On Feb. 26, Senator Angus King met with University of Maine students over Zoom in Williams Hall to answer questions on domestic and international responses to the Israel-Palestine conflict. Students poised that in addition to a history of illegal occupation, the Oct. 7 attack on Israel by Hamas began a period of bombing that violated multiple international humanitarian rules and killed at least 47,707 Gazans so far. Despite a ceasefire that has recently been enacted following Israel’s denial of humanitarian aid, some are left questioning the security of this agreement. Members of UMaine Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) and UMaine Here4theKids convened to gain King’s insight on how the war has been handled and his position on rising tensions in the region.
Joining the call was fourth-year wildlife & ecology student Kiley Chen; computer engineering graduate student Willow Cunningham; President of UMaine JVP and a second-year secondary education student Talia Cullum; fourth-year computer science student Lucas Bent; second-year political science student Gracie Gebel; graduate history student Asher Reisman and third-year economics student and President of UMaine Here4theKids Megan Sauberlich.
The call with King specifically discussed Bernie Sanders’ new Joint Resolutions of Disapproval, the progress of the Gaza ceasefire, King’s opinion on the “Non-profit killer” bill, HR 9495 and diplomatic roles to ease conflict in this region.
Two days before the call, Bernie Sanders filed four new Joint Resolutions of Disapproval against an arms sale of $8.56 billion to Israel as a mechanism to uphold the Foreign Assistance Act and Arms Export Control Act that have been violated by multiple US arms sales to Israel this past year. Earlier, in September, Sanders had filed three other JRDs against a 20 billion arms export to Israel that was endorsed by around 20 other senators including Sen. King, but ultimately did not pass in the Senate. Cunningham started off by thanking King for his support on these JRDs.
Q:
Cunningham: “First off, we wanted to thank you for voting in favor of the JRDs back in November last year, those were Senate Joint Resolutions JRDS 111, 113, 115. We think it’s a great indication you’re willing to uphold human rights in accordance with the Foreign Assistance Act. There’s a new set of JRDs Senator Sanders introduced very recently and we wanted to hear your thoughts on them and whether or not you’re thinking of voting in favor or against?”
King shared he had only heard about the JRD’s the day before. Given the conditions of the ceasefire, his vote would largely depend on the circumstances at the time.
A:
King: “As you mentioned I voted in favor of the resolutions last fall because I was very concerned and have been from the very, very beginning about how Israel was conducting the war and what I thought was excessive bombing and so I have to tell you my vote was one of conscience. I just could not be complicit in what was going on in Gaza in terms of the bombing. If the war has resumed and Israel is following a similar course to what they did last year then I would certainly strongly lean towards voting for it just as I did in November.”
Q:
Gebel: “I love to hear that during the war, this was a vote of conscience for you and you thought this was unacceptable, that was very much a popular opinion. That is something I have been feeling with all my peers around me. Polling data has shown, in February 2024, so a year ago now, 46% of 19 to 29 year olds had said that Israel’s response was unacceptable.”
King responded his position has been similar since the beginning of Israel’s attack on Gaza. Three weeks after October 7, King and other Senators met with the Israeli ambassador, where Senator King reportedly told him the following.
A:
King: “You need to do two things: calibrate the attack on Hamas so there aren’t any undue casualties among civilians, and secondly, you should simultaneously mount a serious humanitarian aid program in order to win over and ameliorate suffering in Gaza.”
A year after Israel’s invasion, King met with Netenyahu in Tel Aviv, where he recalled telling him: “Mr. Prime Minister, the bombing is hurting Israel more than Hamas. It’s harming Israel in terms of international opinion and opinion in the United States. It’s hurting Israel in regard to its Arab neighbors with whom it is friendly, like Jordan and potentially Saudi Arabia.”
Q:
Cullum: “Another thing that we wanted to discuss with you is bill HR 9495 that passed in the House in the last session. It is dubbed the non-profit killer bill and it has given the authority to the presidential appointee, the secretary of the treasury, to designate nonprofits as giving material support, which is not clarified in the bill what material support means, to terrorists. This is of significant importance to us as a chapter of JVP, as so often support for Palestinians is confused and conflated with support for terrorists. But this is not just affecting us, this could affect the ACLU and other nonprofits that are required to run a civil society. I guess my question for you, Senator, if this bill was in front of you would you vote no on it?”
A:
King: “Yes, I would vote no.”
Q:
Cullum: “And I suppose, would it be too much to ask of you to speak with your colleagues to try and get more people to vote no on this bill alongside you?”
