As the world anticipates the 2024 US presidential elections, both Kamala Harris, the Democratic Party candidate, and Donald Trump, the Republican Party candidate, have outlined their plans regarding the Middle East, particularly in light of the ongoing war between Iran and Israel.
In the upcoming election, Vice President Harris has revealed her intention to build on previous roles as US Senator and California Attorney General. Her platform emphasises social justice, economic equity, and climate change initiatives.
Conversely, Trump seeks to return to office after losing the 2020 election. His campaign is characterised by a strong focus on immigration reform, economic growth, and law and order.
The election and its outcome will significantly impact the current situation for both Israeli, Iranian citizens and their governments.
Here are 10 likely effects of the Iran-Israel war on the election:
1. Public Opinion on Foreign Policy: As the Iran-Israel conflict intensifies, both candidates are likely to adjust their campaign strategies to resonate with voters concerned about foreign policy. Harris has emphasised strong support for Israel while also addressing humanitarian issues, stating, “The United States stands firmly with our allies, particularly in the face of aggression.” This dual approach appeals to moderate Democrats and independents who prioritise national security while being sensitive to progressive voters’ concerns.
In contrast, Trump will likely leverage his historical commitment to Israel to rally his base, framing his previous administration’s policies, such as the Abraham Accords, as successful strategies for regional stability. He remarked, “The atrocities that took place on October 7 would have never happened if I were still in the White House,” indicating a desire to regain a stronghold in foreign policy discussions.
2. Impact on Campaign Messaging: Both candidates will tailor their messaging based on the evolving situation. Harris may focus on promoting a balanced approach that highlights the need for diplomacy alongside military support, reflecting her commitment to both security and humanitarian efforts. Trump is expected to emphasise a return to his “America First” doctrine, advocating for unwavering support for Israel and criticising Harris’ and Biden’s foreign policy as ineffective. He stated, “We’re going to make it work out… we’ve gotta get that guy back, right?” referencing his commitment to securing the release of hostages, which aligns with his broader narrative of strength and decisiveness.
3. Influence on Key Voter Demographics: The candidates will navigate complex voter demographics shaped by their positions. Harris faces the challenge of maintaining support from the Jewish community, which generally favours Israel, while addressing the progressive wing of her party that demands a more balanced approach. Conversely, Trump is likely to solidify his appeal among evangelical Christians and pro-Israel voters by emphasising his commitment to Israel, asserting that he understands their concerns better than his opponents.
4. Economic Considerations: Economic implications resulting from the conflict will play a significant role in both campaigns. Harris might highlight how instability in the Middle East could affect oil prices and the US economy, positioning military support for Israel as crucial for national and economic security.
On the other hand, Trump could use rising oil prices as a critique of the Biden administration’s policies, arguing that strong foreign policy is essential for domestic economic stability, stating, “We need to end the bloodshed caused by an emboldened Iranian terrorist regime.”
5. Partisan Polarisation: Both candidates will likely navigate a divided electorate. Harris’ need to appease progressive factions demanding a ceasefire could create tensions within her campaign. Trump may further deepen partisan divides by portraying the current administration as weak and ineffective in handling international conflicts, often asserting that he is the candidate who can ensure security and prevent such crises.
6. Media Coverage and Narrative: Media narratives surrounding the conflict will influence both candidates’ messaging. Harris will need to respond to coverage highlighting civilian casualties, balancing her support for Israel with calls for humanitarian assistance. Meanwhile, Trump may seize on media portrayals to bolster his critique of Democratic leadership, stating, “Under my leadership, we would not see the tragedies occurring today.”
7. Role of Activist Groups: Both candidates will face pressure from activist groups. Harris must engage with organizations advocating for both Israeli and Palestinian rights, ensuring her campaign addresses diverse perspectives within her voter base. Trump is likely to align himself with pro-Israel groups, using their endorsements to reinforce his commitment to strong US-Israel relations.
8. Security and Military Spending: In terms of security and military spending, Harris may face scrutiny from progressives regarding US military aid to Israel. She will need to justify such support as vital for national security while advocating for humanitarian aid to Palestinians. Trump is expected to advocate for increased military spending and support for Israel, portraying it as necessary to counter Iran’s influence.
9. International Relations as a Campaign Issue: As both candidates approach international relations, Harris may emphasise the importance of US leadership and diplomacy, aiming to promote stability while addressing humanitarian needs. Trump, however, will likely frame his approach as one of restoring US strength and presence globally, critiquing Harris’s foreign policy as insufficient.
10. Potential for Domestic Protests: Finally, the potential for domestic protests related to the conflict will affect both campaigns. Harris may need to proactively address any unrest as she once said during a live broadcast, “I am clear eyed: As Kamala Harris once said during a live broadcast, “I am clear eyed: Iran is a destabilising dangerous is a destabilizing dangerous force in the middle east and today’s attack on Israel further demonstrates that fact.” promoting her balanced approach to peace and demonstrating her willingness to listen to constituents’ concerns. Trump could leverage protests to reinforce his narrative of law and order, suggesting that unrest reflects a failure of the current administration.
ALSO READ THESE TOP STORIES FROM NIGERIAN TRIBUNE
