WarSclerotic

Nearly 300 Congress members declare commitment to ‘unbreakable’ U.S.-Israel bond – Haaretz – Israel News.

Nearly 300 members of Congress have signed on to a declaration reaffirming their commitment to “the unbreakable bond that exists between [U.S.] and the State of Israel”, in a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

The letter was sent in the wake of the severe recent tensions between Israel and the U.S. over the prior’s decision to construct more than 1,600 new housing units in East Jerusalem, a project it announced during U.S. Vice President Joe Biden’s visit to the region.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu took advantage of his trip to the United States this week to try to mend the rift with the Obama administration, but he was greeted with cold welcome by the White House.

Netanyahu also met during his visit with members of Congress, who welcomed him with significantly more warmth.

The letter from Congress expresses its “deep concern” over the U.S.-Israel crisis, and emphasizes that lawmakers had received assurances from Netanyahu that the events leading up to the recent tensions would not be repeated.

Letter from members of Congress

Dear Secretary Clinton:

We are writing to reaffirm our commitment to the unbreakable bond that exists between our country and the State of Israel and to express to you our deep concern over recent tension. In every important relationship, there will be occasional misunderstandings and conflicts.

The announcement during Vice President Biden’s visit was, as Israel’s Prime Minister said in an apology to the United States, “a regrettable incident that was done in all innocence and was hurtful, and which certainly should not have occurred.” We are reassured that Prime Minister Netanyahu’s commitment to put in place new procedures will ensure that such surprises, however unintended, will not recur.

The United States and Israel are close allies whose people share a deep and abiding friendship based on a shared commitment to core values including democracy, human rights and freedom of the press and religion. Our two countries are partners in the fight against terrorism and share an important strategic relationship.

A strong Israel is an asset to the national security of the United States and brings stability to the Middle East. We are concerned that the highly publicized tensions in the relationship will not advance the interests the U.S. and Israel share. Above all, we must remain focused on the threat posed by the Iranian nuclear weapons program to Middle East peace and stability.

From the moment of Israel’s creation, successive U.S. administrations have appreciated the special bond between the U.S. and Israel.

For decades, strong, bipartisan Congressional support for Israel, including security assistance and other important measures, have been eloquent testimony to our commitment to Israel’s security, which remains unswerving.

It is the very strength of this relationship that has, in fact, made Arab-Israeli peace agreements possible, both because it convinced those who sought Israel?s destruction to abandon any such hope and because it gave successive Israeli governments the confidence to take calculated risks for peace.

In its declaration of independence 62 years ago, Israel declared: “We extend our hand to all neighboring states and their peoples in an offer of peace and good neighborliness, and appeal to them to establish bonds of cooperation and mutual help with the sovereign Jewish people settled in its own land.”

In the decades since, despite constantly having to defend itself from attack, Israel has repeatedly made good on that pledge by offering to undertake painful risks to reach peace with its neighbors.

Our valuable bilateral relationship with Israel needs and deserves constant reinforcement.

As the Vice-President said during his recent visit to Israel: “Progress occurs in the Middle East when everyone knows there is simply no space between the U.S. and Israel when it comes to security, none. No space.”

Steadfast American backing has helped lead to Israeli peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan. And American involvement continues to be critical to the effort to achieve peace between Israel and the Palestinians.

We recognize that, despite the extraordinary closeness between our country and Israel, there will be differences over issues both large and small.

Our view is that such differences are best resolved quietly, in trust and confidence, as befits longstanding strategic allies. We hope and expect that, with mutual effort and good faith, the United States and Israel will move beyond this disruption quickly, to the lasting benefit of both nations.

We believe, as President Obama said, that “Israel’s security is paramount” in our Middle East policy and that “it is in U.S. national security interests to assure that Israel?s security as an independent Jewish state is maintained.”

In that spirit, we look forward to working with you to achieve the common objectives of the U.S. and Israel, especially regional security and peace.

Sincerely,

STENY HOYER ERIC CANTOR

HOWARD L. BERMAN ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN

GARY ACKERMAN DAN BURTO

Petraeus to Ashkenazi: I never said Israeli policy endangers U.S. – Haaretz – Israel News.

Commander of the U.S. Military’s Central Command Gen. David Petraeus phoned his Israeli counterpart, Gabi Ashkenazi, this week to deny reports that he had blamed Israeli policy for the failure in a regional solution and for endangering U.S. interests.

Earlier this month, Petraeus warned the Pentagon that “America’s relationship with Israel is important, but not as important as the lives of America’s soldiers,” in a posting on the Foreign Policy Web site.

In a 56-page report, the Central Command had written: “The enduring hostilities between Israel and some of its neighbors present distinct challenges to our ability to advance our interests,” the CENTCOM report read.

