The National Interest Foundation Newsletter

Issue 259, November 1, 2024

Welcome to our NIF Newsletter. In this week’s edition, we examine what’s behind Israel’s decision to ban the humanitarian aid agency UNRWA, delve into the relevance of Arab-American and Muslim-American votes in U.S. presidential elections, and analyze where things stand in the home stretch before Election Day.

Editor: Bassam Tarbush

---

What’s Behind Israel’s Decision to Ban UNRWA?

What’s Behind Israel’s Decision to Ban UNRWA?

By NIF Staff

Earlier this week, Israel’s parliament passed two laws banning the humanitarian aid organization United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) and outrageously declaring it a terror group. The measures were enacted despite universal pressure and opposition against the move from the United States and others. These entities all highlighted the vital humanitarian services that UNRWA provides, which are especially imperative now in light of Israel’s ongoing and destructive Gaza War that has decimated the territory and left civilians in desperate need of essential resources, shelter, and safety. To many observers, the actions did not come as a surprise due to the blatant longstanding Israeli desire to wrongfully smear and dismantle the aid agency. For years, Israeli officials have sought to undermine UNRWA and its work in an effort to, in their eyes, erase the Palestinian refugee issue and the internationally-recognized right of return to lands that they were forcibly displaced from. In fact, not long ago just back in early 2024, Israel made false accusations regarding UNRWA and the October 7th Hamas attacks that were subsequently debunked. Now, what has transpired in recent days is merely Israel’s latest attempt aimed at hindering the aid agency and the important role that it plays.

Across the board, rights activists, government officials, and experts have criticized the Israeli ban of UNRWA and warned that it will worsen the already dire humanitarian crisis in Gaza. As such, world leaders have condemned the legislation and outlined that it will have devastating consequences. Humanitarian groups that have worked on the ground with UNRWA point out that the ban will severely debilitate aid services – something that has already been obstructed by Israeli forces as it is. One aid organization’s statement on the ban commented that “Israel has bombed Palestinians to death, maimed them, starved them, and is now ridding them of their biggest lifeline of aid…Piece by piece, Israel is systemically dismantling Gaza as a land that is autonomous and livable for Palestinians…Its banning of UNRWA is condemnable and another step in this crime.” Human rights advocates also emphasized how the efforts to stamp out UNRWA predate the October 7th Hamas attacks and have nothing to do with purported security or terrorism. Instead, they have always been about eroding Palestinian rights and stripping them of any potential refugee status that paves the way for their right of return under international human rights law. UNRWA serves as a constant reminder that Palestinians were forcibly displaced from their ancestral homes and has therefore been a target of Israeli officials for decades who seek to, in essence, sweep the Palestinian refugee issue under the rug.

Even prior to the ongoing Gaza War, many in the territory were reliant on humanitarian aid resources like those that UNRWA provides and this has only increased due to the continued devastation brought about by the Israeli military operations which have destroyed health care facilities, hospitals, and shelters, while displacing at least 90% of civilians. UNRWA is the largest humanitarian agency in Gaza with over 13,000 workers in the enclave alone. It offers critical health care, education, food, water, employment, emergency, and social services – resources that are especially needed now for the 2 million or more civilians who have been displaced since the onset of the war. The organization has played a key role in aiding the lives of millions of civilians since its founding in late 1949. Dismantling UNRWA would be catastrophic, as the aid agency’s network of warehouses and staff form the backbone of humanitarian relief distribution in Gaza. Without it, civilians will lose their last remaining access to food, water, medicine, and other basic resources.

On top of this, UNRWA’s aid services are also essential because of Israel’s obstruction of humanitarian relief into Gaza, which has even prompted the United States to criticize this in recent weeks and demand that improvements be made. Back in mid-October, the Biden administration warned Israel that it must increase the amount of humanitarian aid it is allowing into Gaza within the next 30 days, or risk losing access to U.S. weapons funding. Aid groups and human rights advocates have been seeking to draw attention to this for months, and the fact that U.S. officials have publicly done so again as they did back in April speaks volumes, as it demonstrates that Israel’s impeding has gotten so flagrant that even those who have seemingly found ways to try and shield misbehavior have grown unable to ignore the degree of violations and abuses that are taking place. The glaring Israeli obstruction of humanitarian aid is one of the reasons why there has been such widespread concern and denunciation regarding the UNRWA ban, since as so many have pointed out, the relief agency plays such an irreplaceable role in providing much-needed assistance services.

