Solarz' Indian Dreams Dashed

by Paul Findley

Last October, a New York City weekly newspaper that specializes in news related to India reported unusual delay in the long expected formal nomination of former Congressman Stephen J. Solarz, for many years Capitol Hill's leading proponent of Israeli interests, as President Bill Clinton's ambassador to New Delhi.

According to the report, the appointment was anything but certain. Solarz had been given a desk at the State Department but, suggesting big trouble, the administration had not sent a notice of intent to New Delhi, a notification that normally is made in advance of ambassadorial appointments.

Two days later syndicated columnist Robert D. Novak reported, "New York Democrats this past week were informed that after routine FBI investigation Solarz was out of the picture–totally and permanently." The New Yorkers were told that Solarz will not be named to "the promised post of ambassador to India or to any other federal job."

On Sept. 13, Solarz, bubbling with excitement over the prospect of becoming "Mr. Ambassador," witnessed the historic handshake between Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat on the south lawn of the White House. He shouted his congratulations to me, as if I deserved credit for the occasion! New York Senator Patrick Moynihan and others present chuckled over whether India, with its billion-plus population, is large enough to contain Solarz' energies.

Now, Solarz' dreams are dashed. It's been a bad two years for the hardworking, peripatetic legislator.

Before the 1992 elections, Solarz' future seemed secure. In five easy campaigns for re-election in his heavily Jewish Brooklyn district, he had worked hard and successfully in securing contributions for future election campaign needs. He didn't need the money and allowed it to accumulate year after year until, in early 1992, it topped $2 million, an all-time high for members of the House of Representatives.

The first hard blow came when the congressional district he had represented for 10 years was divided into six parts, with each part added to an adjoining district. Eager to stay in the House of Representatives, Solarz decided that his best bet was to seek nomination and election in a near by district in which Hispanic citizens predominate. It has few Jews. To win, Solarz would have to defeat five other candidates, each with Hispanic ancestry.

Solarz brought to the contest more than 20 years of legislative experience, debating skills, and the considerable advantage of seniority. If re-elected, he would be the number two Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, with a good prospect of later becoming chairman.

His campaign fund was greater than the aggregate of all five opponents, and he was accused of trying to buy a congressional seat that rightfully belonged to an Hispanic. Years of high-decibel support for Israel and no record of attention to Hispanic interests were a major problem.

Through the years, he was unabashedly pro-Israel. In a public hearing one day on legislation to extend U.S. aid to Israel, he demanded to know: "Is there anything that the Israelis want from us, or could conceivably want from us that they weren't able to get [in pending legislation]?" Assured by the presiding congressman that the legislation had actually been cleared with the Israeli embassy, Solarz relaxed with this astounding observation: "If they have no problem with it, there is no reason for us to. " It would be difficult to construct a dialogue more blatantly biased for the interests of a foreign country.

But his mishandling of personal finances was likely the worst obstacle in his ill-fated campaign for re-election to Congress as well as his subsequent quest for a diplomatic post. The New York Times, which over the years had carried abundant positive publicity about his exploits for Israel, published an article about his bad debts. Despite the generous congressional salary and the earnings of his wife, Solarz had established a record of not paying bills and one creditor even brought a lawsuit against him.

Still worse, he emerged as one of the worst offenders in the highly publicized scandal two years ago over abuse of the House bank. In recent years, he had written 743 overdrafts on his personal account at the bank. While he eventually made good on all of the overdrafts, the level of these abuses aroused broad protest. He lost the nomination.

With the election of Bill Clinton as president, Solarz began an aggressive campaign to win a major foreign policy position in the new administration. He openly sought appointment as secretary of state, then shifted to the position of permanent U.S. representative at the United Nations. Those efforts failing, he sought selection as ambassador to Japan. When that position went to former Vice President Walter Mondale, Solarz turned his attention to India and emerged as the leading candidate. Pending the normal FBI check into his background, Solarz occupied a temporary office in the State Department and awaited presidential orders to go to New Delhi.

What went wrong? It wasn't lack of partisan credentials: a lifelong Democrat, Solarz had almost always cooperated with party leaders on Capitol Hill and elsewhere. It wasn't lack of experience and competence in foreign affairs: Solarz has visited–and studied–almost every nation on earth, including such normally inaccessible places as North Korea. Even his critics view him as one of the most knowledgeable members of Congress.

A Record of Mismanagement

While the details of the FBI check will never be fully disclosed, it is likely that his long record of sloppy management of personal finances contributed to his downfall. Fresh in mind is Clinton's early difficulty with poorly screened nominations for major positions, particularly his recommendation of Zoe Baird to be attorney general. The nomination was withdrawn after the disclosure that Baird had violated the law in hiring domestic help.

Solarz has many faults. He is aggressive in the extreme. Infuriatingly so, at times. His devotion to Israel is excessive.

Still, he moved far beyond Middle East issues. Years ago, he won–and deserved–applause in taking on the pro-Greek lobby in a successful campaign to preserve U.S. aid to Turkey. Three years ago, he joined Republican leader Bob Michel and helped to frustrate the Democratic leadership by supporting the resolution in the House of Representatives that endorsed the U.S. assault on Iraqi forces in Operation Desert Storm. The House was at its best in that debate, and Solarz' closing argument was one of the highlights.

He worked hard, pressed hard, and climbed high. He was always in a hurry. In dealings with his staff and colleagues he was an unrelenting taskmaster. His congressional office always hummed with activity.

He pushed his causes and himself in the extreme. In 22 years in Congress, I encountered no one who worked harder on legislative issues. All of this served to make his plummet prominent and inglorious.

There is epic tragedy in his unceremonious exit from the national scene. The Clinton administration is thoroughly justified in refusing to place in charge of a major embassy someone with a long record of dodging creditors and writing overdrafts, but I cannot exult in Solarz' misfortune.

Over the years I became a regular sparring partner with Solarz, appearing frequently on television and radio shows, as well as in the work of Congress. In a review in Washington Jewish Week he attacked my book They Dare to Speak Out.

I took no offense.

We almost always took opposing positions in debate, but his public arguments often reflected his constituency rather than personal conviction. One day he confided: "If Middle East issues were left to the two of us, we could solve most of them in a hurry." As with most congressmen, political survival came first.

Is Solarz barred from all federal positions, as the news report indicated? Probably not. Along with other unusual characteristics, he has a rare level of stubbornness. In addition, as one who has carried the Israeli torch loyally and effectively for years, he has a lot of blue chips to cash in.

Former Congressman Paul Findley is chairman of the Council for the National Interest, a membership organization in Washington, DC.