Originally published in Hankyoreh.
Cynics and conspiracy theorists believe that everything is planned behind the scenes. They think that an assassination, even if it seems to be the work of a crazed loner, is actually stage-managed by a cabal. An accidental fire is no accident. Nothing is ever a surprise.
But there have been three major surprises related to elections in recent weeks, beginning with France, and even cynics seem to be smiling.
In the French elections for the European Parliament in June, the far-right National Rally party came in first with nearly one-third of the vote. It then topped the polls again in the first round of the national elections that French President Emmanuel Macron unexpectedly called immediately after the European results came in.
But the real surprise was when the far right slipped to third place in the second round of elections as the left and the liberals cooperated to put forward their strongest candidates against the surging National Rally. Even the left was caught by surprise on election night when it came in first.
The second electoral surprise came when a reformist won the presidential elections in Iran. Masoud Pezeshkian, having pledged to negotiate with the West and be more lenient on social issues at home, managed to defeat his very conservative opponent in the second round.
In the biggest shock, however, President Joe Biden suddenly reversed himself and withdrew from the U.S. presidential race. After a disastrous debate performance against Republican challenger Donald Trump, Biden had come under increased pressure from within the Democratic Party to step down as nominee and endorse a younger replacement.
That replacement is Vice President Kamala Harris.
As vice president, Harris hasn’t done very much. She was tasked with addressing the root causes of migration, which involved visiting countries in Central America largely responsible for the outflux of migrants. Although the number of border-crossers has dropped since a peak in December, Harris can show little for her efforts. She also did some work defending voting rights and women’s access to abortion, but again she has not been able to point to any significant results from those initiatives.
The position of vice president is not generally high profile or powerful. Dick Cheney, vice president under George W. Bush, was an exception, for he wielded considerable control over national security because he made a bold power grab and his boss was demonstrably inexperienced in foreign policy matters. Most other vice presidents disappear into the background. Charles Curtis? Dan Quayle? John Nance Garner, another forgettable vice president (under FDR), once said that the position wasn’t worth a bucket of warm piss.
Kamala Harris is not a shy person. She was a highly effective prosecutor before she began her political career (perhaps too effective, some critics have said, because of her determination to put people behind bars). It was out of character for her to disappear in Joe Biden’s shadow.
Now, with Biden pulling out of the race, she is flexing her atrophied muscles. In her first day as the presumptive nominee, she spent 10 hours on the phone talking with 100 key members of the Democratic Party to rally support for her candidacy. She is now giving high-profile speeches and preparing to go head-to-head with Trump in the next debate scheduled for September. Given her record as a prosecutor and a well-informed senator, Harris will not be a pushover in any exchanges with Trump, who has been waffling about participating in the September debate.
Harris will still be constrained. For instance, she has no choice but to run on the record of the Biden administration. She has promised to continue implementing many administration policies, including the efforts with the Inflation Reduction Act to move the U.S. economy out of the fossil fuel era. However, she has been a more consistent supporter of climate justice and redistributive economic policies than the president, and that’s saying a lot given Biden’s generally progressive record on those issues.
On foreign policy, Harris faces a couple of challenges. The presumptive Democratic nominee has been somewhat more critical of the Israeli government’s handling of the war in Gaza, which will perhaps help restore the confidence of a younger generation that has been increasingly skeptical of the Biden administration’s approach to the region. After Israeli President Benjamin Netanyahu’s recent visit to Washington, she vowed that she “will not be silent” about the suffering in Gaza.
On China, Harris joined Biden in criticizing the Trump administration for the tariffs it imposed. Both Democrats then reversed themselves to support their own additional tariffs on China. As senator, Harris lambasted China for its policies in Hong Kong, Xinjiang, and Taiwan. As a result, a Harris administration will be equally committed to the continued unravelling of economic ties between Beijing and Washington.
Harris is an equally harsh critic of Russia and Russian President Vladimir Putin. Last year, at the Munich security conference, she accused Russia of committing crimes against humanity. “And I say to all those who have perpetrated these crimes, and to their superiors who are complicit in those crimes – you will be held to account,” she said.
A Harris presidency won’t be substantially different from the preceding Biden administration. If anything, the changes will be of tone and emphasis. Harris has put women’s rights and racial justice at the front and center of her concerns. She will likely focus more on democracy and human rights than Biden did. It’s hard to imagine, for instance, Harris fist-bumping Mohammed bin Salman the way did Biden did. But she is also a pragmatist who, like any good prosecutor, is willing to make deals if necessary.
In the end, both Harris and Trump offer American voters that ideal combination that they crave in popular entertainment: the same thing as before but somehow different. Harris is certainly different from Biden—younger, sharper, a bit more progressive—but she will faithfully deliver on what the administration started. Trump offers a radical change from the current status quo in Washington, but he’s been president before so he’s a known quantity to the voters.
Still, unlike a month ago, the U.S. election is now full of surprises.
Of course, sometimes elections are not a surprise. In Venezuela, the opposition was polling well ahead of the party of President Nicolas Maduro. This week, however, Maduro declared himself the winner with 51 percent of the vote, an entirely predictable act of political malfeasance. Ditto Maduro’s refusal to share any proof of his victory. Also predictably, protestors have taken to the street. They believe that, like the ouster of Slobodan Milosevic in Serbia in 2000 after similarly falsified election results, they can pressure Maduro to face the reality of his electoral loss and step down.
If the protestors in Venezuela are successful, they will prove once again that, contrary to the dismissals of conspiracy theorists and cynics, average people can still change history through the simple act of voting. It’s not the only democratic act. It’s not even the most important political thing you can do. But voting is still meaningful and, in the aggregate, surprisingly powerful.
No comments:
Post a Comment