The National Interest Foundation Newsletter

Issue 257, October 18, 2024

Welcome to our NIF Newsletter. In this week’s edition, we analyze how the United States is rewarding aggression by providing Israel with the THAAD antimissile system, offer insight regarding the way that various ethnic and religious groups can play a significant role in influencing presidential elections, and delve into whether or not anti-Trump Republicans might impact the upcoming election.

Editor: Bassam Tarbush

---

U.S. Rewards Aggression by Providing Israel with THAAD System

U.S. Rewards Aggression by Providing Israel with THAAD System

By Jake Spiller

Recently this past weekend, U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin – under direction from President Biden – authorized the deployment of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) antimissile system to Israel. Notably, it is a rare and costly system, with the U.S. government having only seven THAAD batteries currently available for deployment. THAAD is capable of intercepting ballistic missiles and engaging targets at 93 to 124 miles (150 to 200 kilometers). Reportedly, three are at Fort Bliss and two are at Fort Cavazos – both sites in Texas – and one is in Guam and another in South Korea. The latter two are on guard for North Korean missiles, and it is one of the THAAD systems from Texas that is on its way to Israel. A THAAD battery was deployed as a part of increased U.S. forces in and around the Middle East back on October 21st of last year following the October 7th Hamas attacks, and now sending a THAAD system directly to Israel marks a new chapter in the ongoing regional hostilities.

Critics of the move have understandably decried it as the latest increase in U.S. involvement and as a significant reward to Israel, which has only been escalating its combat operations and regional provocations in recent months, with a desire to seemingly perpetuate hostilities indefinitely. Observers point to Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu as continuously coming up with new demands for any potential ceasefire deal, and deliberating derailing the prospects of halting military attacks and operations. With the THAAD system’s deployment, roughly 100 U.S. soldiers will operate it, putting American lives in grave danger. Any successful attack on the system could result in the direct killing of American soldiers and in doing so give war hawks fuel for trying to advocate for further American intervention. Regardless of President Biden’s intentions, as long as American soldiers are on the ground, it risks deepening U.S. involvement in a potentially deadly and devastating conflict. At the same time, it allows Netanyahu to wage his endless war, and continue to ignore American and United Nations calls to de-escalate.

Israel’s latest escalations include its indiscriminate airstrikes on the Lebanese capital city of Beirut over the past several weeks. Israel and Hezbollah have been engaging in tit-for-tat strikes since shortly after the October 7th, 2023 Hamas attacks. Hezbollah has made clear that it would respect a ceasefire in Gaza, and instead of reaching a deal to do so which would undoubtedly ease tensions in the region, Israel has instead chosen to open another front to its war by sending ground forces into Lebanon and carrying out airstrikes that have led to at least 2,350 recent deaths in Lebanon – the overwhelming majority of these being civilians. Furthermore, upwards of 1.2 million people have been displaced from their homes in Lebanon due to the Israeli airstrikes, which have even drawn public criticism from U.S. State Department officials who have commented that “…when it comes to the scope and nature of the bombing campaign that we saw in Beirut for the past few weeks, it’s something that we made clear to the government of Israel we had concerns with and we were opposed to.”

As the destructive Gaza War continues, Israel has also, for the past six months, been provoking a direct conflict with Iran. Back in early April, Israel attacked the Iranian consulate in the Syrian capital city of Damascus, which was the catalyst for the Iranian retaliation attack on Israel less than two weeks later. Then, in late July, Israel assassinated Hamas’s political leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran, which in conjunction with another targeted killing in Lebanon, sparked the second Iranian missile attack back in early October. Before his assassination, Haniyeh was involved in ceasefire negotiations for Hamas. As Israel opens new war fronts, in Gaza, the situation remains devastating. Earlier this week on Monday, an Israeli attack on Shuhada al-Aqsa Hospital led to images circulating online of civilians being burnt alive, again sparking outrage.

