The Relationship Between the Middle East and U.S. Elections
The relationship between the Middle East and U.S. elections puts both the Democratic and Republican parties in a position where they must prove themselves when facing the greatest challenges of U.S. foreign policy.
This issue will become clearer when Benjamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel, delivers a speech to a joint session of the U.S. Congress.
Although J.D. Vance, Donald Trump’s running mate, differs with Trump on some positions, he aligns with him in supporting Netanyahu’s extreme stances, including the belief that Israel should continue the Gaza war until Hamas is completely destroyed.
Biden and Harris face a tough task in responding to Netanyahu’s statements without their party suffering in the polls.
While Trump may attract a group of Jews who typically vote for Democrats, a Gallup poll shows that millions of Americans, especially Muslims and many Jews, oppose Netanyahu’s extreme positions.
However, among these millions of voters, many have become disillusioned with the Biden administration due to its inability to negotiate a ceasefire.
Although these individuals will not vote for Trump, they might not show up at the polls at all, which could be decisive in key swing states.
However, the new Iranian President, Masoud Pezeshkian, could play a pivotal role in bringing these voters back to the polls.
Since his victory, Pezeshkian has cautiously interpreted his win in a complex manner, clearly showing that he is not seeking to secularize the government. Instead, he has stated that he is focused on ensuring all Iranians have dignity to build their own meaning in life.
His most significant action so far has been publishing a note titled ‘A Message to the New World,’ which was published in English in the Tehran Times.
In this note, Pezeshkian wrote that they welcome sincere efforts to reduce tensions and will respond to honesty with honesty.
These statements can be seen as Iran’s willingness to reduce the threat of nuclear war by opening its nuclear facilities to international inspectors in exchange for opening global markets to Iranian products and global goods for Iranian consumers.
What can be inferred from Pezeshkian’s stance is exactly what the Biden administration should demonstrate as a credible response to Netanyahu’s statements before Congress. In contrast to the enthusiasm Trump and Vance will show for Netanyahu, Secretary of State Antony Blinken is in a position to announce a new approach to peace in the Middle East.
To be sure, Biden and Harris should not express absolute confidence in the initial negotiations with Pezeshkian, negotiations that could significantly reduce the risk of nuclear war between Iran and Israel.
This is only feasible if Harris’s team can win the November elections and if Pezeshkian can overcome the resistance of his hardline religious opponents.
In any case, isn’t it logical for Americans to allow the government to try this path to significant change rather than letting Trump and Vance squander the opportunity? But Americans can only do so if Blinken quickly contacts Iran and cooperates in declaring the intention of both countries to explore new paths aimed at achieving peace in the Middle East.