Pro-Israel Democrats expressed cautious optimism about the unexpected decision by Democratic National Committee Chairman Ken Martin to withdraw his resolution pressing for humanitarian aid to Gaza and for the release of hostages held by Hamas, which was unanimously approved by party members on Tuesday at the DNC’s annual summer meeting held in Minneapolis.

Martin, in a sudden reversal, announced he would pull the resolution after DNC members rejected a dueling measure, opposed by pro-Israel groups, that had endorsed an arms embargo and a suspension of U.S. military aid to Israel. Instead, he said he would create a task force “comprised of stakeholders on all sides” of the Israel debate to pursue what he called a “shared dialogue” on an increasingly divisive issue.

“This was a surprise ending to this meeting,” Halie Soifer, the CEO of the Jewish Democratic Council of America, which helped draft the pro-Israel measure and privately advocated for its passage, told Jewish Insider on Tuesday. 

Despite Martin’s 11th-hour reversal, Soifer said she was satisfied with the outcome, noting the DNC also passed a resolution condemning antisemitism that, coupled with its rejection of the arms embargo proposal, “reflects where the party stands” on major issues concerning Israel and the Jewish community.

“It’s my sense,” she added of Martin, “that he introduced and ensured passage of this resolution to defeat the other resolution,” which she said “was completely out of step with the views of the party.”

Soifer said she hopes to join the proposed task force “to discuss the path forward” on approaching Israel, acknowledging internal tensions that have roiled the party in recent years. Martin “clearly recognized that there are a range of strongly held views on this matter, and he wants to make sure that those voices are heard,” she told JI.

Martin has not yet shared additional details on the task force, and the DNC did not return a request for comment from JI. Latonya Reeves, a DNC member in Minneapolis, told JI on Tuesday that she had not been further informed of the task force — which she called “the best way to move forward” on the issue.

Sara Forman, who leads the New York Solidarity Network, a local pro-Israel group that aligns with Democrats, said she was broadly “encouraged” that the DNC had chosen “not to recommend” what she dismissed as a “one-sided resolution against Israel,” arguing that the party “represents far more than its progressive base.”

“I’m always one for conversation, and think that talking about things is an important step, so I’m going to offer grace to Martin in this regard,” she said of his announcement. Still, she added of the failed resolution, “I think it’s a bigger concern overall that the Democratic Party seems to be uniquely singling out Israel for rebuke or scrutiny in a way that no other U.S. ally is rebuked or scrutinized.”

A spokesperson for Democratic Majority for Israel, which released a statement praising the DNC’s votes before Martin revealed he would pull the resolution, said it was “pleased that the anti-Israel measure was decisively defeated by the committee,” but declined to comment more broadly on what transpired at the end of the meeting.

Brian Romick, DMFI’s president and CEO, said in an interview with JI that he viewed the outcome on Tuesday as “a win” for the pro-Israel community, in light of the potential for a more hostile debate. “The bad resolution was rejected and Ken’s compromise resolution also passed the committee,” Romick said. “That all happened publicly” and “reaffirmed where the party stands on Israel,” he said. “Anything else beyond that is just inside baseball.”

Some Democratic insiders familiar with internal party dynamics indicated that Martin had chosen to change course because he anticipated a disruptive floor debate over his resolution, which was poised to face broader scrutiny during the DNC’s general session on Wednesday.

“He’s worried about what would happen at the meeting,” one party source informed of the matter said on Tuesday. “On one hand, viewed from there, it makes sense and seems like a rational move,” the source reasoned, while also noting that it has “some real downsides.”

On the other hand, “when you punt something to a task force you actually continue the debate, because now it’s going to be a big fight” over who is included in the committee, the source said. “Then it becomes hard to move past.”

Manny Houle, a Democratic pro-Israel strategist in Minneapolis, said Martin’s maneuver was tactically smart — as DNC leadership seeks to avoid “internal proxy fights and focus messaging on pushing back against” the Trump administration in advance of the upcoming elections. “It is often a tactic to give your most ardent detractors busy work so you can focus on the work that matters,” he explained.

