March 1990, Page 14

Words To Remember

Senator Robert Dole (Jan. 16):

"Let's not have Congress do everything. Let's give the President flexibility. It might mean that a country like Israel, they're going to have some problems with resettling immigrants coming from the Soviet Union. They're going to have housing problems. We're going to be asked to help. I'm working with Senator Inouye on that right now. So it's not a hostile effort, just trying to make a point that we need to look everywhere to help these emerging democracies and also help those countries we've helped in the past."

US State Dept. Spokesperson Margaret Tutwiler (Jan. 16):

"I'm not sending a message to anyone, to any country. And that's why we were very specific to say that this was a problem, as we see it, aimed at the system, not at any one country."

American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) statement (Jan. 16):

"We should not hurt our existing, vulnerable democratic allies in the process of helping potential democracies. Instead we should look toward strengthening the tools of diplomacy by increasing the foreign assistance account."

Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (Jan. 17):

"I think we need to sit down and discuss this situation."

Yosef Beh-Aharon, aide to Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir (Jan. 17):

"We are having to drain money from our military budget to funnel to the Soviet Jews. A cut in aid will make this very difficult.”

Israeli Communications Minister Gad Yaacobi (Jan. 17):

"It will have a very negative effect on the Israeli economy. The Israeli public will be less amenable to give concessions on the peace process."

Israeli Vice Premier Shimon Peres (Jan. 17):

"There is totally no justification to deal a blow to us instead of just dividing it up a little bit with the Europeans."

Robert K. Lifton, American Jewish Congress president (Jan. 17):

"Cutting five percent of foreign aid to ... Israel, Egypt, Turkey and the Philippines in favor of Eastern Europe will be harmful to our [US] credibility."

House Minority Whip Newt Gingrich (R-GA) (Jan. 17):

"It is the right thing to ask ... to rethink the level of our commitment."

Senator Phil Gramm (R-TX) (Jan. 17):

"I don't see taking support from our old friends to give to our new friends. I don't believe we should be lessening aid to the Middle East at a time when the challenge to them is the greatest."

New York Times Editorial (Jan. 17):

"The question of Israel is the trickiest, diplomatically and politically ... Would reduced aid speed the Middle East peace talks? Mr. Dole and others in Congress are fed up with Prime Minister Shamir's glacial pace. But reducing aid could cause Mr. Shamir to dig in his heels and rally Israelis behind him."

New York Times columnist R.W. Apple, Jr. (Jan. 19):

"Many in Washington who were once automatic backers of Israel now dare to say they are disgusted with the Shamir government, and

Senator Robert Dole's Foreign Aid Reduction Proposal:

Defense Minister Yitzhak Rabin said today he was worried about the future, even though he had 'reason to believe' American assistance would hold steady through next year."

Syndicated columnist Patrick J. Buchanan (Jan. 21):

"What vital US interest is served by sending $1.2 billion a year in economic aid to a Likud-led regime whose behavior on the West Bank would trigger a US embargo if conducted by Mikhail Gorbachev to keep control of Lithuania?"

New York Times correspondent Thomas L. Friedman (Jan. 21):

"Many congressmen think Israel's annual $3 billion allocation has become an entitlement program Jerusalem takes for granted, and they quietly cheered Mr. Dole's suggestion to do something about it."

Washington Post correspondent Charles Krauthammer (Jan. 23):

"What kind of message does it send to American allies and adversaries around the world when those countries that most identify with the United States and its interests are precisely the ones whose aid is cut?"

President George Bush (Jan. 25):

"Let me reiterate my philosophical approval for the Bob Dole position, which is to give the President more flexibility on this concept of earmarking."

Paul Schamm, Washington representative of American Friends for Peace Now, quoted in Washington Jewish Week (Jan. 25):

"I think Dole is putting himself out ahead of the others who feel similarly but won't say so. A year from now Dole won't be the only one. We oppose cutting aid, of course. But I think you're just seeing the very tip of frustration with Israel ... I think sooner or later it will translate into aid."

Washington Jewish Week editorial (Jan. 25):

"This, we suspect, is another signal in a long series of signals that George Bush may be about to abandon Ronald Reagan's vision of Israel as a favored ally whose aid is inviolate and whose mistakes and indiscretions are to be forgiven and overlooked. Indeed, our concern is that, with the changing East-West geopolitical scene, the Bush administration may grow increasingly impatient with Jerusalem."

Representative Ben Gilman (R-NY), quoted in The Jewish Week (Jan. 26):

"Aid for Israel is vulnerable at every stage of the process.”

William Schneider, American Enterprise Institute senior policy analyst, quoted in The Washington Post (Feb. 6):

"Dole's proposal isn't really about foreign aid. It's about Israel's continual blocking of the Baker peace plan, and to a lesser extent, Eastern Europe and presidential prerogatives over foreign policy.”

Senator Robert Dole, quoted in The Washington Post (Feb. 6):

"It's a big program, and why shouldn't we look at $3 billion almost $4 billion going to Israel?"

Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Robert Byrd (Feb. 7):

"Some countries, certainly the largest of our historic aid recipients, can probably take cuts substantially larger than five percent. Somewhere between 10 percent and 20 percent would be more realistic."