We Resigned Over U.S. Support for Genocide—But Are Voting for Harris
“We are not defending the two-party system whose shortcomings are blindingly clear—but in this election, if Kamala Harris loses, then Donald Trump wins.”
Lily Greenberg Call and Harrison Mann
We publicly resigned from federal government this summer because we felt complicit in the U.S. backing of Israel’s genocide in Gaza. We spoke out because we hoped our voices would add to the pressure to end it.
Since then, we have used our platform to support the unprecedented Palestinian solidarity movement that erupted over the past year and to push for an immediate cease-fire and arms embargo. We have advocated before members of Congress, to the press and on university campuses across the country. Lily joined the Uncommitted National Movement at the Democratic National Convention to push for a Palestinian speaker on stage. We both have engaged members of the Harris campaign on its inadequate approach to the genocide.
There has, of course, been no material movement from Vice President Kamala Harris on the issue. Despite the well-polled preferences of its base, the Harris campaign believes it can win on Tuesday in spite of the genocide — or perhaps it would simply rather chance it than give an inch to the pro-Palestinian movement. What other explanation is there for sending former President Bill Clinton to Michigan to tell voters that civilian deaths in Gaza are justified and that Israelis “were there first”?
The best thing Harris could do before Election Day is call for an immediate arms embargo. She would motivate thousands of disaffected Americans, including many young people and swing state voters, to show up at the polls.
We understand that some see voting against Harris as the strongest way to hold the Democrats accountable — but we do not believe it’s our best shot at ending the U.S.-backed violence in Gaza, the West Bank and Lebanon, violence which is still spreading across the region.
We are not defending the two-party system whose shortcomings are blindingly clear — but in this election, if Kamala Harris loses, then Donald Trump wins.
We hoped this election would become a referendum on Gaza. For us, that hope was premised on the assumption that President Joe Biden, or at least Harris, would reconsider their position on Israel if it looked like it would cost the election, either by alienating voters or instigating a larger war. We were wrong.
Were we fundamentally wrong to imagine that ending the genocide in Gaza could ever be on the ballot in 2024? While the horror we are witnessing is incomparable, it also represents a culmination of policies that supported apartheid, occupation and war that long predate the national political careers of Harris or Trump. We are 26 and 35 years old and have never had a chance to elect a president who did not oversee the casual slaughter and degradation of innocent Arabs across the region.
Former President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton launched a catastrophic regime change-turned-civil war in Libya and began U.S. support for Saudi Arabia’s blockade, starvation and bombing of Yemen, which expanded under Trump. Before Biden sponsored Israel’s genocidal blockade, starvation and bombing of Gaza, he was a vocal supporter of the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
The United States has been at war in the Arab world for decades. We worry that our sincere hope to push Harris to stand up to decades of bipartisan militarism and dehumanization is bound to end in disappointment. As she might say, “You exist in the context of all in which you live and what came before you.” But this reality does not absolve Harris of accountability, which is a necessary and righteous demand for anyone who has proudly affirmed their intent to arm Israel during its openly genocidal war in Gaza.
Trump and Harris have both pledged unconditional support to Israel if elected. Unlike Trump, however, Harris heads a coalition with a growing number of legislators demanding an end to unconditional support for Israel, including several senators co-sponsoring legislation to block weapons transfers to Israel. Under a Harris administration, we believe there will be a wider gap in the armor that protects Israeli impunity.
The inevitable assault from Trump on civil liberties would severely impact many marginalized communities, and his allies are open about their vision, which includes many aspects of Project 2025 like mass deportations. Many will die because of restrictions on abortions, even in medical emergencies, and contraception and other reproductive healthcare will be limited. Legal protections for queer folks would be undermined and a Trump administration would support attempts to destroy labor protections and attack unions.
While some leading Democrats have an enthusiasm for criminalizing pro-Palestinian protest, a Trump presidency would use every tool of the state to oppress organizers and activists fighting the genocide. The authors of Project 2025 recently released “Project Esther,” a plan to infiltrate, surveil and criminalize pro-Palestinian organizers. It aims to wipe out all “anti-Israel sentiment,” which it equates with antisemitism, in the next two years, labeling organizers, government officials and members of Congress as the “Hamas Support Network” and threatening them with prosecution, deportation, imprisonment or impoverishment.
To those who say it is a sign of privilege to risk electing Trump, given the dire threat he poses to American democracy and civil liberties, we agree. But it is also a privilege to vote knowing no candidate will send bombs to kill our families — a privilege an increasing number of Arab Americans do not share. We are holding these truths in tandem, and we have no interest in shaming those who cannot bring themselves to vote for an administration with this much blood on its hands.
It would not be honest to promise that electing Harris will save Gaza. Even if pressure within the Democratic Party grows beyond our wildest dreams, it may not move Harris before the last Gazan is slaughtered, starved or interned (and before the last hostage dies). However, the unrestrained, total annexation and ethnic cleansing of the West Bank — as threatened by the Netanyahu government — is not yet in full force, and it would face fewer obstacles under Trump.
Netanyahu himself knows this, and his own minister of national security, an aggressive champion of West Bank annexation, endorsed Trump this summer. A Democratic administration would give us more time and more hope of heading off West Bank annexation.
The next president will indeed exist in the context of what came before them: Long-standing financial, political, reputational and bureaucratic incentives to make war constantly, usually in the Middle East, most outrageously against Palestinians. Changing that context and attacking those incentives is not easy. But we know it will be easier under a Harris administration.
The day after Harris wins, we will carry on the progress of the past year to demand change and build political power with marches, organizing, advocacy, education, fundraising, action and marshaling resources.
We are under no illusion. It’s a long shot under Harris. Under Trump, it’s impossible.
Disclosure: Views expressed are those of the writer. As a 501©3 nonprofit, In These Times does not support or oppose any candidate for public office.
SPECIAL DEAL: Subscribe to our award-winning print magazine, a publication Bernie Sanders calls "unapologetically on the side of social and economic justice," for just $1 an issue! That means you'll get 10 issues a year for $9.95.
Lily Greenberg Call is a former special assistant to the chief of staff at the Department of Interior. She has nearly a decade of experience in politics, movement organizing, and domestic and international human rights work. She worked on Vice President Kamala Harris’ 2020 primary campaign and President Joe Biden’s 2020 campaign and served in the Biden administration until May 15, 2024, when she became the first Jewish political appointee to resign in protest of U.S. policy in Gaza. Lily has appeared as a guest on MSNBC, CNN, NBC, and given commentary and written articles for The Washington Post, Politico, The Guardian, and Truthout. She holds a B.A. in Political Science and Public Policy from the University of California, Berkeley.
Harrison Mann is a senior fellow at Win Without War and a former U.S. Army major and executive officer of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) Middle East/Africa Regional Center who resigned in protest of his office’s support for Israel during its Gaza campaign. He previously served as a Middle East all-source intelligence analyst and led a crisis cell coordinating intelligence support for Ukraine. Prior to DIA, he worked at the U.S. Embassy Tunis Office of Security Cooperation and led Army Civil Affairs teams combatting regional smuggling under U.S. Naval Forces Central Command (NAVCENT) in Bahrain. Harrison began his Army career as an infantry officer. He received a B.A. from the College of William & Mary and a Master in Public Administration from the Harvard University John F. Kennedy School of Government.
