The Pennsylvania governor’s ascent as a vice-presidential candidate signals a traditional, not progressive, stance on Middle Eastern affairs.
Josh Shapiro, the governor of Pennsylvania, has emerged as a strong contender to be Kamala Harris’s running mate. A proud, observant Jew, Shapiro’s potential selection is seen by some as a clue to a Harris administration’s position on Middle Eastern issues, particularly regarding Israel and Gaza. While Shapiro’s likely appointment could represent a political strategy to strengthen appeal among moderates, it does not necessarily forecast a shift in policy on the Israel-Palestine conflict.
Shapiro’s public statements reflect a traditional stance within the Democratic Party, standing in contrast to the progressive view that the U.S. should limit support for Israel over alleged human rights abuses. The recent Gaza conflict has exacerbated the split between establishment Democrats, who remain largely pro-Israel, and progressives, who advocate for a reconsideration of military and financial aid. Joe Biden’s administration has maintained a steady pro-Israel policy, and Shapiro aligns with this stance.
Following Hamas’s October 7 attack, Shapiro quickly condemned the act, framing it as a justification for Israel’s right to self-defense. His remarks have sparked criticism, especially within the U.S. Muslim community. Although Shapiro later emphasized that his criticisms were aimed at Hamas and not the Palestinian people, his initial comments have left some feeling that his approach lacks nuance and empathy for Palestinian civilians.
In subsequent interviews, Shapiro has expressed his support for peace, acknowledging that many in the Palestinian community desire stability as much as their Israeli counterparts. He has also been vocal about his disapproval of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, whom he labeled as “one of the worst leaders of all time.” His calls for a two-state solution appear sincere, yet his tone has done little to ease the frustration of progressive critics.
Shapiro’s stance aligns him with the Democratic establishment, positioning him as a defender of Israel’s actions while subtly recognizing the complex dynamics at play. His nuanced position, however, fails to fully appease either the pro-Israel establishment or the more critical progressive base within his party. In resurfaced college writings, Shapiro described Palestinians as “battle-minded,” a comment that has added fuel to his critics’ concerns about his objectivity on the matter.
If Harris chooses Shapiro, the decision would likely be viewed as a strategic appeal to moderate and pro-Israel voters rather than a signal of drastic policy shifts. Shapiro’s presence on the ticket could help balance Harris’s appeal, distancing the campaign from the progressive call for reduced U.S. support to Israel.
In sum, a Shapiro vice presidency would reflect a commitment to the existing Democratic platform on Israel. His views, rooted in traditional party values, suggest a continuity of pro-Israel policy rather than an embrace of progressive demands for a reevaluation of U.S.-Israel relations.