The party’s pro-Israel wing knows it has “the power to push back,” Houle told JI. “It’s not worth giving more air to the extremist factions.” The debate over Israel “is not going away anytime soon,” he added. “But we’ve shown where we stand and hopefully there are more pressing things that we need to give oxygen to.” 

Whatever Martin’s intentions, Susan Turnbull, a former DNC vice chair, said she was excited by the prospect of a task force, suggesting that it would be well-timed to take place between the conventions. 

“What I think is the case is that this, of all issues, needs to have consensus and that what he wanted in his first meeting is not to have winners and losers,” she told JI. “He wanted to come to a good result for collaboration.”

“I’m giving him a lot of credit because we have a hard enough time within the Jewish community dealing with this issue,” she said, adding that it will be “important that every perspective be considered” as the DNC hones its approach to the Middle East.

It remains to be seen if Martin, who on Tuesday acknowledged a “divide” in the party over Israel, will find partnership on the opposing end of the issue. Allison Minnerly, the 26-year-old DNC member who had introduced the failed measure on Gaza, which faced criticism for not mentioning Hamas, voiced disappointment with his decision and said he was “prolonging” the conversation rather than taking a position to align the party with a base she views as amenable to her views on Israel.

Still, as the DNC moves to reach a tenuous detente on Israel, some pro-Israel Democrats said that any future resolution on the issue should reflect values that have long been espoused by the party, even as they have faced ongoing pushback from the activist left. 

“The vast majority of American Jews, and Americans more broadly, understand the complexity of the conflict — wanting to see Israel’s security protected and the remaining hostages released, the humanitarian crisis in Gaza truly addressed, and all parties work toward a future in which both Israelis and Palestinians are safe and free,” Amy Spitalnick, CEO of the nonpartisan Jewish Council for Public Affairs, told JI. “Any resolution on Gaza should reflect those widely-held values.”

Amanda Berman, CEO of the Zioness Action Fund, a progressive pro-Israel advocacy group, said on Tuesday that “there is legitimate critique and concern about this devastating war dragging on — and Democrats should stand staunchly with the Israeli public as it models dissent, protest and a pro-democracy movement the American left should emulate.”

“To the extent that any fringe element of the Democratic Party is willing to abandon Israel and the American Jewish community,” Berman said, “they will be abandoning true progressive values, liberation for persecuted minority communities, our historic alliances and America’s national security.”

Shortly after members of the Democratic National Committee passed a resolution on Tuesday voicing support for humanitarian aid to Gaza and calling for the release of hostages held by Hamas, Ken Martin, the party chair, announced that he would withdraw the measure, which he had introduced, and instead form a task force to continue discussing the matter.

The surprise reversal came even as the DNC, now holding its annual summer meeting in Minneapolis, had voted to reject a dueling and more controversial resolution that had backed an arms embargo as well as a suspension of U.S. military aid to Israel, raising alarms among Jewish and pro-Israel Democrats who rallied behind Martin’s effort, co-sponsored by DNC leadership.

“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 after the competing measure had been voted down. “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.”

He said that he would “appoint a committee or a 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.”

Martin announced his decision after huddling with co-sponsors of the failed resolution, which also called for recognition of a Palestinian state and was expected to be voted down. The measure additionally drew criticism for not mentioning Hamas — in contrast with Martin’s proposal, which also supported a two-state solution. The measures, each backing an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, were nonbinding and meant to telegraph the party’s stances on an issue that has increasingly fueled internal tensions.

His about-face underscores the pressures that Martin, who became DNC chair in February, is facing from an outspoken contingent of anti-Israel activists who are now aggressively seeking to push the party away from its traditional commitment to defending the U.S.-Israel relationship — which has come under growing strain amid party backlash to the ongoing war in Gaza.

