After a resolution from Democratic National Committee Chairman Ken Martin on the party’s stance on the Israel-Hamas war passed unanimously and without discussion at Tuesday morning’s DNC meeting in Minneapolis, Martin pulled the resolution in order to create a task force to study how the party is going to move forward.
His decision to pull the resolution came after a second resolution calling for, among other things, an arms embargo on Israel failed. Both resolutions can be seen here on pages 8 and 42, respectively.
“As we’ve seen there’s a divide in our party on this issue. This is a moment that calls for shared dialogue, it calls for shared advocacy, and that’s why I’ve decided today at this moment – listening to the testimony and listening to people in our party – to withdraw my amendment and resolution to allow us to move forward in a conversation on this as a party,” Martin said. “We need to keep working through this. We have to find a path forward as a party and we have to stay unified. No one should confuse unity with unanimity.”
Martin said the task force will “work through this” and bring solutions back to the party.
Martin’s Resolution 3, “Resolution for Humanitarian Aid to Gaza and an End to the Israel-Hamas War,” called for the immediate release of hostages – living and deceased, a credible pathway to a two-state solution “that ensures equal measures of dignity, freedom, and opportunity for Israelis and Palestinians alike, and opposes any unilateral steps by either side that undermines the prospects for the two states.”
Martin did not speak with the media after the meeting.
In his presentation of the resolution, Martin acknowledged the conflict is a longstanding dispute between people with historic claims to the land.
“The Democratic Party recognizes the worth of every Israeli and every Palestinian, and affirms that both peoples have the right to security, to dignity and to self-determination, free from violence, extremism and hatred in all forms,” Martin said. He also called for secure and unrestricted aid to flow into Gaza.
“[That] is absolutely essential, and [it] is the position of 44 Senate Democrats who signed a letter recently calling for a large-scale expansion in aid,” Martin said. “The resolution also recognizes the complexity of the conflict in the Middle East and calls for a long-term peace through a two-state solution negotiated through direct bilateral negotiations.”
Resolution 18, “Resolution on Gaza,” calls for elected Democrats to support an immediate ceasefire, arms embargo, and suspension of military aid, urging its members to recognize Palestine as a country, and that the “Democratic Party affirms its commitment to international law, human rights for all people, an immediate and continual supply delivery chain opened for humanitarian focused life-saving food and medical care in Gaza, and the pursuit of a just and lasting peace for all in the region.”
Allison Minnerly, the DNC member from Florida who wrote Resolution 18, said the vote was an opportunity for the Party to align with its voters.
“Overwhelmingly. Democrats want the end of U.S. involvement in this war,” she said. “In particular, they want their elected officials to not be complacent in this crisis. While it’s important that the conversation started today, the chair has placed a comma in that conversation.”
Stephanie Beal, a committee member from Colorado, introduced an amendment that added language calling for the return of all hostages, an offensive arms embargo, and suspension of offensive military aid, as well as affirming its commitment to a two-state solution.
Harini Krishnan, a committee member from California, said that she supported Resolution 3 because it put the onus of a ceasefire on Hamas as well as Israel.
“I see pain with both sets of people. Both sets of people have the right to dignity and a life free of violence,” she said. “[Resolution 18] mentions the right-wing Israeli government but doesn’t put any onus on a militant group that is also oppressing the Palestinian government.”
Minnerly said she was not in favor of the amendments.
“The ‘offensive weapons’ line is typically used, and I think what really happens there is that we neglect to address that all weapons in the region, continue furthering this crisis and continue the war,” she said. “It should be the United States’ position that there is no further escalation of this conflict, and that would really start by signaling to our elected officials, particularly in the Democratic Party, but we do not want them to be complacent with their votes and with their voices.”
Beal wasn’t surprised that her amendment failed.
“I knew that this was an issue that the party itself is very divided on,” she said. “The amendment was meant to try and bring that a little bit together. I knew that was a hard task. Insurmountable, as it turned out.”
Nathan Soltz, the Oregon party chair, said after the meeting that he supported Martin’s resolution and was not supportive of the amendments to Resolution 18.
“The amendments felt like what we were trying to reach in Resolution 3,” Soltz said. “After all the discussions (around Resolution 18) [Martin] felt more discussions were needed.
“I know the chairman’s commitment to making sure that all these voices are heard and that we approach this in a very deliberative and intentional manner. So I did not know that that exact motion was going to be coming up, but it did not surprise me.”
A letter that was shared with the media and signed by 31 members of Democratic Jewish caucuses from around the country, supported Martin’s Resolution 3 and opposed Resolution 18.
“Resolution 3…reaffirms the Democratic Party’s long-standing values of peace, dignity, and humanity,” the letter stated. “It’s clear there can be no lasting peace so long as Hamas is still in power in Gaza, and bilateral statehood negotiations are necessary for ensuring a two-state solution will result in sustainable peace.”
“Resolution 18 lacks context or nuance with regard to the myriad of complex issues surrounding the conflict and neglects to voice support for Israel’s security or the release of the hostages.”
Lisa Pearl, the president of the North Carolina Democratic Party Jewish Caucus who circulated the letter, said that Martin is balancing different parts of the party.
“He has multiple groups who want to have their voices heard and considered,” she said. “Because I haven’t spoken to Ken, I really can’t address what his intent is…I just know the way that they actually all voted, which was they voted against Resolution 18, and that is on record.”
Andrew Lachman, the president of California Jewish Democrats, said there is a conversation to be had about where the party can come together.
“The Jewish community as a whole…there’s a level of discomfort as to what’s going on,” he said. “We’re sorting through this at the same time, trying to figure out what the right tone is.”
The group Democratic Majority for Israel, in a statement, praised the defeat of Resolution 18 without addressing the withdrawal of Resolution 3.
“Today, the Democratic Party sent a clear and resounding message by defeating a reckless and divisive resolution: we stand with the people of Israel and will continue to do so,” Brian Romick, president and CEO of DMFI said. “We cannot forget how we got here. Hamas started this war and continues to hold 50 hostages. Passing this resolution would have been a gift to Republicans, further divided our party, and rewarded Hamas’ brutality.”
Among the 19 resolutions that were voted on were resolutions condemning antisemitism – submitted by Lachman – and Islamophobia. Both passed unanimously. Resolutions that pass the Resolution Committee are presented to the General Session on Wednesday as a package recommended by the Resolution Committee.