Arab Americans’ vote will matter in this election, Middle East Institute panel hears

Short Url
Updated 29 October 2024
Follow

Arab Americans’ vote will matter in this election, Middle East Institute panel hears

Arab Americans’ vote will matter in this election, Middle East Institute panel hears

LONDON: Just days before Americans head to the polls to decide who will be the next US president, Republican Donald Trump and Democrat Kamala Harris find themselves neck and neck in the race for the White House. With the contest balanced on a razor’s edge, any minor development at this point could be enough to decisively swing the vote.

Although they make up just 1 percent of the total electorate, Arab Americans represent a significant constituency in several swing states, where even a handful of votes could influence the election outcome. As such, neither of the main candidates can afford to take their votes for granted.

That is why Arab News teamed up with polling agency YouGov to survey the attitudes of Arab Americans across all geographies, age ranges, genders and income brackets to see which way the community was leaning, and what issues mattered to them most.

What became abundantly clear from the survey was that Arab Americans are not a monolith motivated by any single issue. Domestic matters, such as the economy and the cost of living, loomed large, while border security and abortion rights were also key considerations.

However, it was the plight of the Palestinians that emerged as the biggest issue for Arab Americans of all generations; namely the ongoing Israeli offensive against Hamas in Gaza and the perceived failure of President Joe Biden’s administration to rein in Israel.




Asked which candidate they were most likely to vote for, 45 percent said Trump while 43 percent opted for Harris. (AFP/File)

Brian Katulis, a senior fellow for US foreign policy at Middle East Institute, who moderated a special panel discussion on Monday to examine the poll findings, said the prominence of the Palestinian issue in this election showed there was still a role for the US to play in the region.

“Within the political discussion we’re having in this country, it does imply that there’s actually a strong interest in the US engaging more deeply in the Middle East — just doing it in the right way,” said Katulis.

“There’s a serious difference over who and which candidate is the right way. But for those who’ve said that we should just pull back from the region, restrain ourselves, there’s some who say that, but I think there’s a general impulse here that we need to actually delve more deeply into trying to solve — or not solve, but engage — these questions in a proper way in the region itself, but then politically here at home.”

Asked to place six key issues in order of priority, 26 percent of Arab Americans polled by YouGov said the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is their chief concern. The economy and the cost of living were not far behind, representing the chief concerns for 19 percent of respondents.

“The highest priority, in terms of issues that Arab Americans face, the Palestinian-Israeli conflict came at 26 percent — the highest — then followed by the economy and cost of living,” Lara Barazi, a freelance data consultant and former research director at YouGov, told the MEI panel.

Palestine appeared to be of most concern to Arab Americans in lower income brackets: 37 percent of those earning under $40,000, falling to 22 percent among those paid $80,000 or more.

“These are their issues that kind of mirror what’s going on right now in the US, not only for Arab Americans, when we look at income,” said Barazi.




If Harris does beat Trump to the presidency, it remains unclear whether she will shift the Democratic Party’s stance on Israel. (AFP/File)

“The highest priority goes to the Palestinian conflict. It’s 41 percent of the lowest earners who support the Palestinian-Israeli conflict versus the highest earners. Basically, they’re interested in the economy, cost of living and the Palestinian conflict, but they do put a lot of weight on the economy and cost of living.”

What was also interesting about the findings was how much of a priority the Middle East conflict was for respondents identifying as Republican, Democrat and independent.

“We see that the highest (ranking) for the Palestinian-Israeli conflict comes from independents and the lowest comes from Republicans,” said Barazi. “Only 17 percent of Republicans said that the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is a top priority for us, while cost of living comes the highest for Republicans.”

Despite Trump being perceived as more supportive of the Israeli government than Harris, many Arab Americans indicated in the poll that they would still vote for him, which suggested they are penalizing the Democrats over the Biden administration’s perceived failure to rein in Israel.

Asked which candidate they were most likely to vote for, 45 percent said Trump while 43 percent opted for Harris, although this gap could easily be narrowed — or slightly widened — by the survey’s 5.93 percent margin of error.

The slightly higher support for Trump than for Harris comes despite the fact that 40 percent of those polled described themselves as Democrats, 28 percent as Republicans and 23 percent as independents.

The findings were somewhat puzzling, especially as Trump has announced his intention to expand his 2017 travel ban on people from seven majority-Muslim countries (Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen) and has said if elected he would bar Palestinian refugees from entering the US, policies that few Arab Americans would support.

Nevertheless, it appears Biden’s record on the Middle East over the past year has been the deciding factor for many.