Martin has offered no additional details on what motivated his abrupt decision or his new plan to create a task force. The DNC did not respond to a request for comment on Tuesday.

His sentiments echoed the “big-tent” rhetoric that he had endorsed when he ran for DNC chair — with some pro-Israel party members voicing reservations that his approach could be overly accommodating to extreme views and fail to enforce red lines on Middle East policy.

Martin’s Gaza resolution was unanimously approved by the DNC’s Resolutions Committee, while the dueling measure, introduced by a 26-year-old member from Florida, was rejected in a voice vote.

The committee did not take a recorded vote and no members asked for a breakdown, a person familiar with the process said. An attempt to add language into the alternate resolution calling for the release of all hostages and to oppose offensive weapons to Israel also fell flat, reflecting a failed effort to unify the resolutions that preceded the votes this week.

The meeting on Tuesday was expected to be heated but largely avoided the sort of drama that animated its convention last year, drawing more attention for Martin’s decision to yank his own proposal near the end of the proceedings.

Even as Martin called for a continued dialogue on the matter, Allison Minnerly, the DNC member who had introduced the failed resolution, expressed disappointment with his choice and said she believed he was “prolonging” the conversation rather than taking a position to align the party with a base that she views as amenable to her views on Israel.

When Democratic National Committee members gather in Minneapolis later this month for the party’s summer meeting, they’ll consider two Israel-related resolutions — a more balanced one, which has the backing of party chair Ken Martin, and an anti-Israel measure that calls for an arms embargo and a suspension of U.S. military aid to Israel. 

Sources within the DNC say they don’t expect the anti-Israel resolution, which was authored by a committee member from Florida, to pass. But the fact that it will be considered by the body has unnerved Jewish Democrats, who are working behind the scenes to promote the more balanced resolution. That one calls for an “immediate ceasefire and the unconditional release of all hostages, living and deceased, held by Hamas.” It also reiterates Democratic Party support for a two-state solution. (The text of the two resolutions was first reported by Semafor.)

The Martin-backed resolution is co-sponsored by the DNC’s entire leadership, including DNC associate chair Stuart Appelbaum, the president of the Jewish Labor Committee, according to a copy of the resolution obtained by Jewish Insider. Both measures will first be voted on by the DNC’s Resolutions Committee.  

“It sends a strong signal that the chair himself has chosen to sponsor and lead the resolution that clearly condemns the Oct. 7 terrorist attack on Israel, affirms Democrats’ commitment to bringing home the hostages and addresses the need for humanitarian aid in Gaza,” Jewish Democratic Council of America CEO Halie Soifer told JI on Wednesday. “We are hopeful the DNC Resolutions Committee will reject the arms embargo resolution and reaffirm its support of a two-state solution and a release of the hostages.”

A DNC spokesperson declined to comment on the specific measures. “Any DNC member can submit resolutions for fellow members to consider,” the spokesperson told JI, noting that “submitted resolutions might not necessarily represent the views of the entire DNC.” 

The anti-Israel resolution was submitted first; the competing resolution came later, as an attempt to reiterate the positions adopted in the Democratic Party platform at the convention in Chicago last year. The platform stated that former President Joe Biden and former Vice President Kamala Harris were committed to “Israel’s security, its qualitative military edge [and] its right to defend itself.” The measure being advanced by Martin and his allies leading the DNC strongly condemns the Oct. 7 Hamas attacks, and it takes aim at both Hamas militants and “far-right ministers in the government of Israel.” 

JDCA and Democratic Majority for Israel have both been part of conversations with DNC officials to offer suggestions on the Martin-backed resolution. 

DMFI CEO Brian Romick said in a statement that the group is “deeply troubled by the introduction of a flawed, irresponsible” anti-Israel resolution  “that will further sow division within our party and do nothing to help bring an end to the Israel-Hamas.” 

Other left-leaning Jewish groups, like Zioness, offered feedback as well and called on Democrats to reject the anti-Israel resolution, which did not mention Hamas or the Oct. 7, 2023, terror attacks. 

