Israeli diplomats, AIPAC, and other groups on the American Jewish and Christian right are learning a tough lesson today: Be careful what you tell Congress to do on Israel, because it might come back to bite you.
For months they have been whipping Congress into a state of hysteria over the Palestinian plan to go to the UN. They mustered bipartisan near-unanimity around the proposition that if the Palestinians didn't back off, U.S. aid to the Palestinian Authority (PA) would be cut off -- a message formalized in House and Senate resolution, in letters from House appropriators, in the FY12 Foreign Operations Appropriations bill and in statements delivered by members.
But a House hearing last week on aid to the Palestinians highlighted the growing realization of what cutting off aid to the PA would mean for Israel: an end to security cooperation that has allowed Israel to enjoy historically low levels of violence and the collapse of the PA.
Veteran Israel hardliner and neocon Eliot Abrams told the committee that he was not in favor of cutting aid to the PA. David Makovsky of the Washington Institute of Near East Policy -- a think tank closely aligned with AIPAC -- argued that the group that would gain the most from a cut off of aid to the PA would be Hamas. Jonathan Schanzer from the neocon Foundation for the Defense of Democracy suggested that the impact of cutting aid would be "devastating." Shortly thereafter, news broke that Israel is calling for the international community to continue aid to the Palestinians, as made explicit in an Israeli report presented at a donors conference at the UN on September 18, which stated, "Israel calls for ongoing international support for the PA budget and development projects..."
Will Congress now re-think and retract its threat to cut off aid to the PA? Perhaps, but only if the government of Israel, AIPAC, et al give members of Congress the necessary political cover.
These are difficult times for members of Congress who genuinely care about Israel -- because more than at any time in the past, Israel has been turned into a partisan football. House Republicans, egged on not only by AIPAC, but by the likes of ECI , the RJC, the ZOA, and CUFI, have eagerly seized any pretext to attack the president and Democrats for not being "pro-Israel" enough -- often endorsing positions that are extreme even by Israeli standards. This tendency was on display with Rep. Walsh's (Tea Party-IL) recent introduction of a resolution endorsing Israeli annexation of the West Bank.
Many Democrats have played the same game, tacking ever-further to the right to prove that they are no less "pro-Israel" than their Republican counterparts -- even at the expense of President Obama's peace efforts (and Israel's best interests). This phenomenon was on stark display with Rep. Israel's (D-NY) introduction of a bill seeking to cut off military aid to any country that votes for a Palestinian initiative at the UN.
The government of Israel, AIPAC, et al have recklessly encouraged this trend, heedless of the danger posed by a Congress whose members are more interested in outflanking each other with dogmatically hawkish positions than they are in what is genuinely good for Israel (and the United States).
With the issue so politicized, the normal exit strategies are not available. In the past, Congress might have passed the buck to the president, passing legislation cutting off aid to the Palestinians, but giving the president waiver authority. Such a scenario seems unlikely today. Republicans in this Congress have shown an unwillingness to give the president unfettered waiver authority when it comes to Middle East aid. Given their fervor for cutting funding for pretty much everything (except Israel), getting GOP members, and particularly Israel's new best friends in the Tea Party, to support a waiver could prove difficult.
Democrats in Congress would (correctly) view a waiver-based solution as a trap. Republicans in Congress would claim tough pro-Israel credentials for imposing sanctions, and then paint the president -- and Democrats in general -- as not "pro-Israel" if the president were to exercise the waiver. As we enter an election year, it seems unlikely that Democrats would allow this to happen.
Which takes us back to today's lesson for the government of Israel and AIPAC, et al. They are the ones who pushed Congress to climb this "pro-Israel-means-cutting-Palestinian-aid" tree. Now, if they truly care about Israel and not just about partisan game-playing on the issue, they will have to provide a ladder for Congress to climb down.
Follow Lara Friedman on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Lara_APN
Mira Sucharov: Laughing Our Way Through the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict
Steve Clemons: Obama Tells Palestinians to Stay in Back of the Bus
And, if the neocons want to fund the unelected Abbas, red flags should be warning all that this may not be in the interests of anyone. Neocons have a failed track record that begs us to do the opposite of what they propose.
Bottom line is that Israel exploits the rightwing Christian nutcases for funding and I have no idea why our relationship with them is so important. They are hardly the lynchpin to peace in the region and are far more bellicose and aggressive than other countries there that would make better peace partners.
We send billions in aid to Israel and I don't see what we get back from it... We could spend those billions on our unemployed, our schools, our infrastructure, our back to work programs, etc..... and get far more out of it than we get with funding Israel's oppression of Palestinians...