Petraeus told reporters on Thursday that the report ? which he claimed had been taken out of context – had been drafted because: “We noted in there that there was a perception at times that America sides with Israel and so forth. And I mean, that is a perception. It is there. I don’t think that’s disputable.”

“But I think people inferred from what that said and then repeated it a couple of times and bloggers picked it up and spun it,” he added. “And I think that has been unhelpful, frankly.”

Responding to questions regarding that report, U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates warned that the ongoing Palestinian-Israeli conflict gave enemies of the two allies the opportunity to “exploit” the lack of a political settlement.

“Lack of progress toward Middle East peace is clearly an issue that is exploited by our adversaries in the region and is a source of certainly political challenge,” said Gates. “Whether it has a direct impact, I’m not entirely sure. But there is no question that the absence of Middle East peace does affect U.S. national security interests in the region.”

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen, meanwhile, told reporters at the same briefing that the relationship between the U.S. Army and the Israel Defense Forces remained “exceptionally” strong.

Mullen added that he had been in contact with IDF Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi twice this week and that the U.S. was concerned with Israel’s security because:

“It is in our national interests obviously or we wouldn’t be so engaged… the United States has considered peace in the Middle East to be a national security interest for decades.”

Also Thursday, th U.S. State Department said that it was still “working on keeping proximity talks moving forward with goal of resuming direct negotiations as soon as possible,” despite the recent tensions between the U.S. and Israel over construction in East Jerusalem

Jamal Abdi: War with Iran by Any Other Name.

This week may be looked back on as the pivotal moment when war with Iran entered the mainstream of political thought in the Obama era. At a time when Iranians are standing up to an Iranian government that has been deprived of the Bush-era shadow of war, that shadow is again emerging.

“Bomb Bomb Iran” may be finally crossing over to the pop charts.

While Iran war rhetoric is nothing new in Washington, for the first time it has been given a vehicle. This week, a resolution in the House of Representatives is being circulated by Texas Republican Louie Gohmert that explicitly endorses an Israeli military strike on Iran if “no other peaceful solution can be found within reasonable time.” The resolution does not specify what peaceful solution its supporters are willing to endorse, what timeframe they would consider “reasonable”, or what kind of “support” the United States would provide to Israel if they bombed Iran. The resolution also does not specify what sort of Israeli military action the U.S. would support.

But in the National Review this week, neoconservative pundit Daniel Pipes raised the specter that, if Israel bombs Iran, it will be with nuclear weapons. Pipes offers this as yet another reason the President must be cajoled into bombing Iran first (he has previously urged that Obama attack Iran to win reelection).

This was also the week that AIPAC convened its annual conference in Washington, in which many of the speakers, including U.S. lawmakers, focused on the importance of imposing “crippling sanctions” on Iran and rallied AIPAC members to lobby Congress on this point. While it was the “crippling” gasoline sanctions that were on the marquee, the conference’s subtext was clearly war.

“To our friends in Israel, to AIPAC,” Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina proclaimed to the conference on Monday, “Congress has your back!”

“All options must be on the table. And you know what option I’m talking about,” Graham declared.

“When you talk about war you should never talk about it with a smile on your face. But sometimes it’s better to go to war than it is to allow the holocaust to develop a second time,” asserted Graham, thus reducing the debate on Iran policy to a false choice between all out war or a second holocaust.

And then, having committed himself to the former option, Graham laid the groundwork for his vision for war.

If military options go forward, Graham said, “The Iranian government’s ability to wage conventional warfare against its neighbors and our troops in the region should not exist; they should not have one plane that can fly or ship that can float.”

Whether this message was intended for Israeli generals or for American war planners, Graham’s message was clear–a military option must be “decisive” and the U.S. and Israel need to act soon because “we do not have time on our side”.

“I hope and pray that other options will work,” Graham insisted. “I hope and pray that is not the option we have to seek.” But if figures like Graham are so hopeful that other options will work, it is odd that they have worked so effectively to systematically undercut and eliminate those other options every step of the way.

Already, multilateral sanctions the Obama Administration is attempting to construct with partners and at the U.N. have been declared dead before arrival. Prior to that, it was the engagement track that was prematurely eulogized after a mere twelve weeks. And once “crippling sanctions” are circumscribed to an artificial timeline and fail to miraculously fix everything, we will soon have exhausted our entire diplomatic playbook with remarkable swiftness. The path will be cleared for war.

This is not keeping all options on the table, this is clearing the table for only one option.

On Sunday, Michael Makovsky, foreign policy director of the Bipartisan Research Center, revealed the true pathway upon which “crippling sanctions” will place the U.S. In a column in the San Francisco Chronicle, Makovsky clearly connected the dots between a “crippling” gasoline embargo and war with Iran.

The President, Makovsky said, should “beef up” the U.S. naval presence in the Persian Gulf so that “the U.S. Navy could then blockade Iran to enforce sanctions on gasoline imports passed by both houses of Congress.”