“DNC members should vote against this attempt to reopen and rewrite the party platform that was adopted with overwhelming enthusiasm at the convention less than one year ago,” Zioness CEO Amanda Berman told JI. “Americans want to see Democrats fighting for housing, healthcare, education, economic opportunity and democracy, not fighting about support of our democratic allies abroad.” 

The intra-party fight comes soon after Martin faced criticism from some Jewish leaders for an interview in which Martin fumbled a question about New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani’s refusal to condemn the phrase “globalize the intifada.” 

Democratic National Committee Chairman Ken Martin defended himself on Friday amid criticism that his response to a question about New York City Democratic mayoral nominee Zohran Mamdani’s refusal to condemn the “globalize the intifada” slogan did not sufficiently express his own view that the phrase should be condemned.

“The right-wing lie machine is at it again. That’s not what I said in this interview. I’ve never supported or condoned the phrase ‘globalize the intifada’, a phrase which is reckless and dangerous, as it can been [sic] seen as a green light to terror, and it should be unequivocally condemned,” Martin wrote in a response on X to the Washington Free Beacon.

“Let me be clear, at a time of rising antisemitism, there’s no place for rhetoric that can be seen as a call to violence,” he added.

Several Jewish Democrats and organizations that represent them defended Martin’s handling of the Wednesday “PBS NewsHour” interview fallout.

Halie Soifer, CEO of the Jewish Democratic Council of America, told Jewish Insider on Friday that, “We welcome the clarification from Chair Martin that the phrase ‘globalize the intifada’ is reckless and dangerous because it can be seen as a green light to terror. Chair Martin has never supported or condoned this phrase, and has now made it clear that there’s no place for rhetoric that can be seen as a call to violence in the Democratic Party.”

“He also said that this phrase should be unequivocally condemned, and we would like to see all Democrats do exactly that,” Soifer told JI. 

The Democratic Majority for Israel said in a statement that the group “appreciates the recognition by DNC chair Ken Martin that the phrase ‘Globalize the Intifada’ is a dangerous call to incite violent action against Jews & Israelis.” 

“During the last two intifadas, thousands of innocent Israelis — Arabs and Jews — were victims of Palestinian terrorism. Words have meanings, and the meaning of that phrase is clear to those who have experienced the intifadas. This incitement of violence should never be acceptable and must be condemned unequivocally,” the statement continued.

Martin’s Friday comment was met with criticism from several Jewish Democrats.

Georgia Democratic state Rep. Esther Panitch took issue with the DNC chairman’s response, writing on X, “I am not right-wing, and I know what I heard. You have welcomed the person who refused to condemn the phrase you call dangerous. Why?”

Sara Forman, the executive director of the New York Solidarity Network, an organization representing Jews in New York, criticized Martin in a lengthy X post on Friday for his handling of the interview question and his subsequent tweet clarifying his position. 

“There is no excuse the chair of @TheDemocrats could come up with to put the toothpaste back into the tube. Ken Martin is the chair of the DNC and his idiotic ‘big tent’ comment is now a party position with a high cost – the loss of normal Democrats around the country,” Forman wrote.

“Incumbents will be held accountable for his words against Republican challengers who will make it very difficult and expensive to hold swing districts. And D challengers will be playing right into the hands of their Republican incumbent opponents when they distance themselves from his comments,” she continued. “For a party chair to fundamentally misunderstand his role, which is to fundraise so Democrats can win elections, is insane.”

Ken Martin, the chair of the Democratic National Committee, spent Friday calling Jewish leaders, seeking to reassure them that he does not condone the phrase “globalize the intifada,” two sources with knowledge of the meetings told Jewish Insider. Among the leaders he called were senior officials at the Anti-Defamation League and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. 

The meetings came shortly after a clip of Martin discussing New York City Democratic mayoral nominee Zohran Mamdani went viral online. PBS NewsHour anchor Amna Nawaz asked Martin to respond to concerns from Jewish colleagues that Mamdani’s refusal to condemn the phrase “globalize the intifada” was “very disturbing, potentially dangerous” — and asked Martin outright whether he agreed.