King responded, commenting on the use of the word “terrorism,” in the bill.
A:
King: ”In full disclosure, when the bill was first introduced, I was one of the supporters of it, because I was thinking in terms of terrorism generally. And then came to realize the threat that you suggest in terms of nonprofits and the loose definition of support of terrorism and I withdrew my support and would certainly vote no now and would certainly argue to my colleagues that it would not be a good vote. I don’t know the status, I don’t know if it’s been reintroduced in either the House or the Senate, but I can assure you I will oppose it, if it is. And certainly vote no if it came to the floor, for the reasons you stated.”
Q:
Cullum: “Do you think making a statement against this bill in the Senate, making some kind of public statement about it, is that too much to ask of you?”
A:
King: “I would certainly speak out against it, again, for the reasons that you state. This is a case where I listened and studied and came to realize what the implications were, which I think frankly are made somewhat more serious with the change in administrations, so sure I suspect I would speak against it.”
Students then shared concerns on how the next phases of the ceasefire will carry out.
Q:
Reisman: “What role do you think the U.S. could play in facilitating conditions where a kind of credible authority could take shape?”
A:
King: “One of the things that we really need is a serious, politically representative voice for the Palestinian people so that we can finally move toward a two-state solution. One thing is to continue the support for the security arrangement: the security forces of the PA. We have supported the efforts of the Jordanians and the others of the middle east… they’re the ones that have to make this happen and I think that the U.S. has an important role to play there in generally supporting these efforts to rebuild the leadership in terms of what can be accomplished. So, I think general support for the PA, but also efforts to reform the PA. I think there has to be new leadership and where that is gonna come from is – that’s the conundrum we have right now.”
Q:
Reisman: “In that context, I think about the destruction of Gaza’s higher education infrastructure in the last 15 months. The Palestinians have achieved some pretty remarkable things under the conditions in which they’ve lived. Literacy rates, I think in excess of 97%… that’s where we would imagine leadership coming from, right? Is from those sorts of institutions that have now been, in the case of Gaza, totally leveled.”
A:
King: “There’s no easy black or white answers here, and you can’t say ‘well the Israelis were terrible,’ without acknowledging that Hamas really harmed the Palestinian people and during this war they did in fact use them as human shields. I don’t want to leave you with the impression that I believe that Israel has conducted itself as it should have in this situation. A big part of the redevelopment of Gaza should be educational institutions and I believe that the gulf states, including Saudi Arabia, if we could find a resolution to this would contribute significantly to the rebuilding of Gaza but we have to get through this horrible conflict right now.”
Reisman went on to point out the young generations’ perspective on imperialistic ambitions.
Q:
Reisman: “Our relationship with Israel often exemplifies a lot of features of that kind of imperial ambition and I guess just as an elected official, someone who makes their career in politics, I hope that you’re aware of that shift and have an interest in representing that desire as it grows.”
A:
King: “Well I think the two leading examples of what you’re talking about are Vietnam and Iraq. Both of which were mistakes in my view, and I can recommend you, if you’re looking for things to read, I just reread David Hallberstamm’s monumental book called “The Best and the Brightest” about the war in Vietnam. And of course we went into Iraq under false pretenses and I think those are examples of what you’re talking about. Now, I’m not sure having Israel as an ally represents imperialism. Now you have a democratic country that in many ways has the same values although they didn’t express them in this war, but I don’t see that as imperialism. Here’s the challenge, we don’t want to be imperialistic, but we don’t want to withdraw from the world.”
King continued by pointing out trends toward U.S. isolationism and the impact of reduced U.S. Agency for International Development (AID).
“We do a lot of good around the world, and one of the worst things the Trump administration has done was destroy U.S. AID. Now I met with AID workers in Kabul, Afghanistan who were teaching Afghan farmers how to be more efficient and produce more food for their people; that’s positive work that is very positive for this country. Another example that I just learned about is AID support for a major desalination plant in Jordan. Jordan has no water and a desalination plant could make a huge difference in the stability of that country. That sort of thing I don’t consider imperialism, I consider that us leading and helping the world to develop in ways that will hopefully garner our values rather than the Chinese who are very active in African and Latin America building roads, highways, ports, those kinds of things. So I don’t consider foreign aid or engaging with the world to be imperialism, so I understand what you’re saying and I think we have to try and tread a line between being engaged with the world in a positive way and imperialism. And I understand that concern and my orientation is to try and find the right path.”
King finished the conversation, making a promise to keep in touch and reconvene when the Joint Resolutions of Disapproval comes to the floor.