Also taking part in Monday’s MEI panel discussion, Yasmeen Abu Taleb, a White House reporter at The Washington Post, said the Democrats never expected the issue of Palestine to hang over the campaign in the way that it has.




Despite Trump being perceived as more supportive of the Israeli government than Harris, many Arab Americans indicated in the poll that they would still vote for him. (AFP/File)


“We’ve never seen the issue of Palestine be this big of a political issue for this long,” she said. “I think in the Biden administration, there was a sense that people would be really angry and protest for a month or two. They hoped the war would be over by January.

“They were always wildly optimistic that this was not going to hang over them as an election issue. And here we are, more than a year later, and it’s still a key driver of the election. I think that’s an important signal of how much the politics have shifted on this.

“I don’t think we’ve seen this in US politics, where the debate has been this intense and sustained.”

If Harris does beat Trump to the presidency, it remains unclear whether she will shift the Democratic Party’s stance on Israel or if the policy of the Biden administration, of which she is part, will remain broadly unchanged.

“Obviously it depends on who wins but I do think if you saw a Harris presidency, it’s not going to be the dramatic change that people are pushing for,” said Abu Taleb. “But I do think there are signs that the Democratic Party is shifting on Israel, and in subtle but important ways.”

Although the Arab News-YouGov poll focused on Arab American opinion, the panel discussion naturally expanded to the prevailing attitudes among the Arab populations and leaderships in the Middle East. Tarek Ali Ahmad, head of research and studies at Arab News, said that many in the Middle East are holding their breath.

“People are essentially just waiting for the election day to come,” he added. “That’s when everyone’s going to be like, OK, now we can finally stop this election game, campaigning, and we can actually get to solid, concrete policy that will affect what’s going to happen, whether or not we’re going to see an actual end to the conflict, or we’re going to see even further.

“We haven’t heard anything in terms of preference to whichever candidate comes through. But at the same time, we cannot dismiss the fact that any incoming president will have a lot to clean up with regards to everything that’s happening on the ground.”




“So there’s so many different aspects that come to shift public opinion on the ground with regards to who’s going to be president,” Ali Ahmad said. (AFP/File)

On whether or not the Arab world has any preference for the US presidency, Ali Ahmad said many in the region have remained tight-lipped, preferring to wait and see the outcome of this closely fought race.

“There’s a lot of different points of view and there’s no real proper preference for either candidate because of the fact that it’s just such a razor-thin difference,” he said.

“Now you have people on the ground talking about how, essentially, every single event that occurs causes a shift in opinion, from (Israel) entering into Lebanon, from the bombing of Iran, to even Biden’s resignation from the nomination.

“So there’s so many different aspects that come to shift public opinion on the ground with regards to who’s going to be president.”

Reflecting on the significance of the role of the Arab American constituency in the election, Ali Ahmad said many seem to recognize their vote can make a significant difference.

“The reason why there’s a big turnout, as we said, nine out of 10 Americans are set to go vote, is that 80 percent of those who responded found that their vote actually counts and will matter in this year's election,” he said.

“They really feel that they could actually change it and make that difference, whether it is to punish the Democrats or whether it is to actually vote for an independent.”

 


Afghans push back against international calls for cricket team ban

Afghans push back against international calls for cricket team ban
Updated 02 February 2025
Follow

Afghans push back against international calls for cricket team ban

Afghans push back against international calls for cricket team ban
  • Cricket is considered the most popular sport in Afghanistan, representing hope for many Afghans
  • British lawmakers urge national cricket body to boycott Feb. 26 match against Afghanistan

KABUL: Afghans are pushing back against calls to ban their national cricket team from participating in international competitions, saying such a move would not reverse the Taliban’s increasing restrictions on women in the country.

Regarded as the most popular sport in Afghanistan, cricket has represented a rare bright spot for many as they struggle amid a devastating economic and humanitarian crisis sparked by sanctions slapped on them by the Taliban administration following their takeover in 2021.

Since last month, foreign campaigns calling for Afghanistan’s men’s team to be barred from international matches have been gaining traction as a protest against the Taliban restricting women’s access to education, the workplace and public spaces, as well as sports.

This includes British lawmakers urging the England and Wales Cricket Board to boycott England’s upcoming match against Afghanistan in the ICC Champions Trophy, which is scheduled to take place on Feb. 26.

“There are problems in the country — we can’t deny that — but cricket is certainly not one of them,” Ahmad Nadim, a 23-year-old cricket fan in Kabul, told Arab News.

“The national players were among the first ones to criticize the restrictions on girls’ education and they have continuously voiced their support for Afghan women’s rights. Cricket has been a great source of happiness for Afghans and still continues to be one.”