“There’s no candidate in this party that I agree 100 percent of the time with, to be honest with you. There’s things that I don’t agree with Mamdani that he said,” Martin told Nawaz. In the interview, he did not specifically address the “globalize the intifada” language. 

The clip quickly garnered backlash, and on Friday morning Martin began doing damage control. 

“I’ve never supported or condoned the phrase ‘globalize the intifada’, a phrase which is reckless and dangerous, as it can been [sic] seen as a green light to terror, and it should be unequivocally condemned,” Martin wrote in a Friday morning post on X. “Let me be clear, at a time of rising antisemitism, there’s no place for rhetoric that can be seen as a call to violence.” 

In the Friday phone calls, Martin faced criticism from the Jewish leaders, the two sources confirmed. But a DNC senior advisor told JI that Martin made clear he stood with them against the harmful rhetoric. 

“By the end of it there was an understanding that Ken does understand and is aligned with the community and that frankly people want full-throated leadership,” the advisor said. “This language isn’t about Democrats. This is just not acceptable, period, and as a party it’s not acceptable.” 

But Martin still held his fire against Mamdani because Mamdani himself did not utter the phrase “globalize the intifada,” the DNC advisor explained. Rather, Mamdani defended its use by others. 

In the PBS interview, Martin said he is committed to leading a “big tent” party.

“You win by bringing people into your coalition. We have conservative Democrats. We have centrist Democrats. We have labor progressives like me, and we have this new brand of Democrat, which is the leftist,” Martin said. 

Democratic National Committee Chairman Ken Martin declined on Wednesday to criticize New York City Democratic mayoral nominee Zohran Mamdani’s refusal to condemn the “globalize the intifada” slogan. The DNC chair, who was elected earlier this year, praised the party for being a “big tent” comprising different ideologies, including “leftists” such as Mamdani.

Asked during a “PBS NewsHour” interview about concerns from Jewish Democrats regarding Mamdani’s refusal to condemn the phrase, Martin replied, “There’s no candidate in this party that I agree 100 percent of the time with, to be honest with you. There’s things that I don’t agree with Mamdani that he said.”

Martin said that he had learned through his 14 years as chairman of the Minnesota Democratic Party and his tenure at the DNC “that you win through addition. You win by bringing people into your coalition. We have conservative Democrats. We have centrist Democrats. We have labor progressives like me, and we have this new brand of Democrat, which is the leftist.”

“We win by bringing people into that coalition. And at the end of the day, for me, that’s the type of party we’re going to lead. We are a big tent party. Yes, it leads to dissent and debate, and there’s differences of opinions on a whole host of issues. But we should celebrate that as a party and recognize, at the end of the day, we’re better because of it,” Martin said.

Martin also argued that national Democrats could learn from Mamdani’s primary campaign performance in terms of focusing their message away from President Donald Trump and toward a forward-looking vision.

“He campaigned for something. And this is a critical piece. We can’t just be in a perpetual state of resisting Donald Trump. Of course, we have to resist Donald Trump. There’s no doubt about it for all the reasons we just talked about. But we also have to give people a sense of what we’re for, what the Democratic Party is fighting for, and what we would do if they put us back in power,” Martin said.

“One of the lessons from Mamdani’s campaign is that he focused on affordability. He focused on a message that was resonant with voters and he campaigned for something, not against other people or against other things. He campaigned on a vision of how he was going to make New York City a better place to live,” he continued.

Martin praised the methods by which Mamdani’s campaign got its message out.

“The other lessons, of course, is the tactics he used to get his message out, both a very aggressive in-person campaigning, meeting voters where they’re at, and then also in those digital spaces, using very creative messaging to cut through the noise and to get to voters in an inexpensive but authentic way,” he said.