While the U.S. government has criticized Israel’s actions with some of its words and statements, military aid continues to flow, making any calls for Israel’s restraint hollow and hypocritical. Once THAAD is enabled, this will only embolden Israel, as it provides increased security that is even more advanced than Israel’s Iron Dome system. What is particularly troubling is that all of this comes at a tense and volatile time when the world is waiting to see the manner in which Israel carries out its next attack on Iran – with the scope and timing of this remaining unclear. It is unknown if Israel has agreed to any conditions for receiving THAAD, however, the coverage provided by the new system might encourage more aggressive Israeli behavior. In fact, military analysts suspect that Israel is waiting for the cover that THAAD would provide before it strikes Iran. On the same day as the THAAD announcement, President Biden also released a letter demanding that Netanyahu increase aid to Gaza or risk the United States withholding weapons, but with 30 days to take action. However, Israel has crossed Biden’s “red lines” before, including with its military operations in Rafah. Various observers have questioned the timing, and how it would not even take effect until after the upcoming U.S. election.

The United States’ decision to send the THAAD antimissile system to Israel takes place at a time when the entire Middle East is at risk of all-out war. Doing so allows Netanyahu and his right-wing government to continue their pursuit of endless war, and paves the way for the perpetuation of conflict and hostilities in the region. What has become clear is that Israel is abusing the United States’ support and intentionally inflaming tensions in order to continue receiving the latter’s backing. For the sake of preventing a broader war in the Middle East which the U.S. would likely be dragged into, the United States should hold Israel accountable for its provocatory and bellicose actions instead of playing the role of its public relations manager and trying to downplay Israel’s harmful behavior.

Ethnic and Religious Groups in Presidential Elections

Ethnic and Religious Groups in Presidential Elections

By Daniel Imbornoni

As the 2024 U.S. Presidential Election draws closer, the anticipated significance of voter appeal and support among key electoral blocs has continued to grow. Projections and estimates have suggested that this election will be extremely close, and has led candidates to focus on swing states and vital undecided groups throughout the nation. The slim margins between likely victory and defeat have brought some of these groups to national attention, including ones that may normally be undervalued, such as the Arab-American and Muslim-American communities across the country but especially in important battleground states like Michigan. While the aforementioned has received a large amount of public attention for their potentially decisive role in the upcoming election, there are other noteworthy demographic groups that could also hold a lot of electoral sway which should not be overlooked as well.

Historically in the United States, many ethnic, religious, and national origin groups have been associated with a certain political party or values that candidates traditionally relied upon for support in elections. Irish-Americans, for example, were largely affiliated with the Democratic Party because of its stance in advocating for Irish independence which appealed to many in this voting bloc. Circumstances like these could give certain political parties reliable and sizable voting blocs that they could draw upon to secure victories during elections. As demographics have changed throughout the country over the years, the size and significance of these various groups has also altered which blocs candidates often prioritize. A contentious and increasingly polarized political climate, coupled with challenging socioeconomic conditions, has meant that the loyalties of these groups can be fluid and sometimes shift from one electoral cycle to another.

Recently, African-Americans have been one of the major voting blocs that has seen a variation in their support. For decades spanning recent presidential elections, many African-Americans have tended to support Democratic candidates. Back in 2020, in a swing state like Georgia where around 30% of the population is African-American, these voters were essential to President Biden’s victory there – as 92% of African-Americans voted for Biden over Trump. However, since then, it appears that support from African-Americans has dwindled, with 77% supporting Harris according to a Pew Research Poll from August. Analysts suspect that this decline is the result of voters who have become dissatisfied with the Biden administration’s performance in areas such as the rising cost of living and the failure to deliver on racial justice promises. Although Harris still leads with a comparatively large percentage of these voters compared to Trump, this approximately 15% loss in support for a Democratic presidential candidate is of particular concern, as both candidates seek to shore up votes in the expected close 2024 election.

In important battleground states like Nevada and Arizona, Hispanic-Americans have become a significant voter group whose support Harris and Trump are contending for. While Arizona retains a majority non-Hispanic White population comprising around 53.4% of the population, it has a large 31.6% Hispanic population as well. Nevada, with a similarly-sized Hispanic population at 28.3%, is thus another key swing state for both candidates. Whereas a number of Hispanic-Americans have gravitated towards the Democratic Party for its advocacy of minority and immigrant protections, there are also a substantial segment of others who tend to support the Republican Party as a result of them or their ancestors fleeing from repressive left-wing regimes in countries across Latin America. This makes them a very diverse voting bloc that both the Harris and Trump campaigns can garner support from. Additionally, issues such as inflation, the rising cost of living, employment, and other socioeconomic concerns are of importance, and some voters have associated Harris, the Biden administration, and Democrats with the brunt of responsibility for these shortcomings.