Israel’s banning of UNRWA is yet another example of its long track record of overt disregard for international institutions and norms. By seeking to do so, it is applying a policy of collective punishment against Palestinian civilians in Gaza and cutting off an indispensable line of aid. Outlawing the humanitarian aid agency will only worsen the circumstances in Gaza and fuel more animosity across the region towards Israel’s unethical practices. Thus, the United States, the United Nations, and others should pressure Israel to reverse its decision or risk being ostracized from the global community.

Arab-American and Muslim-American Votes in U.S. Presidential Elections

Arab-American and Muslim-American Votes in U.S. Presidential Elections

By Jake Spiller

With only a few days left until the 2024 U.S. presidential election, polling in national and swing states has remained razor-tight. All signs point to an extremely close race for the White House, with the candidate who prevails likely to be whichever one can mobilize and spur higher turnout. Undoubtedly, two of the main demographic groups that will shape the outcome are Arab-Americans and Muslim-Americans. Both are highly significant due to the recent shifts in the political landscape stemming from the Biden administration’s handling of the Gaza War and the distribution of these voters across several key swing states. According to recent polling by the Arab American Institute, 81% of Arab-Americans view Gaza as important in determining their vote, with the crisis coming behind only jobs and the economy. Following the onset of the conflict last October, support for the Democratic Party sharply declined from 40% in April of 2023 to 23% in October of 2023. At the same time, the war also seemed to prompt an increase in support for the Republican Party, with many of their gains being amongst Independents.

While support for the Democrats has since bounced back up, the latest numbers show a split tie between them and Republicans at 38% each, with the remaining 24% identifying as Independents or without a clear party affiliation. Alarmingly for Harris, the polls show that on Election Day, Trump could receive higher support among Arab-Americans instead of voters merely rallying around a third-party candidate. When asked if the presidential election was held today, 42% of respondents said Trump and 41% said Harris. A look at the Electoral College shows how Arab-Americans are expected to play a significant role in the election outcome, as noteworthy pockets of them are dispersed among many of the most important battleground states, with 392,733 in Michigan, 126,553 in Pennsylvania, 77,599 in Arizona, and 58,033 in Georgia. Due to the narrow-thin polling numbers in these swing states, the manner in which these voters sway looks critical. All four of the aforementioned states have been the sites of numerous rallies by both campaigns. President Biden carried all of them in his 2020 win, and Former President Trump won all four back in 2016 when he emerged victorious. Vice President Harris remains behind Biden’s 2020 support numbers among Arab-Americans, so unless she makes inroads with other influential demographic groups, she risks losing all four states.

President Biden and his administration have shaped the United States’ response to Israel’s War on Gaza, and also, its military operations against Lebanon and Iran. Biden has reiterated his support for Israel, while critics, including fellow Democrats, see the United States as allowing Israel to perpetuate a war with no end in sight that has killed a heinous number of civilians. Many Americans see Biden’s refusal to use the United States’ enormous leverage to end the war while continuing to supply Israel with arms despite overwhelming evidence of war crimes as complicity in Israel’s violations. During the Democratic presidential primary process, Biden ran without any serious challengers; however, an ‘Uncommitted’ movement was initiated calling for an immediate and permanent ceasefire in Gaza and an arms embargo on Israel. It began in Michigan’s Democratic primary held in late February, where only a few weeks before the election, a coalition campaigned to cast ‘uncommitted’ ballots instead of for Biden as a protest vote and ended up garnering over 100,000 to do the same – a substantial 13.2% of the total in Michigan and approximately two-thirds of the Biden win margin (154,000) over Trump in the state back in 2020. By the end of the primary season, the ‘Uncommitted’ movement had received more than 700,000 votes nationwide and subsequently earned 36 delegates at the 2024 Democratic National Convention this past summer.