As Ken Martin has emerged as the favored candidate to lead the Democratic National Committee, the longtime Minnesota state party chairman has won backing from a wide range of activists, including critics of Israel and steadfast defenders of the Jewish state — in a coalition his supporters say demonstrates a proven ability to navigate growing internal divisions over Middle East policy that roiled the presidential election.

Martin, 51, has frequently been at the center of ongoing tensions over Israel after Hamas’ Oct. 7 attacks, which fueled protests at the state party convention last year. In Minnesota — where the party’s far-left faction is sizable and outspoken — Martin has forged a delicate balance in handling platform debates on key Middle East issues, while largely resisting anti-Israel demands, according to several Jewish community activists who expressed satisfaction with his leadership.

At the same time, he has also won positive reviews from the Uncommitted movement, a campaign launched during the 2024 Democratic primary protesting the Biden administration’s record on Israel, and other party activists who have favored inviting Israel critics into the Democratic fold, which Martin has called a “big tent” capable of accommodating disagreements on hot-button issues such as the Middle East.

But even as he has managed to collect goodwill from a broad portion of his base in Minnesota and beyond, some skeptics have raised concerns that his ecumenical approach to party infighting could prove untenable at the national level, especially regarding seemingly intractable debates over Israel that have continued to sow division.

His perspective is hardly unique in the DNC chair race, where the top contenders have all embraced a “big-tent” philosophy — including Ben Wikler, the Wisconsin state party leader, and Martin O’Malley, the former governor of Maryland. But as Martin has claimed support from a near-decisive share of party members before the Feb. 1 election, he has yet to definitively clarify how he would negotiate some of the thorniest Middle East policy issues that remain unsettled as Democrats look ahead to future races.

During his tenure as state party chair, a position he has held since 2011, Martin has spoken out against antisemitism and occasionally enforced red lines in debates over Israel, which he visited in 2022. Days after Oct. 7, 2023, for instance, he strongly condemned a local branch of the Democratic Socialists of America for releasing what he called  a “garbage antisemitic statement.”

“‘From the river to the sea’ is a chant used by extremists to support the destruction of Israel,” Martin said in a social media post denouncing the language used by the organization. “It is appalling to embrace this rhetoric in this statement, which also doesn’t even acknowledge the slaughter of Israeli & American civilians. This is disgusting.”

“He’s been in the trenches,” Manny Houle, a pro-Israel strategist who has known Martin for years, said in an interview with Jewish Insider. “On the harder issues that we’ve seen plague Democrats this election cycle, Ken has much more of a kind of broad scope of the issues that the party is facing.”

Meanwhile, at the state party convention last year, many Jewish leaders credited him with preserving pro-Israel resolutions amid a heated platform debate that resulted in just one capitulation, striking an amended line that described “denial of the right of the state of Israel to exist” as a form of antisemitism, which was viewed by Jewish advocates as a major loss.

Martin has also rebuked a pro-Israel state senator, Ron Latz, who shortly after the Hamas attacks faced backlash for claiming that “Palestinian youth dream of the opportunity” to kill “as many Jews as possible.” In a statement that did not directly name Latz but was released amid the controversy over his comments, Martin said “inflammatory rhetoric from elected officials is counterproductive to addressing rising Islamophobia and antisemitism,” and called on the party to “set a better example.”

“He’s been in the trenches,” Manny Houle, a pro-Israel strategist who has known Martin for years, said in an interview with Jewish Insider. “On the harder issues that we’ve seen plague Democrats this election cycle, Ken has much more of a kind of broad scope of the issues that the party is facing.”

Owing to his support for Israel, however, some Jewish party activists said they were thrown by his comments last month at a DNC candidate forum hosted by Young Democrats of America — when he said he believed that a member of the Uncommitted movement, who had faced scrutiny over anti-Israel commentary, “should have been allowed to speak at the [DNC] convention.”

