Murphy wants a new foreign policy

In five years as U.S. Senator for Connecticut, (Chris) Murphy has emerged as a vocal critic of the Democratic Party’s muddled approach to international relations and a champion of a progressive vision for American policy abroad.

Murphy’s proposed plan is bold, timely, and necessary: Exercise military restraint. Rein in surveillance. Increase development assistance. Promote human rights at home and abroad. Work within multilateral institutions. Respect international law.

But, he adds, in action if not words: Maintain the status quo of oppression, military occupation, and apartheid for the Palestinian people. In his vision for a progressive future, Murphy has left Palestinians behind.

By toeing the party line on Israel, Murphy abandons his principles and undermines his own calls for change.

Senator Murphy actively supports increases in America’s already astronomical levels of military assistance to Israel. When the Obama administration decided not to veto a UN resolution condemning Israel’s illegal settlements, Murphy was a vocal critic. During the 2014 conflict in Gaza, in which six Israeli and well over one thousand Palestinian citizens were killed, Murphy cosponsored a resolution declaring total support for Israeli actions and defining rocket attacks from Gaza as wholly unprovoked. Though he questioned the timing, Murphy even agreed with the Trump administration’s decision to move the American embassy in Israel to Jerusalem — the decision that fueled a recent wave of protests during which Israeli forces have killed over one hundred Palestinians.

Murphy has also proven to be a vocal critic of Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions — a nonviolent social movement that puts economic pressure on companies directly involved in Israeli human rights abuses. Murphy supported a bill that would allow state and local governments to refuse to work with organizations on the basis of their stance on BDS and, more worryingly, expressed only tentative reservations about another that would have effectively criminalized even advocating for BDS — a proposal that the ACLU declared a clear infringement of constitutional rights.

While calling others to support his progressive foreign policy vision, Murphy backs the forces of oppression when politically desirable. This is more than just inconsistent; it’s self-defeating.

Murphy’s position on Israel undermines his foreign policy vision from the start. Every one of his principled stands — a reduction in drone strikes, an end to arms sales to Saudi Arabia, and multilateral action on climate change — has been labeled by opponents as politically infeasible. By subordinating principles to political expediency on Israel, Murphy effectively takes the same position, ceding all ground to his opponents before the battle has even begun.

Of course, political realities cannot be ignored. But there is a meaningful difference between calling for progressive goals while compromising in their pursuit, and actively aligning oneself with oppression from the start. Murphy has done the latter.

Chris Murphy wants a new foreign policy.

And he is right to. On many issues, he has displayed forward-thinking leadership that his Connecticut constituents should be proud of.

But as long as Murphy continues to support the Israeli government’s oppression of Palestinians, change is not possible. There is no progressive policy without Palestinians.