a slur, according to Deets.
This could be significant as Arab-Americans represent a large number of voters in certain swing states such as Michigan. “I don’t know exactly what the polls are now in Michigan, but it’s one of those states where that issue could throw the election,” said Deets. In 2016, Trump defeated Hillary Clinton in Michigan — home to over 200,000 Arabs — by a mere 11,000 votes.
“The Biden-Harris administration has disappointed so many on its Gaza policy that a number of people are going to step back and either cast a throwaway vote or a third-party vote.”
The protest vote has gained traction through national movements such as Uncommitted and Abandon Harris, which have been lobbying Arab-American voters. Many have turned their support to Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate, and other independent or third party candidates.
U.S. Domestic Policy
Alaa El Hadidi, adjunct faculty in AUC’s Prince Alwaleed Center for American Studies and Research, broke down current American voter priorities into the following: Middle East policy and human rights, China policy, the economy, migrants and the environment.
While policies can be static, El Hadidi said to watch the different attitudes between the two parties, especially with foreign policy. “They have very different approaches to the region; however, the place of the Middle East in the overall American strategic interest will remain the same.”
This extends to each party’s China policy: “One of the very few things both parties agree on is that the rise of China is a threat and that they need to rival the country’s major economic trade partnerships in the Gulf and beyond, though each candidate has their own approach.”
Domestically, El Hadidi thinks human rights will be a huge voter issue. “The last time America was so polarized was during the Vietnam War, which happened almost at the same time as the civil rights movements,” he said. Today, the issue of human rights manifests through the Middle East policy, abortion rights and the migrant issue.
On migration, El Hadidi recalled Trump’s immigration ban on eight Muslim countries. “We can expect Trump to be more stringent on immigration rules, whether from Latin America or the Middle East.” Meanwhile, a Harris administration would be more flexible on immigration and more vocal about humanitarian crises, including along the U.S.-Mexico border.
One final issue to watch is the environment. “Trump now has his famous slogan to encourage increased production of fossil fuels: ‘Drill, baby, drill.’ With the Democrats, environmental policy is a dilemma. On one hand, they want cheap oil, but on the other, they want less oil produced,” said El Hadidi, explaining that the Biden-Harris environmental policy is costly to consumers.
On November 5, Americans will head to the polls to elect their next president. Our faculty shared their thoughts on how the candidates — and their policies — differ.