The Democratic Party “should not be afraid of debate or dissent,” Martin argued, noting that his state boasted “the largest Uncommitted caucus” in the country. “That’s what we do in Minnesota,” he told the audience of young activists, some of whom applauded his remarks. “In our party, we have a process that empowers people to organize around issues and not be afraid to stand up for what they believe in, because they will be heard and their voice will matter.”

“I think the issue that he still has in Minnesota and nationally — if he gets elected as the chair — is how do you keep these factions together that seem to be drifting apart on this issue and on the fundamentals of why did we lose the election?” a pro-Israel party organizer in Minneapolis told JI. “That question sort of still has not been decided, and I haven’t really heard anything from Ken in his platform about that.”

One pro-Israel member of Young Democrats of America, who has worked with Martin and views him favorably, said he was “surprised” by Martin’s endorsement of Uncommitted, which advocated for an arms embargo on Israel. “On the one hand, DFL is a big tent,” the party activist reasoned to JI, referring to Minnesota’s Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party. “We still have pro-gun elected Dems, so it fits in with his philosophy in general.”

“On the other hand,” the pro-Israel activist added, speaking anonymously to address the sensitive issue, a national convention held just after former Vice President Kamala Harris had replaced Biden at the top of the Democratic ticket “is not exactly the place for this.”

Though Wikler has also said that the party made a strategic error in refusing to allow a representative of Uncommitted to give remarks at the convention last summer in Chicago, O’Malley, for his part, has criticized that conclusion, arguing he did not feel it was an appropriate venue for the movement to air its disagreements.

Another pro-Israel party organizer in Minneapolis, who also requested anonymity to speak candidly on the DNC race, said that he had interpreted Martin’s comments as “pandering” to a younger crowd as he seeks to shore up support from the activist left. “It’s not necessarily consistent with what he says to other people in different spaces.”

“I think the issue that he still has in Minnesota and nationally — if he gets elected as the chair — is how do you keep these factions together that seem to be drifting apart on this issue and on the fundamentals of why did we lose the election?” the organizer told JI.  “That question sort of still has not been decided, and I haven’t really heard anything from Ken in his platform about that.”

In a statement shared with JI on Wednesday, Martin said the Democratic Party “must always stand against hatred, including antisemitism, and we must call out and fight hatred wherever and whenever we encounter it — no exceptions.”

“I have done that during my time as chair of the Minnesota DFL,” he said, “balancing the right to free expression, and the right to participate in the political process, with what is right. And I will continue to do the same as chair of the DNC. The Democratic Party should also not be afraid of debate and dissent — that is the hallmark of who we are. A good party chair’s job is to find consensus and unity across the big tent of the party. Moving forward, we need to listen and make sure that all voices are being heard.”

Regarding the war between Israel and Hamas, he lamented the “pain” and “destruction” wrought by the conflict, while voicing “hope that the cease-fire and hostage-release agreement secured in the final days of the Biden administration will remain in place.”

“He will not treat criticism of Israel as invalid per se,” Doug Rossinow, a history professor at Metro State University in St. Paul, Minn., explained in an email to JI, noting that Martin “will try to enforce norms that account for the fears, anxieties and anger that this conflict excites — but his aim in doing so will be to make room for both Israel and Palestine advocates in a big tent.”

“With his comments after being sworn in,” Martin added, “many are now concerned whether President Trump will increase the likelihood of the agreement falling apart — we need to work to make sure that doesn’t happen.”

Doug Rossinow, a history professor at Metro State University in St. Paul, Minn., who has written about divisions over Israel within the state party, said that Martin has established a reputation as a “unifier in Minnesota,” making “advocates for both Israel and Palestine in the Democratic Party here feel they’ve been treated fairly and protected against abusive behavior.”

“He will not treat criticism of Israel as invalid per se,” Rossinow explained in an email to JI, noting that Martin “will try to enforce norms that account for the fears, anxieties and anger that this conflict excites — but his aim in doing so will be to make room for both Israel and Palestine advocates in a big tent.”

If Martin “gets the job” that he’s now running for, Rossinow added, “we’ll see how well a Minnesota model can work at the DNC.”

