North Carolina Democrats Divided Over Controversial Resolution on Israel

The executive committee of the North Carolina Democratic Party recently passed a resolution calling for an immediate arms embargo on Israel, igniting a significant debate among party members. This decision reflects ongoing tensions within the Democratic Party regarding its stance on the Israel-Hamas conflict. The resolution not only criticizes Israel’s military actions but explicitly accuses it of committing genocide and apartheid.

Some Jewish Democrats in North Carolina view the resolution as a legitimate expression of support for Palestinian human rights. In contrast, others perceive it as a divisive move that could undermine party unity. The resolution’s advocates are now reaching out to Democrats in other states who may wish to adopt similar positions, indicating a potential shift in the party’s approach to foreign policy issues related to Israel.

The internal conflict comes at a critical time for North Carolina Democrats, especially with the upcoming Senate race. The seat vacated by retiring Senator Thom Tillis presents an opportunity for Democrats, but concerns loom over the impact of disunity on their electoral prospects. Kathy Manning, chair of the Board of Directors for the advocacy group Democratic Majority for Israel, voiced apprehension, stating, “This is an issue that’s going to divide Democrats at a time when Democrats need to be working together on the issues that voters actually care about.”

In contrast, Alan Smith, a primary sponsor of the resolution and a member of the state party’s progressive caucus, argues that such a position resonates with the party’s base. He emphasized that passing the resolution demonstrates responsiveness to constituents’ views, stating, “I think it’s only going to help the Democratic Party. It’s going to get people to come back.”

Polling data supports these contrasting perspectives. According to a survey from the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, younger Democrats are notably less supportive of military aid to Israel compared to their older counterparts. Only 38% of Democrats under 45 favor such military support, while 48% of older Democrats do. This generational divide is indicative of broader shifts in party alignment regarding international issues.

The resolution’s language stands out, as it is the only one among recent Democratic state party resolutions that explicitly calls for an embargo on military aid to Israel. It states, “The military resources that have been made available to Israel through annual and emergency military aid have been used to commit the crime of genocide and other war crimes in Gaza.” This stark assertion has drawn both support and condemnation within the party.

Supporters of the resolution are not limited to one demographic; it has garnered backing from the North Carolina Democratic Party’s African American Caucus, the Arab Caucus, the LGBTQ+ Caucus, and others. Reem Subei, chair of the party’s Arab Caucus, described the resolution as a local issue, emphasizing the importance of addressing human lives, including Palestinian lives.

On the other side, critics like Lisa Jewel, president of the state Democratic Party’s Jewish Caucus, argue that the resolution fosters division and detracts from other pressing issues such as healthcare and housing. Jewel urged leadership to denounce extremist views and focus on unifying topics that resonate with a broader audience.

The passage of the resolution reflects a culmination of grassroots efforts, having been developed over a multiyear process that involved local precincts and county conventions. Supporters view its success as a testament to grassroots organizing within the party.

Despite the resolution’s approval, notable figures such as North Carolina’s Governor Josh Stein and former Governor Roy Cooper have refrained from commenting publicly. Their silence raises questions about the party’s leadership and commitment to addressing the divisions within its ranks.

As the political landscape evolves, the future of this resolution remains uncertain. Proponents believe it will become part of the party’s official platform, while opponents argue that leadership can still impede its adoption. The timeline for any potential vote on the party platform remains unclear, leaving party members and observers awaiting the next developments.

In the broader context, the ongoing disputes over Israel and Palestine have influenced various Democratic races nationwide. For instance, in the recent New York mayoral primary, candidate Zohran Mamdani garnered attention for his critical stance on Israel, illustrating the growing influence of progressive voices within the party.

As the situation unfolds, the North Carolina Democratic Party faces a critical juncture. How it navigates this internal conflict may well shape its future and its ability to present a unified front in upcoming elections. The resolution’s implications extend beyond state lines, potentially influencing party dynamics and voter sentiments across the country.