Despite record-setting performances — including high-profile victories against England, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Australia — over the last few years, Afghanistan’s place on the world cricket stage has become increasingly controversial.

After the Taliban disbanded the country’s women’s team following their takeover, most squad members fled to Australia, where they reunited for a match just last week.

Though the International Cricket Council requires member nations to have both a men’s and a women’s team, as Afghanistan kept its status as a full member it triggered boycotts from countries like Australia and England, which have refused to play them in bilateral matches.

Human Rights Watch have also called on the ICC to suspend Afghanistan’s membership “until women and girls can once again participate in education and sport” in the country.

In their home country, Afghans are openly opposing the boycotts and are calling for sports to be separated from politics.

“Afghanistan’s cricket team is all supportive of women’s rights to education because education is the foundation of a strong society and development in the country,” Hasti Gul Abid, an Afghan cricketer who has played for the national team, told Arab News.

“Afghanistan’s cricket reached the current stage with a lot of difficulties,” he said. “The people of Afghanistan have been supporting their national team since day one. Our people contributed to the advancement of cricket as much as the players did.”

As the men’s team’s popularity and victories have brought joy across the country on many occasions, some argue that the squad should not be seen as representatives of the Taliban government.

“The cricket team belongs to the whole country and all Afghans. It represents us all, not a specific political or ethnic group,” said 21-year-old Khanzada Shaheen, who plays in a local cricket team in Kabul.

Banning Afghanistan’s cricket team will not change the Taliban’s policies against women, said Lal Pacha, a fruit vendor in Kabul.

“We all want Afghan girls to return to schools and universities but why punish our cricket team for that?” he told Arab News.

“Let’s say the cricket team is banned from playing internationally, will this change the Islamic Emirate’s policy? There’s no logic in the demand for banning the cricket team.”


Man arrested in UK over alleged Qur’an burning

Man arrested in UK over alleged Qur’an burning
Updated 02 February 2025
Follow

Man arrested in UK over alleged Qur’an burning

Man arrested in UK over alleged Qur’an burning
  • Incident took place in Manchester, from where it was live-streamed on social media
  • Man, who held up Israeli flag during broadcast, remains in custody on suspicion of racially aggravated offense

LONDON: A 47-year-old man has been arrested in the UK on suspicion of a racially aggravated offense after a Qur’an was reportedly set on fire.

The incident occurred in the center of the city of Manchester on Saturday and was live-streamed on social media.

It took place in front of the Glade of Light memorial, which was installed to honor the memory of the victims of the 2017 Manchester Arena bombing.

On the live stream, an individual tore out pages of a book appearing to be a Qur’an, before setting fire to each one. He also held up an Israeli flag during the broadcast.

Greater Manchester Police said in a statement that it arrested a man on the same day “on suspicion of a racially aggravated public order offence.” The man, who has not been named, remains in police custody.

Assistant Chief Constable Stephanie Parker said: “We understand the deep concern this will cause within some of our diverse communities and are aware of a live video circulating.

“We made a swift arrest at the time and recognise the right people have for freedom of expression, but when this crosses into intimidation to cause harm or distress we will always look to take action when it is reported to us.”


Canada announces retaliatory measures against Trump tariffs; China also vows ‘countermeasures’

Canada announces retaliatory measures against Trump tariffs; China also vows ‘countermeasures’
Updated 02 February 2025
Follow

Canada announces retaliatory measures against Trump tariffs; China also vows ‘countermeasures’

Canada announces retaliatory measures against Trump tariffs; China also vows ‘countermeasures’
  • Trump placed duties of 10 percent on all imports from China, 25 percent on imports from Mexico and Canada
  • Says decision necessary “to protect Americans,” although it could throw global economy into possible turmoil

OTTAWA: Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said on Saturday Canada would impose 25 percent tariffs on C$155 billion ($106.5 billion) of US goods in response to tariffs imposed by US President Donald Trump.

C$30 billion would take effect from Tuesday and C$125 billion in 21 days, Trudeau told a news conference.

China also said it “firmly opposes” the new tariffs imposed on Beijing and vowed to take “corresponding countermeasures to resolutely safeguard our own rights and interests.”

Trump earlier signed an executive order imposing 25 percent tariffs on all goods from Canada and Mexico starting on Tuesday except Canadian energy products, which will be subject to a 10 percent duty.

Trudeau warned the tariffs would hurt the United States, a long-time ally. He encouraged Canadians to buy Canadian products and vacation at home rather than in the US.

He said some non-tariff measures, including some relating to critical minerals, energy procurement and other partnerships are being looked at.