Jacob Frey, the mayor of Minneapolis and a Jewish Democrat who is backing Martin, said that the state party chair has “built out the necessary coalitions” and “understands the direction that we need to go as a party.”

“He has had the guts, has had the courage, to tell people on both sides what they don’t necessarily want to hear, but it’s the truth, and that’s the kind of leader we need right now,” Frey told JI in a recent interview. “I think he’s the right person for the job.”

Still, some grassroots Jewish activists in the state have voiced dissatisfaction with Martin’s handling of Middle East policy conflicts. One pro-Israel party organizer in Minneapolis, who requested anonymity to speak candidly, claimed Martin has “ceded space” to anti-Israel voices who “dominate party positions and elected offices in the city,” while elevating Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN), one of the fiercest critics of Israel in the House, during her primary last cycle. 

“There is no indication that Ken Martin shares their views,” the organizer acknowledged to JI. “He does occasionally go after them on social media. But he has not deployed any of the leadership tools at his disposal to curtail their influence within the party.”

But other Jewish community members recognize that Martin’s role may include backing candidates like Omar because he is a “party man,” according to a Democratic operative in Minneapolis who believes Martin “has been on the right side of” the divide and has “taken actions to defuse” tensions relating to Israel.

Martin has been “a supporter of the U.S.-Israel relationship” and “understands the importance of the U.S.-Israel alliance,” Beth Kieffer Leonard, a Jewish communal leader in Minneapolis, told JI in an email. “Any suggestion to the contrary is not only misinformed, it contradicts my experience working with Ken.”

He also has a personal connection to the Jewish community his supporters frequently cite: Martin’s mother was Jewish, though he was raised Catholic, a spokesperson for his campaign confirmed to JI.

Steve Hunegs, the executive director of the Jewish Community Relations Council of Minnesota and the Dakotas, said that Martin “has been accessible and sympathetic to our concerns,” voicing appreciation for his meeting with Jewish Democrats in the state to discuss their “dismay about the persistence of antisemitism within certain elements of the DFL.”

“Should the DNC elect Ken as its chair,” Hunegs told JI in a statement, “we strongly encourage him to publicly stand against antisemitism — especially when the hate and vitriol comes from the members and leaders within the Democratic Party.”

In addition to pro-Israel Democrats, Martin has also gained support from activists who are eager to push the party away from a traditional Middle East policy platform. A member of Uncommitted who served as a delegate to the DNC said Martin “would be a good fit,” telling Minnesota Public Radio in December he was “certainly fair” to the movement.

James Skoufis, a New York state senator who recently withdrew from the DNC chair race and backed Martin, has argued in favor of engaging anti-Israel voices in party discussions rather than shunning them — a practice he views as consistent with the big-tent approach espoused by the current field of leading candidates.

“Ken knows how important it is to stand against antisemitism, and he has been able to do that while holding our big tent together,” Skoufis said in a text message to JI. “We need to meaningfully engage stakeholders on difficult issues like the conflict in Gaza and better demonstrate empathy, respect and understanding for diverse viewpoints. That’s what a good leader does and that’s what Ken will do.”

Martin has also won backing from James Zogby, a pro-Palestinian activist who supports conditioning aid to Israel. Zogby, president of the Arab American Institute, is now running for vice chair of the DNC.

The DNC chair race features several long-shot candidates including Marianne Williamson, the former presidential candidate; Faiz Shakir, a former campaign manager for Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT); and Nate Snyder, a former Homeland Security official. Jaime Harrison, the current chair, is not seeking reelection.

Marc Broklawski, a vice chair of the Virginia Democratic Party, told JI on Thursday that Martin “understands that supporting Israel’s security and advancing justice aren’t at odds — they’re deeply connected.”

“For Jews like me, it’s clear,” he said. “Ken’s integrity, empathy and ability to unite diverse voices make him uniquely equipped to lead our party forward without leaving anyone behind.”