The ’Uncommitted’ movement’s stance following Biden’s departure from the race and heading into next week’s general election is not to endorse any specific candidate for president unless an arms embargo and permanent ceasefire are imposed on Israel. Some analysts have speculated that Harris, if elected, could have a tougher position on Israel than Biden or Trump; however, she has declined to call for an arms embargo and others do not expect a considerable difference. At the same time, since Harris has had less foreign policy experience than Biden, there are those who anticipate that she could rely more on her advisors if she wins the election, providing some hope for a few incremental policy changes. In the end, Harris is likely to lose out on some support among Arab-American, Muslim-American, and progressive voters who are unhappy with the Biden administration’s handling of the Gaza War, but the extent to which this impacts the overall electoral results in key swing states remains to be seen and will certainly also be influenced by other important factors like the level of distaste towards Trump, how much he directly benefits from non-Harris voters, and whether disheartened citizens decide to cast ballots for one of the two major-party candidates regardless of their grievances as opposed to gravitating towards a third-party candidate or simply abstaining from voting altogether.

Home Stretch Before Election Day

Home Stretch Before Election Day

By Daniel Imbornoni

This week, Former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris have been rounding out the campaign trail as the United States gears up for Election Day 2024 on Tuesday. Both candidates have been holding a series of final rallies across the country, with many of these taking place in important swing states that will determine the outcome of the election. Recent polling shows that the presidential race is neck and neck, with Trump and Harris engaging in last minute campaign stops in an effort to vie for any remaining undecided voters and try to appeal to contested demographics and constituencies.

On Sunday, Trump hosted a rally at New York City’s Madison Square Garden which drew criticism for various controversial remarks from event speakers, most notably comedian Tony Hinchcliffe and Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani. Hinchcliffe included a reference to Puerto Rico as a “floating island of garbage,” while Giuliani disgracefully claimed that Palestinians are taught to kill Americans “at 2 years old.” The reprehensible comments garnered widespread condemnation, and overshadowed the rally. They also elicited speculation from election forecasters on whether or not they may hurt Trump in the upcoming election. Battleground states like Pennsylvania have a sizable population of Puerto Rican descent, while others like Michigan have an especially noteworthy population of Palestinian-Americans. Since the rally, the Trump campaign has attempted to distance itself from the comedian Hinchcliffe in particular, but what transpired has left some wondering what – if any – fallout there might be come Election Day.

Although any loss of support could end up being crucial in this election, it may not be so much that as it is an increased likelihood that certain voters will not sway towards the Republican presidential candidate, as stateside Puerto Ricans are the only ones eligible to vote and tend to lean towards the Democratic Party. According to a 2022 poll by the Pew Research Center, 58% of stateside Puerto Ricans believe that the Democratic Party represents them while 36% say that Republicans do. This can also be seen in other stateside institutions, as all 3 Puerto Rican-Americans in the U.S. House of Representatives are New York Democrats. However, analysts have pointed out that the backlash could still have a negative effect on Trump’s support within the broader Hispanic and Latino-American communities – a major demographic contended for by both candidates in this election.

On Tuesday night of this week, Vice President Harris held a rally at The Ellipse in Washington D.C. on the site where Former President Trump addressed the crowd that stormed the United States Capitol on January 6th, 2021. An estimated 75,000 people were in attendance, according to the Harris campaign. Harris’s message at the rally centered around unity and collaboration, duty to the country, and calls for Americans to “turn the page” on Trump, with Harris describing him as “unstable, obsessed with revenge, consumed with grievance, and out for unchecked power.” A major issue for the Harris campaign has been clearly distinguishing herself from President Biden, particularly regarding her economic policies; something Trump has been shown to be leading on. At the rally, Harris attempted to address this by detailing her plan to lower housing costs, expand child tax credit, and place a cap on grocery price gouging. According to Blueprint, the economy remains a key motivating factor for voters in battleground states, which are predicted to determine the winner of this election. Thus, relaying a successful message on this issue is likely to be crucial.

In regards to polling placement, Harris holds a 1.4% lead against Trump, according to some of FiveThirtyEight’s latest poll results. Trump still maintains a lead as being the favored candidate for economic and immigration issues. Meanwhile, Harris’s campaign – as made evident by Tuesday’s rally – has been focusing on the issue of political extremism, and polls 40% to Trump’s 38% on who has approached this issue better. Both candidates’ gaps are within the average of the polls’ margin of error, meaning that either may be potentially in the lead, and most polls have been demonstrating similar results. In the key swing states, both Trump and Harris remain within the margin of error as well. The leads in all seven of the most important battleground states that will determine the outcome of the election – Arizona, Nevada, Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia, Pennsylvania, and North Carolina – are minimal, highlighting that they are “anyone’s game” and that both Trump and Harris possess multiple paths to securing the presidency which will finally play out next week.