Sen. Bernie Sanders recently conveyed his thoughts on Vice President Kamala Harris and her potential influence on U.S. relations with Israel if she is elected president.

Sanders, a campaign surrogate for the Democratic Party ticket, believes that Harris could be persuaded to support what he says is a more humanitarian outlook concerning Gaza, contrasting with former President Donald Trump’s stance, as Breitbart reports.

The discussion took place during Sanders' appearance on CNN's State of the Union with host Jake Tapper. The journalist noted the concerns among Democrats regarding the Biden-Harris administration's firm stance with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

This relationship has caused discontent among some voters, particularly within Michigan's Arab-American and Muslim-American communities.

Tapper pointed out the potential electoral implications of these concerns. He raised the issue of Democratic voters either opting out or voting third-party in response to what they see as unwavering support for Netanyahu's policies. Sanders was asked to address these voters, who may be considering Trump or another candidate.

Harris’s Potential Impact on U.S. Policy

Sanders emphasized his view that Hamas, which attacked Israel on Oct. 7, is a notorious terrorist group. He affirmed Israel's right to retaliate against Hamas. However, he took a stand against Israel's actions that have led to widespread destruction in Gaza, citing substantial casualties and injuries.

With his characteristic focus on humanitarian issues, Sanders expressed his commitment to blocking additional offensive military support for Israel. He stressed a need for an approach that differentiates military actions against legitimate threats and those that lead to civilian suffering.

Contrasting Potential Approaches

Sanders contrasted what he believes to be Harris's potential change in policy with Trump's historical alignment with Netanyahu.

He suggested that there could be an opportunity to influence Vice President Harris to adopt a more compassionate standpoint on Gaza. Sanders argued that such influence would not be possible under a Trump administration.

In his view, Trump's presidency could likely deepen ties with Netanyahu, leaving little room for humanitarian considerations in policy decisions -- an outcome Sanders finds troubling.

Senator Sanders' Perspective on Republican Opposition

Sanders also criticized the lack of bipartisan support for humanitarian aid in the Senate, highlighting the struggle to secure essential relief for the people of Gaza. He specifically mentioned the dire conditions faced by children in the region and lambasted the Senate's resistance to funding efforts that would address starvation.

He directed these comments towards Republicans, framing the humanitarian issue as a non-partisan obligation. Sanders expressed his disbelief that some might prefer to vote for Trump, who he insinuated holds views less favorable to humanitarian aid.

Future Prospects Under Harris

Sanders stated that electing Harris could provide a chance to steer U.S. foreign policy towards more humanitarian goals and alleviate the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. This policy shift would represent an opportunity to influence Harris in departed strategies from the administration's previous approach.

The senator's statements aimed at demonstrating the stark contrast between what he perceives as potential under a Harris administration compared to Trump’s approach. He stressed that opening to change under Harris might lead to a more balanced approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

His arguments seemed focused on appealing to disenchanted Democratic voters, urging them to consider the ramifications of their electoral choices on humanitarian policies.

Overall, Sanders is leveraging his influence to advocate for strategic changes in U.S. foreign policy, particularly regarding military aid and humanitarian intervention in Gaza. His remarks reveal a deeper dialogue within the Democratic Party and the political calculus at play as the election approaches.

As the electoral landscape continues to evolve, Sanders’ comments serve as a catalyst for further discussions on foreign policy and the future direction of U.S. international relations, highlighting the crucial role of voter sentiment and policy influence.

These discussions underscore the ongoing debate about balancing national security interests with human rights obligations -- an issue central to Sanders' political philosophy.