Republicans have been trying for a long time to convince Americans that they are the party that stands for Israel, and that the Democrats are not.
During the first 2024 presidential debate on September 10, Donald Trump made bold claims about Vice President Kamala Harris’ stance on Israel. He accused her of hating Israel, stating that if she were to become president, “Israel will not exist within two years. At the same time, in her own way, she hates the Arab population, because the whole place is going to get blown up. Arabs, Jewish people, Israel. Israel will be gone.”
Trump’s remarks came during a heated exchange over Middle East policy. He stated, “She wouldn’t even meet with Netanyahu when he went to Congress to make a very important speech. She refused to be there because she was at a sorority party of hers. She hates Israel.”
Trump used the moment to contrast his handling of Middle East tensions, particularly in relation to Iran, suggesting that the Israel-Hamas war would not have erupted if he had remained president.
Trump also blamed the Biden administration for what he called the “appeasement of Iran,” claiming that their policies had emboldened Hamas. “Iran had no money for Hamas or Hezbollah under my administration. Now Iran has $300 billion because they took off all the sanctions that I had,” he added.
Trump’s accusation centered on the idea that the Biden administration’s decision to ease sanctions on Iran gave the country access to billions of dollars, which was then funneled to terrorist organizations. During Trump’s presidency, strict sanctions were imposed on Iran as part of his “maximum pressure” campaign. These sanctions were aimed at crippling Iran’s economy, particularly by restricting oil sales, which are a significant source of revenue for the country. According to Trump’s debate statements, these sanctions had cut off Iran’s ability to fund groups like Hamas and Hezbollah.
Trump claimed that when President Biden and Vice President Harris took office, they rolled back many of those sanctions, allowing Iran access to substantial funds. The figure Trump mentioned—$300 billion—is not widely confirmed, and independent analysts have questioned the accuracy of this claim. A report from The Jerusalem Post noted that Iran’s economic recovery, though improved, has not reached the scale Trump suggested, and the lifting of sanctions has been more limited than he implied.
It’s true that the Biden administration has taken a different approach toward Iran compared to Trump’s more aggressive policies. Biden aimed to restore the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which Trump had pulled out of in 2018. The JCPOA placed limits on Iran’s nuclear activities in exchange for sanctions relief. As of now, negotiations to re-enter the deal have stalled, and sanctions relief has not been fully implemented.
However, Trump’s statement about Iran having access to $300 billion and using it to fund Hamas is not fully backed by available data. While Iran’s involvement in funding terrorist groups is not new, the scale of this support under the Biden administration is less dramatic than Trump suggests. Independent analysts and fact-checking sources have questioned the accuracy of the $300 billion figure, as Iran’s economy, while recovering, has not seen such a drastic influx of funds.
Harris immediately refuted Trump’s allegations during the debate. She reaffirmed her support for Israel and its right to self-defense, especially against threats from Iran and its proxies. “I will always give Israel the ability to defend itself, in particular as it relates to Iran,” Harris said during the debate.
She also condemned Trump’s remarks, describing them as divisive and false. Harris emphasized her lifelong dedication to Israel’s safety and called for a ceasefire in Gaza.
During the debate, Harris addressed the violence stemming from the Israel-Hamas conflict. “We need to end this war, and that starts with securing the release of hostages,” Harris said. Her emphasis on diplomacy contrasted sharply with Trump’s more aggressive stance, as she reiterated the importance of the U.S. working with international partners to ensure peace in the region. She underscored the ultimate need for a two-state solution, aiming to secure peace and dignity for both Israelis and Palestinians.
The debate highlighted the stark differences in their foreign policy views, particularly on the Israel-Palestine conflict. Trump’s approach centered on taking severe actions against “terror-infested areas,” while Harris advocated for diplomatic solutions.
Both candidates received mixed reactions from political figures and analysts following the debate. Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo echoed Trump’s criticism, accusing the Biden-Harris administration of emboldening Iran through appeasement policies. “This administration’s approach to Iran has led to war, terrorism, and put Americans at risk,” Pompeo said in support of Trump’s stance.
On the other hand, Harris’ remarks were met with approval from several Jewish organizations and political figures who praised her stance on Israel’s security and the ongoing conflict in Gaza. The Democratic Majority for Israel voiced its support, stating, “Kamala Harris has always been a steadfast supporter of Israel. She made that very clear tonight, and we are proud to stand by her.”
Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA) wrote during the debate, “I appreciate her commitment to making sure Israel has the tools to defend itself.” Harris’ supporters also commended her for advocating a peaceful resolution to the ongoing conflict while affirming Israel’s right to protect its citizens.
Dr. Amnon Cavari, who leads the research group American Public Opinion toward Israel and serves as the head of the Institute for Liberty and Responsibility at the Lauder School of Government, Diplomacy, and Strategy at Reichman University in Herzliya, Israel, criticized Trump’s remarks about Israel’s future under Harris. He called them “irresponsible” and “a ridiculous thing to say by a presidential candidate.”
Dr. Cavari believes Trump’s comments aren’t really aimed at the Jewish population, but rather an attempt to project strength in foreign policy, an area in which Trump doesn’t have a particularly strong hand. According to Cavari, the broader message Trump is sending is that “if Harris is elected, the world is going to collapse,” with Israel serving as a prime example.
Cavari pointed out that Trump never talked about forming alliances or coalitions like Biden has, which have been instrumental in protecting Israel. Instead, Trump has stuck to the assertion that no one would challenge the U.S. once he’s back in office.
Cavari contrasted this with the Biden-Harris position, which emphasizes that the U.S., along with other nations, stands united in supporting Israel. He commended Harris for starting the debate by acknowledging the October 7 attacks and presenting a strong stance on Israel.
Cavari also noted that Trump didn’t offer concrete plans to prevent future conflicts, and even some of his Israeli supporters weren’t entirely impressed. Israelis, Cavari emphasized, want to hear solutions, not apocalyptic rhetoric.
Cavari added that Republicans have long tried to position themselves as the party that supports Israel, but with limited success. Trump is pushing this narrative hard, turning Israel into a polarizing issue. However, Cavari warned that making Israel a focus of U.S. elections is detrimental, as Israel benefits from bipartisan support, something it should continue to strive for.
The debate made clear the contrasting foreign policies that both candidates would pursue if elected. While Trump emphasized military action and sanctions, Harris focused on diplomacy and long-term solutions to conflicts in the Middle East. Both candidates’ views on the Israel-Hamas war have become central to their foreign policy platforms as the 2024 election draws near.