Another potential voting bloc that deserves attention this electoral cycle is one in the crucial swing state of Pennsylvania, a traditional presidential battleground state that could very well play the most determinant role in the outcome of the 2024 Harris-Trump election. Pennsylvania has a significant population of between 100,000 and 200,000 citizens of Ukrainian descent that some observers argue have been overlooked in media coverage, especially when one considers that this number alone exceeds the 2020 Biden win total in the state – which was about 81,000 votes. Foreign policy regarding the War in Ukraine remains a primary concern for many of them, who are largely divided in their candidate support. On the one hand, there are those interested in supporting Harris due to her commitment to the backing of Ukraine in contrast to Trump’s skepticism regarding Ukraine’s prospects in the war and its reliance on American foreign aid. However, at the same time, Trump holds support among others who believe that he will be firmer with Russia. It is precisely the interesting and complex considerations like these among various voting blocs that might ultimately prove to be decisive to the final outcome of the election this November.

The Anti-Trump Republican and Their Impact on the Upcoming Election

The Anti-Trump Republican and Their Impact on the Upcoming Election

By Meg Richards

Notable anti-Trump GOP groups like Republican Accountability, the Never Trump movement, and the Lincoln Project, as well as Former U.S. Representative Liz Cheney, her father Former U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney, numerous former Bush and Reagan staffers, and a swath of past members of Trump’s own cabinet have come out not only in opposition to him, but in support of Vice President Kamala Harris’s 2024 campaign – echoing similar concerns in an attempt to put “country over party.” This has taken many forms, from social media posts to literally joining Harris on the campaign trail itself, as Liz Cheney did. Further yet, some even closer to Trump, including his Former Vice President Mike Pence, have refused to endorse him. One can argue that having both living Republican vice presidents of this century denounce Trump for the threat that they deem he poses to the welfare of the country speaks even louder than any of the endorsements.

In addition to verbal endorsements, or lack thereof, advocacy groups aligned with the Republican Party such as the Lincoln Project have poured money into TV advertisements and social media campaigns – all focused on highlighting Trump’s weaknesses in a way that will appeal to the very groups that Harris needs to mobilize like working class middle-of-the-road voters who may be disillusioned with Trump. Other support has come in the form of television appearances, be it outlets such as Fox News or CNN, among others of course. Perhaps most notably, support has been seen via an open letter addressing Harris and her running mate, current Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, which was signed by a number of Republicans in the hundreds.

The outpouring of energy and resources into this sort of advertising and campaigning might seem like a waste because in principle, everyone knows that it is not going to persuade the die-hard MAGA voters. However, proponents of the anti-Trump advocacy would point out that it is more so aimed at Republicans who may have already voted for him, but currently possess existing reservations or doubts about doing it again this time around in 2024. Ultimately, this type of campaigning is not intended to sow seeds of doubt in the minds of Trump’s supporters – rather it is to exacerbate existing doubt in those who feel lukewarm or hesitant about the former president. 9% of likely voters who support Trump are prepared to at least consider switching to Harris this November. Furthermore, Larry Sabato, Director of the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics, says that it can also help make the argument to sway left-leaning independent voters who may have been undecided but needed a small push from the other side in a display of bipartisanship. Those who are informed, engaged in politics, and open to having their minds changed – the 13% of undecided voters – is who this anti-Trump advocacy is mainly focused on.

According to the numbers, there is not much of a staggering or noteworthy difference so far. An ABC News/Ipsos poll found that 93 percent of likely Republican voters still prefer Trump over Harris – which is similar to where Trump stood in this regard back in 2020. Despite the size of these numbers, the Harris camp is taking any and all endorsements and anti-Trump advocacy in stride because in this race that is expected to be razor-thin tight, a little goes a long way. Even though it is not that large of a change, any minor swing counts for just a bit more of a majority for Harris to potentially have over Trump. So no, it might not convince a plethora of average American voters to switch over but margin by margin, any slight shift could mean the difference in this election.