In order to enforce “crippling sanctions”, then, a naval blockade will be necessary. And while Makovsky does not call this blockade “war”, a naval blockade is an act of war by accepted international legal standards. Hence, while one can call it “the naval blockade option”, as Lindsey Graham would say “you know what option I’m talking about.”

Thus, we have policymakers and pundits claiming an aversion to war, talking about not talking about war with a smile on their face, and yet their solution is merely to call the pathway to war by a different name.

In committing only to pushing forward the most draconian sanctions available, they avoid a true assessment of what will be the cost–derailing diplomatic options, burning bridges with our allies, and helping snuff out Iran’s opposition movement.

The abysmal effort that has been invested in avoiding a war scenario makes it challenging to accept the premise that these policymakers are actually committed to war as only a last option. Hoping and praying is not sufficient. If we know “bomb bomb Iran” is next on the playlist, it is time to get serious and figure out how to change the station.

Alalam.
Thu, 25 Mar 2010 16:12:22 GMT

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Thursday slammed Western countries over stirring up “too much fuss” over Iran nuclear issue, a day after big powers failed to reach agreement on further sanctions on the country.

“They are saying we are worried that Iran may be building a bomb,” Ahmadinejad said in a speech at the inauguration of a new dam in southwest Iran.

“But we are saying you have built it and even used it. So who should be worried? We or you? They are just making a fuss. They have ended up humiliating themselves,” he added.

“Let me tell you, the era when they could hurt the Iranian nation is over. The Iranian nation is at such a height that their evil hands can’t touch it,” he said.

Meanwhile, senior officials from the United States, Russia, France, Britain, China and Germany failed to agree on sanctions against the Islamic republic in Wednesday’s conference call.

China took part in the call and appealed for more diplomacy to resolve the issue on Thursday.

“China urges all sides to use diplomatic means to peacefully resolve the Iranian nuclear issue through dialogue and negotiation,” foreign ministry spokesman Qin Gang told reporters in Beijing.

“This is the best choice and it conforms to the interests of all sides as well as peace and stability in the region.”

Israel, the Middle East’s sole possessor of nuclear bombs, and the United States have several times threatened to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities.

The West accuses Tehran of seeking to develop nuclear weapons, while Iran strongly denies the accusation.

Tehran says its nuclear program is aimed at making nuclear fuel for civilian purposes, particularly generating electricity for its growing population.

Iran further seeks to enrich uranium for a nuclear research reactor in Tehran.

Netanyahu to AIPAC: Stop Iran or Israel Will – Joel C. Rosenberg – The Corner on National Review Online.

Tuesday, March 23, 2010

Netanyahu to AIPAC: Stop Iran or Israel Will [Joel C. Rosenberg]

After the worst week in U.S.-Israel relations in 35 years, Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu came to Washington Monday and gave a powerful and effective speech at the AIPAC gala dinner at the Washington Convention Center, warning the world to stop Iran — or Israel will — and respectfully but directly challenging the Obama administration on Jerusalem and the peace process.

Netanyahu received scores of standing ovations from the 7,800 guests in attendance, the biggest event in the history of AIPAC (the American Israel Public Affairs Committee). More than half of the members of the U.S. House and Senate were there, as were ambassadors from more than fifty countries and many top Israeli officials, including defense minister Ehud Barak and opposition leader Tzipi Livni. The longest and most sustained came when the prime minister firmly resisted the policy of President Obama, who seeks to divide Jerusalem and stop Israel from building “settlements” in East Jerusalem.

“Jerusalem is not a settlement,” said Netanyahu. “It is our capital.”

Netanyahu’s strategy in rebuilding U.S.-Israel relations is now clear. Reduce tensions with the president and executive branch if at all possible, but focus on speaking directly to the American people and strengthening the truly pro-Israel end of Pennsylvania Avenue: Congress.

Most stunning line of the night: To the surprise of many at the dinner, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) conceded that when it comes to Iran, “Diplomacy has failed.” We all know this to be true, but it has not yet been said so clearly and publicly by such a high-ranking Democrat and close supporter of President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Will Schumer’s analysis be taken up by fellow Democrats? This remains to be seen, but if it is, it could have dramatic implications for Washington’s next steps towards Iran. Schumer urged the administration to keep the military option open, but he stressed hitting Iran with crippling economic sanctions immediately. A bill he has co-sponsored to help cut off gas supplies to Iran (Iran imports 45 percent of its gasoline) passed the Senate on January 28th, he noted. It is now being reconciled with the House version. It should go to the president for signature soon, and he demanded the president move decisively with “immediate implementation.”

