The conflict in the Middle East and its impact on the United States

As they approach presidential elections in the United Statesan issue that does not usually occupy a central place in campaigns could become a decisive factor: the conflict in Middle East. Although historically foreign policy has not been a determining factor in the American vote, the escalation of tensions in Loopthe confrontation with Iran and the role of Israel have tested this trend. The way the president Joe Bidenand its vice president and current candidate Kamala Harrishandle these crises could influence both progressive and conservative voters, and thus play a role in the November elections.

On the one hand, the support of The United States towards Israel has been a constant in its foreign policyregardless of the administration in power. This support has enjoyed broad consensus among the American electorate, particularly in the Jewish and evangelical communities, who see Israel as a strategic and religious ally at the heart of Middle East. From the perspective of Republicans, especially the former president donald trumpsupport for Israel was central during his mandate and translated into historic decisions, such as the recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and the Abraham Accordswhich normalized relations between Israel and several Arab countries. Trump has described his administration as the “most pro-Israel in history”, and his return to power in 2024 could mean a continuity of this line, with a firm focus on the defense of Israel in his conflict with Hamas and Iran.

On the other hand, Kamala Harris faces a more complex challenge. Biden has attempted to balance support for Israel with concern about rising civilian casualties in Loop and the humanitarian impact of the conflict. The administration has pressured Israel to allow more humanitarian aid, in an effort to avoid a total collapse in the region, while at the same time seeking to avoid direct confrontations with the most critical sectors within its own party, particularly young progressives, who They have shown growing sympathy for the Palestinian cause.

In turn, Iran has been a key player in regional dynamics, not only because of its support for militant groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah, but also because of its nuclear ambition. Trump’s decision to withdraw the United States from the Iran nuclear deal in 2018 and his “maximum pressure” approach through economic sanctions and targeted strikes, such as the assassination of General Qasem Soleimani in 2020, cemented his firm stance toward Tehran. In contrast, Harris has shown a more diplomatic disposition, although without significantly departing from Biden’s legacy regarding Iran, which has sought to curb the regime’s nuclear ambitions without precipitating a direct military confrontation.

However, the conflict between Israel and Iran has reached a new critical point, with direct attacks from both sides. Israel has responded to Iranian attacks, and analysts predict that a major Israeli retaliation could occur before Nov. 5, just on the eve of the presidential election. This could put the conflict more central in the campaign, with Biden and Harris trying to avoid an open war that affects not only regional stability, but also oil prices and, therefore, the global economy, an issue always sensitive to American voters.

Likewise, although support for Israel continues to be a consensus policy, a significant division has emerged within the Democratic electorate between the more traditional sectors and the progressive ones. This latter group, largely made up of young people, has shown growing skepticism toward the Biden administration’s pro-Israel policies. While these voters are unlikely to turn to Trump, their disaffection could reduce voter turnout, hurting Harris’ chances in key states such as Michigan, where a sizable Arab-American population could abstain from voting.

In recent weeks, Harris has avoided making strong statements about the conflict, trying not to alienate either pro-Israel voters or pro-palestinians. However, this ambivalence can be costly in a context of high political polarization, where every vote counts. In addition, Biden has shown some frustration with the Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahuwho appears to have on several occasions ignored the president’s recommendations to de-escalate the conflict and has adopted a position increasingly closer to the Republicans.

One factor that could drastically change the electoral equation is the possibility of terrorist attacks inspired by the situation in Loop or a direct confrontation with Iran. While national security is not typically at the top of American voters’ list of priorities, a significant attack on American soil or against American interests abroad could focus attention on foreign policy in unexpected ways.

The Biden administration has worked to contain threats from extremist groups that could capitalize on the conflict in Middle East to inspire new attacks, but the volatility in the region means that the risk persists. While both Harris and Trump have strongly condemned terrorism, the Republican approach tends to be more militaristic, which could appeal to voters concerned about security over the possibility of escalation.

Although foreign policy rarely defines the vote in USAhe conflict in the Middle East could be an exception in the 2024 elections. While Republicans like Trump continue an unwavering stance in favor of Israel and a tough line against Iran, the Biden-Harris administration has attempted a more balanced approach that, although supported by of a majority of the electorate, runs the risk of alienating progressive and critical sectors within his own coalition. The handling of the crisis in Gaza, the role of Iran and the consequences of a possible large-scale conflict in the region will test not only the diplomatic prowess of the candidates, but also their ability to maintain the support of their respective bases.

In an election year plagued by uncertainty and polarization, the events in Middle East They could become an unexpected factor that defines the final result. And although Americans do not usually vote with foreign policy in mind, the magnitude of the current crises could change that reality in November 2024.