Trump also unveiled sweeping measures against China, announcing an additional 10 percent tariff on Chinese imports on top of existing duties.

In a statement on Sunday, China’s commerce ministry slammed Washington’s “erroneous practices,” saying Beijing was “strongly dissatisfied with this and firmly opposes it.”
The ministry said Beijing would file a lawsuit at the World Trade Organization, arguing that “the unilateral imposition of tariffs by the United States seriously violates WTO rules.”

It added that the duties were “not only unhelpful in solving the US’s own problems, but also undermine normal economic and trade cooperation.”

“China hopes that the United States will objectively and rationally view and deal with its own issues like fentanyl, rather than threatening other countries with tariffs at every turn,” the ministry said.

It said Beijing “urges the US to correct its erroneous practices, meet China halfway, face up to its problems, have frank dialogues, strengthen cooperation and manage differences on the basis of equality, mutual benefit and mutual respect.”


Canada announces retaliatory measures against Trump tariffs; China also vows ‘countermeasures’

Canada announces retaliatory measures against Trump tariffs; China also vows ‘countermeasures’
Updated 02 February 2025
Follow

Canada announces retaliatory measures against Trump tariffs; China also vows ‘countermeasures’

Canada announces retaliatory measures against Trump tariffs; China also vows ‘countermeasures’
  • Canada would impose 25 percent tariffs on C$155 billion ($106.5 billion) of US goods, PM Trudeau says
  • China says the duties were “not only unhelpful in solving the US’s own problems, but also undermine normal economic and trade cooperation”

OTTAWA: Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said on Saturday Canada would impose 25 percent tariffs on C$155 billion ($106.5 billion) of US goods in response to tariffs imposed by US President Donald Trump.

C$30 billion would take effect from Tuesday and C$125 billion in 21 days, Trudeau told a news conference.

China also said it “firmly opposes” the new tariffs imposed on Beijing and vowed to take “corresponding countermeasures to resolutely safeguard our own rights and interests.”

Trump earlier signed an executive order imposing 25 percent tariffs on all goods from Canada and Mexico starting on Tuesday except Canadian energy products, which will be subject to a 10 percent duty.

Trudeau warned the tariffs would hurt the United States, a long-time ally. He encouraged Canadians to buy Canadian products and vacation at home rather than in the US.

 

 

He said some non-tariff measures, including some relating to critical minerals, energy procurement and other partnerships are being looked at.

Trump also unveiled sweeping measures against China, announcing an additional 10 percent tariff on Chinese imports on top of existing duties.

In a statement on Sunday, China’s commerce ministry slammed Washington’s “erroneous practices,” saying Beijing was “strongly dissatisfied with this and firmly opposes it.”
The ministry said Beijing would file a lawsuit at the World Trade Organization, arguing that “the unilateral imposition of tariffs by the United States seriously violates WTO rules.”

It added that the duties were “not only unhelpful in solving the US’s own problems, but also undermine normal economic and trade cooperation.”

“China hopes that the United States will objectively and rationally view and deal with its own issues like fentanyl, rather than threatening other countries with tariffs at every turn,” the ministry said.

It said Beijing “urges the US to correct its erroneous practices, meet China halfway, face up to its problems, have frank dialogues, strengthen cooperation and manage differences on the basis of equality, mutual benefit and mutual respect.”
 


Zelensky says excluding Ukraine from US-Russia talks about war is ‘very dangerous’

Zelensky says excluding Ukraine from US-Russia talks about war is ‘very dangerous’
Updated 02 February 2025
Follow

Zelensky says excluding Ukraine from US-Russia talks about war is ‘very dangerous’

Zelensky says excluding Ukraine from US-Russia talks about war is ‘very dangerous’
  • Zelensky’s remarks followed comments Friday by Trump, who said American and Russian officials were “already talking” about ending the war
  • Without security guarantees from Ukraine’s allies, Zelensky said, any deal struck with Russia would only serve as a precursor to future aggression

KYIV, Ukraine: Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said Saturday that excluding his country from talks between the US and Russia about the war in Ukraine would be “very dangerous” and asked for more discussions between Kyiv and Washington to develop a plan for a ceasefire.
Speaking in an exclusive interview with The Associated Press, Zelensky said Russia does not want to engage in ceasefire talks or to discuss any kind of concessions, which the Kremlin interprets as losing at a time when its troops have the upper hand on the battlefield.
He said US President Donald Trump could bring Russian President Vladimir Putin to the table with the threat of sanctions targeting Russia’s energy and banking system, as well as continued support of the Ukrainian military.
“I think these are the closest and most important steps,” he said in the interview in the Ukrainian capital that lasted for more than an hour.
Zelensky’s remarks followed comments Friday by Trump, who said American and Russian officials were “already talking” about ending the war. Trump said his administration has had “very serious” discussions with Russia, but he did not elaborate.
“They may have their own relations, but talking about Ukraine without us — it is dangerous for everyone,” Zelensky said.
He said his team has been in contact with the Trump administration, but those discussions are at a “general level,” and he believes in-person meetings will take place soon to develop more detailed agreements.
“We need to work more on this,” he said, adding that Trump understandably appeared to be focused on domestic issues in the first weeks after his inauguration.