The most sobering speech of the night was that of Sen. Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.), who spoke the truth more clearly and succinctly than anyone else when he noted that this could be the last annual AIPAC conference before Iran gets the Bomb. He said that while he hopes war won’t be necessary — he also supports crippling economic sanctions against Iran — the U.S. needs to urgently prepare for the possibility of launching massive airstrikes to stop Tehran from building and deploying nuclear weapons.

What Will Happen If the World Does Not Stop Iran?
The desire of Radical Islam to annihilate Israel was the first issue Netanyahu raised, and rightly so. “Iran’s rulers say, ‘Israel is a one bomb country,’” the prime minister noted. “The head of Hezbollah says, ‘If all the Jews gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide.’”

Netanyahu called on the world “to act swiftly and decisively” to thwart Iran’s nuclear ambitions, but he made it clear that if the world does not stop Iran, Israel reserves the right to safeguard her people from another Holocaust.

“The greatest threat to any living organism or nation is not to recognize danger in time,” the prime minister said in his speech’s most sobering moment. “Seventy-five years ago, many leaders around the world put their heads in the sand. Untold millions died in the war that followed. Ultimately, two of history’s greatest leaders helped turn the tide. Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Winston Churchill helped save the world. But they were too late to save six million of my own people. The future of the Jewish state can never depend on the goodwill of even the greatest of men. Israel must always reserve the right to defend itself.”

What Have the Palestinian Leaders Done for Peace?
That said, given the brouhaha in the past week between the U.S. and Israel, Netanyahu’s central message naturally focused on his country’s deep and substantive commitment to making peace. He noted that his government has repeatedly called on the Palestinians to come to the negotiating table without preconditions, to no effect.

“From Day One, we called on the Palestinian Authority to begin peace negotiations without delay,” he said. “I make that same call today. President Abbas, come and negotiate peace. Leaders who truly want peace should sit down face-to-face.”

Netanyahu pointed out that his government has dismantled several hundred roadblocks and checkpoints in the West Bank to enable the easier flow of people, goods, and services, and that this has lead to dramatic economic growth in Judea and Samaria. He noted that his government announced last year “an unprecedented moratorium on new Israeli construction in Judea and Samaria.”

“This is what my government has done for peace,” said Netanyahu. “What has the Palestinian Authority done for peace?”

The answer, according to Netanyahu: The Palestinian Authority has “placed preconditions on peace talks”; they have “waged a relentless international campaign to undermine Israel’s legitimacy”; they have “promoted the notorious Goldstone report that falsely accuses Israel of war crimes”; they have “continued incitement against Israel — a few days ago, a public square near Ramallah was named after a terrorist who murdered 37 Israeli civilians, including 13 children. The Palestinian Authority did nothing to prevent it.”

Why Does Israel Face a ‘Triple Standard’?
The prime minister thanked the United States for six decades of a strong and enduring relationship, based on shared values and common interests. He mentioned specific ways that the U.S. and Israel work together to advance freedom and fight fanaticism. But he also noted that while Israel has its imperfections and welcomes and appreciates sincere and honest criticism from its friends, “Israel should be judged by the same standards applied to all nations, and allegations against Israel must be grounded in fact.”

Going off text, he then asked why Israel faces a “triple standard” in the world. There is, he said, one standard for dictatorships, another for democracies, and a third for Israel.

A case in point, of course, is the U.N.’s pernicious and anti-Semitic Goldstone Commission Report which condemns Israel for committing so-called “war crimes” for defending her innocent civilians from 10,000-plus rocket attacks from Hamas terrorists in Gaza while for years the U.N. did nothing to stop those rocket attacks and barely holds Hamas to account for those attacks.

Outreach to Evangelicals
Finally, it should be noted that several years ago, to their credit, the leadership of AIPAC decided to make a conscious effort to reach out to pro-Israel evangelical Christian leaders and activists. I am so glad they did. Last night, there were 130 evangelical leaders present to show unconditional love and unwavering support to the Jewish people and the state of Israel. In the future, I hope more Christian leaders attend and build bridges to AIPAC and the Jewish community.

My wife and I met numerous religious and secular Jews last night (as we did last year) who are profoundly grateful for the support of evangelicals. One Orthodox Jewish woman told my wife and me, “You Christians are the best friends Israel has. You’re the only friends we really have.”

It remains to be seen whether Prime Minister Netanyahu’s “Washington blitz” will avert a coming train wreck between his government and the Obama administration over Iran, Jerusalem, and the peace process. But he is right to speak directly to the American people and to Israel’s friends in Congress. Indeed, he and his government should do much more, including a steady stream of major addresses to pro-Israel groups of Jews and Christians throughout the United States.

— Joel C. Rosenberg is the New York Times–best-selling author of seven novels and non-fiction books about Israel, including Epicenter and Inside the Revolution. He served as an aide to Mr. Netanyahu in 2000.

03/23 02:57 PMShare