A polarizing resolution calling for an arms embargo on Israel was voted down Tuesday by members of the Democratic National Committee.
But in a surprise development, DNC Chair Ken Martin announced after the vote that he was forming a task force to continue discussion of the issue, indicating that the committee planned to consider a new resolution about the issue at a later date.
In announcing his support for the task force, Martin withdrew support for a prior resolution — one he had introduced and backed — that called for a ceasefire in Israel’s war on Gaza. That resolution had already been approved by the DNC’s Resolutions Committee, but was withdrawn at the chair’s behest.
Martin indicated in a speech to the committee that he decided to keep the discussion of the issue going at the spur of the moment.
“There is a divide in our party on this issue. This is a moment that calls for shared dialogue and calls for shared advocacy,” Martin said. “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 resolution to allow us to move forward in a conversation on this as a party. We need to keep working through this. We have to find a path.”
Martin’s action appeared to catch everyone in the room off guard, including fellow DNC members and staff. It came after he spent several minutes huddling with Allison Minnerly, the DNC member from Florida who introduced the arms embargo resolution, after her measure was voted down by the committee.
It also effectively means the DNC will continue debating the war in Gaza, a polarizing issue that some Democratic strategists say puts the party in an almost unwinnable situation.
How the DNC will continue to work through a possible future resolution is unclear. In his remarks, Martin said he would “appoint a committee or task force comprised of stakeholders on all sides of this to continue to have the conversation, to work through this, and bring solutions back to our party.”
What that will mean in practice — who would serve on the committee, how they would be selected, and what their timetable would be for devising a new resolution — is also not immediately clear.
Martin’s decision did not appear to satisfy opponents of Israel’s action in Gaza. Minnerly, who found out what Martin planned to do only after the vote on her resolution failed, said the party could have resolved the debate with its vote Tuesday if it had supported her resolution.
“This is a conversation that the party doesn’t want to have,” she said. “Even though our voters are having it every day, there is a disconnect between the DNC, the establishment, and the everyday people that are on the ground that are casting ballots for the Democratic Party.”
Minnerly said she would be open to serving on the task force created by Martin but added that she thought people from the region and those most affected by the war should also have a place on it.
Supporters of Israel’s actions in Gaza dismissed Martin’s maneuver, saying that the support for Martin’s original resolution proved the party still sides with the Middle Eastern country.
“The Martin resolution passed. The bad one failed,” said Brian Romick, president and CEO of the Democratic Majority for Israel. “The Democratic Party for 75 years has been a pro-Israel party, and I don’t think anything that happened in that room changed that.”
Resolutions approved by DNC members are symbolic gestures and do not dictate how the party’s elected officials vote. But Minnerly said before the vote that she thought it was a necessary step for the party to prove it supported international law and support for all people regardless of race or religion.
This story has been updated with further information and reaction on the new task force.