The nearly three-year war in Ukraine is at a crossroads. Trump promised to end the fighting within six months of taking office, but the two sides are far apart, and it is unclear how a ceasefire deal would take shape. Meanwhile, Russia continues to make slow but steady gains along the front, and Ukrainian forces are enduring severe manpower shortages.
Most Ukrainians want a pause in fighting to rebuild their lives. The country faces near-daily Russian attacks on homes, and strikes on power systems have plunged entire cities into darkness.
Millions of Ukrainians have been displaced, unable to return to their homes after vast tracts of the country’s east have been reduced to rubble. Nearly a fifth of Ukraine is now occupied by Russia. In those areas, Moscow-appointed authorities are swiftly erasing any hint of Ukrainian identity.
With Trump back in the White House, Ukraine’s relationship with the US, its largest and most important ally, is also at a tipping point.
In an initial phone call with Trump during the presidential campaign, Zelensky said, the two agreed that if Trump won, they would meet to discuss the steps needed to end the war. But a planned visit by Trump’s Ukraine envoy, Keith Kellogg, was postponed “for legal reasons” Zelensky said. That was followed by a sudden foreign aid freeze that effectively caused Ukrainian organizations to halt projects.
“I believe that, first and foremost, we (must) hold a meeting with him, and that is important. And that is, by the way, something that everyone in Europe wants,” Zelensky said, referring to “a common vision of a quick end to the war.”
After the conversation with Trump, “we should move on to some kind of format of conversation with Russians. And I would like to see the United States of America, Ukraine and the Russians at the negotiating table. ... And, to be honest, a European Union voice should also be there. I think it would be fair, effective. But how will it turn out? I don’t know.”
Zelensky cautioned against allowing Putin to take “control” over the war, an apparent reference to Russia’s repeated threats of escalation during President Joe Biden’s administration.
Without security guarantees from Ukraine’s allies, Zelensky said, any deal struck with Russia would only serve as a precursor to future aggression. Membership in the NATO alliance, a longstanding wish for Kyiv that Moscow has categorically rejected, is still Zelensky’s top choice.
NATO membership is the “cheapest” option for Ukraine’s allies, and it would also strengthen Trump geopolitically, Zelensky argued.
“I really believe that these are the cheapest security guarantees that Ukraine can get, the cheapest for everyone,” he said.
“It will be a signal that it is not for Russia to decide who should be in NATO and who should not, but for the United States of America to decide. I think this is a great victory for Trump,” he said, evidently appealing to the president’s penchant for winners and business deals.
In addition, Zelensky said, Ukraine’s 800,000-strong army would be a bonus to the alliance, especially if Trump seeks to bring home US troops who are stationed overseas.
Other security guarantee proposals should be backed up by sufficient weapons from the US and Europe, and support for Kyiv to develop its own defense industry, he said.
Zelensky also said a French proposal to put European forces in Ukraine to act as a deterrent against Russian aggression is taking shape, but he expressed skepticism, saying many questions remained about the command-and-control structure and the number of troops and their positions. The issue was raised by French President Emmanuel Macron and with Trump, he said.
“I said in the presence of the two leaders that we are interested in this as a part of the security guarantee, but not as the only guarantee of safety,” he said. “That’s not enough.”
He added: “Imagine, there is a contingent. The question is who is in charge? Who is the main one? What will they do if there are Russian strikes? Missiles, disembarkation, attack from the sea, crossing of the land borderline, offensive. What will they do? What are their mandates?”
Asked if he put those questions directly to Macron, he smiled and said: “We are still in the process of this dialogue.”
Following a statement by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio that the war has set Ukraine back by 100 years, Zelensky urged Rubio to visit Ukraine.
Rubio “needs to come to Ukraine, first of all, to see what Russia has done,” the Ukrainian president said. “But also to see what the Ukrainian people did, what they were able to do for the security of Ukraine and the world, as I said, and just talk to these people.”