When did Netanyahu "boast" of his ability to manipulate the US?
Who called for war with Iran?
It seems the US and Israel are bonded bytheir common world outlook, their democratic states and the Judao Christian heritage.
But then there's always someone like you shrilly calling for an end to support for Israel.
Your statement that Israel is "far more bellicose ad aggressive than other countries there"- would you include Saudi Arabia that funded and trained the terrorists who blew up the World Trade Center? Arabs were behind the very invention of terror.
I suggest you pick your allies among the Moslem regions;t hen you shall see how well they pay you back.
But what really grinds my gears is how often this notion of a "backfiring" strategy is invoked, when Jews are involved. And this is not just confirmed to Mid East politics. Far from it. I have heard this concept, really a veiled warning throughout my career. Whenever anyone does not like the fact that I have just out maneuvered them. Once in a great while they are right. Most of the time they are just flapping gums. And I am so sick of hearing it that I would rather be wrong and take my chances then be intimidated.
"When Jews are involved"-- can you expand upon what Jews do that non Jews don't do?
Thank you.
Israel should put an end to the settlements now, and make peace, before they truly ARE isolated. People world wide generally do not have a problem with Israel, they have a problem with the settlements.
That is, in fact my point (I thought that was self evident).
Our wonderful representatives in Congress will forget about Israel (and the entire middle east) almost immediately, after it actually becomes COSTLY to them to support them. Now, there is only upside ( by either actual gain or avoiding punishment) in being mindlessly anti Israel.
Try suggesting that we go back into an entire REGION of the world that has sunk into post oil Chaos, and spend literally trillions trying to safeguard the Israelis, who have, like drug addicts, spit in our presidents face when asked to stop their illegal settlements, but still demand their money and arms fix so that they can continue on the path of eventual suicide.
I wish Israel well; the part of it on 67 borders, that is. I wish the settlers a hasty exit from their illegal endeavors, and I hope this is the beginning of that. They are the enemies of Israel, of the Palestinians, the US and the entire region, as all fanatics (like al qeada) are. God willing, they will see the light long before they are finally at long last left to their own devices. In the post oil Chaos, they could be a major help to the entire region, or the doomed scape goat for all regional problems.
It's so Machiavellian.
Big tent doesn't mean neoconservatives pulling the strings of your tent. Democrats need to make it a hostile workplace for neocons.
Can you source your claim?
Politicians competing to prove who is more pro-Israel don't care one wit about Israel. They only care about AI PAC money and staying in office.
Cutting off aid to any nation that votes against the interests of Israel? Doesn't that imply that the reason we gave aid to those nations to begin with was to benefit Israel?
I would like to see our elected representatives putting America and our Values first.
'The test of every American policy in the ME is whether it is consistent with the goal of ensuring Israel’s future as a secure, Jewish, democratic state. That is a commitment that runs as a common thread through our entire government."
http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2011/09/14/us-ambassador-support-for-israel-drives-all-us-mideast-policies/
What value does this personal attack add to the discourse?
What evidence, wisdom, or knowledge do you add?
Is this what support for Israel has sunk to? Are people like you their last hope?
Sam, you've said this line several times in the comment section.....I think you should know it is a lie. The VAST majority of the U.S. wants us to be neutral. Only the ignorant like yourself support the racist policies of a theocracy that occupies it's neighbors based on their theocratic view of the world. If you support them so much, go live there! And if you don't think our Congress is bought not just be AIPAC but by many, I have a spaceship to sell you sight unseen.
Cutting off your nose to spite your face is mild compared to what the US is doing to itself in the ME.
Bibi and Congress have made POTUS and SOS irrelevant, regardless who is in charge in January 2013. This is why China can ignore the US, it knows that the US can do nothing to China, no matter how much China damages the US.
By January 2013, China will have even more power, Egypt and Turkey will be fiercely anti-Israel and anti-US as well as most of the rest of the ME. It is very likely that the Kings of Jordan and Saudi Arabia have had to more fast and furiously to the anti-Israel camp to keep from ending up like the rest of the leaders in the ME (either that or they will be gone). No one will even let a US diplomat visit, let alone listen to them.
Basically, by punishing the ME for the very real sins of Israel, the US is throwing away what little power it has left.
If the US wants to retain some power, it needs to throw Israel under the bus as quickly and as hard as possible.
Because if it doesn't, then whoever is the POTUS in 2013, will be impotent and irrelevant to the entire world, not just the ME. The US will have succeeded in destroying its power base faster than any other country in history.
What UN resolution has Israel violated?
With the Pals it is not a matter of being in violation of agreements, they are always on the right side where people like you are concerned.
No objectivity, 1deep. Sad.