Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, May/June 1998, Pages 22, 89

Congress Watch

Israeli Lobbying Shows Uncommon Subtlety

By Shirl McArthur

In the face of increasing reports that the Clinton administration was preparing to publicize the so-called American peacemaking package in an effort to step up pressure on Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to revive the peace process, Israel launched a full-scale public relations and lobbying blitz in March and April reminiscent of its earlier efforts to halt aircraft sales to Saudi Arabia.

The outline of the administration package was presented to Netanyahu and Palestinian Authority (PA) President Yasser Arafat during their meetings with President Bill Clinton in January. At that time, Arafat said that he accepted the administration’s approach, but he feared that Netanyahu would use it as a pretext for non-compliance with what had already been agreed to.

By mid-February, rumors began to circulate that Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Martin Indyk were urging Clinton to go public with the plan, in an effort to restart negotiations. At that point, Israel cranked up the machinery, and Netanyahu sent his foreign affairs adviser, Uzi Arad, to lobby key congressmen to quietly pressure Clinton not to go public with the plan.

The Israeli efforts apparently were successful. By the time Indyk met with the House International Relations Committee and the Senate Foreign Relations Middle East Subcommittee on March 10 and 11 (see separate article on the hearings), he was prepared to say, in response to specific questions from committee members in both the House and the Senate, that the administration had no plans to go public with its proposal.

However, the rumors persisted, and by late March Netanyahu stepped up the pressure. He spoke at length with Clinton by telephone on March 19 and 21, and he sent Israeli cabinet members and American Jewish leaders to Washington to tell anyone who would listen that the administration was on a collision course with Israel. Nevertheless, on March 26 The Washington Post reported that Clinton had decided in principle to go ahead and make the proposal public.

At this point, Netanyahu uncharacteristically shifted gears and moved from the typical Israeli sledgehammer approach to what can only be called a “good guy-bad guy” approach. The “bad guys” were all the usual suspects: Sens. Joseph Lieberman (D-CT) and Connie Mack (R-FL), Reps. Eliot Engel (D-NY), Bill Paxon (R-NY), Steve Rothman (D-NJ), and Jim Saxton (R-NJ), B’nai B’rith, AIPAC, a majority of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, and even a Zionist extremist group called the American Friends of Families Victims of Oslo.

Unwitting Pawns?

The “good guys,” many of whom may have been unwitting pawns in this campaign by Israel and American friends of Israel, were Sens. Carl Levin (D-MI), Joseph Biden (D-DE), and Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D-SD), Reps. Sam Gejdenson (D-CT), Lee Hamilton (D-IN), David Obey (D-WI), and House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt (D-MO), plus a minority of the Conference of Presidents, especially Seymour Reich, president of the American Zionist movement.

On April 5 the “bad guys” swung into action with a very strong letter to Clinton, sponsored by Lieberman and Mack and signed by 81 senators. It claimed that Israel had kept the promises it made at Oslo, but that the Palestinians had not kept their security promises and that Arafat had refused to conclude negotiations on the remaining interim status issues. The letter urged Clinton not to go public with “a peace proposal which is known to be unacceptable to Israel.”

At the same time, Engel, Paxon, Rothman and Saxton were circulating an almost identical letter in the House for signatures. (As of late April, however, the House letter still had not been sent, although more than 120 congressmen had signed it.)

Simultaneously, B’nai B’rith placed a large ad in The Washington Post and other newspapers congratulating the senators for their letter, and more than a two-thirds majority of the Conference of Presidents agreed to write to each of the 81 senators thanking them for the letter, and to Clinton thanking him for not going public with his proposal.

[The 19 senators who did not sign the hard-line letter were Spencer Abraham (R-MI), Daniel Akaka (D-HI), Biden, Jeff Bingaman (D-NM), Dale Bumpers (D-AR), Robert Byrd (D-WV), John Chafee (R-RI), Daschle, Pete Domenici (R-NM), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), John Glenn (D-OH), Judd Gregg (R-NH), Chuck Hagel (R-NE), James Jeffords (R-VT), Herb Kohl (D-WI), Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Levin, Paul Sarbanes (D-MD), and Paul Wellstone (DFL-MN).]

Meanwhile, the “good guys” began a coun ter-campaign. Levin, Daschle, and Biden, joined, interestingly, by Lieberman and by Sens. Bob Graham (D-FL) and Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), all three of whom also had signed the Lieberman/Mack letter, wrote to Albright applauding the administration for its efforts to achieve peace and urging that those efforts be pursued but that it be done “privately, without public disclosure of details.”

In the House, Gejdenson, joined by Gephardt, Obey, Hamilton, and 29 other representatives, sponsored a letter, sent on April 6, that was not as moderate as the Levin letter, but also not nearly so extreme as Engel’s. However, the Gejdenson letter also said that the U.S. “must never endeavor to impose an agreement” and “must never presume to pressure Israel.”

Meanwhile, off the Hill and on the American Jewish organizations front, Reich publicly criticized AIPAC for organizing the 81 senators letter, saying that the American Jewish community is much more appreciative of Clinton’s efforts on behalf of the Oslo process than are the sentiments expressed in the hard-line letter.

At this point the American Friends of Families Victims of Oslo weighed in with a scathing attack on Gejdenson and other “duplicitous Jews in Congress” who signed Gejdenson’s “Clinton Whitewash Letter,” as well as those “particularly cowardly” Jews who signed both the Engel and the Gejdenson letters.

We would imagine that the hard-line letters from the likes of Lieberman, Mack, Engel, Paxon, Rothman, and Saxton were dismissed at the White House and State Department as predictable ranting, done mostly at AIPAC’s behest. However, the letters in which Senate and House Democratic leaders joined with Democrats Levin, Hamilton and Obey, who are usually considered voices of reason on matters affecting the Middle East, probably seemed models of moderation compared with the Lieberman and Engel letters, and their opinions were likely given full consideration within the Clinton administration.

It is hard to give Netanyahu and his Likud Party credit for the subtlety necessary to organize this campaign, and it is even more difficult to imagine Levin, Hamilton and Obey being duped into participating. But the fact is that all four letters had one common thread: do not publicize the administration’s proposal, which was Netanyahu’s primary objective.

It worked, at least for the moment. Plans to make the proposal public appeared to go on hold. In her reply to Levin, Albright confirmed that the administration is determined to pursue the peace negotiations “and to do so privately without public disclosure of details of proposals while we are in the process of exploring them with the parties.” [We hope, however, that the last 12 words of this sentence are important. Albright seemed to confirm in her next paragraph that this decision may be only temporary by saying “…If, notwithstanding our best efforts, the parties remain at an impasse, then of course we would have to make a judgment about how to proceed.”]

No Progress on Easing Lebanon Travel Restrictions

Sen. Spencer Abraham (R-MI) and Rep. Nick Rahall (D-WV) report no progress in their continuing campaign for full freedom of travel between the U.S. and Lebanon. Although the travel ban has been lifted, the Department of Transportation (DOT) still restricts travel agents from naming Beirut International Airport as a destination on air tickets for Americans, and no international airlines are allowed landing rights in the U.S. for flights originating in Lebanon.

Late last year Abraham wrote to National Security Council Director Sandy Berger and Rahall wrote to Secretary of Transportation Rodney Slater urging the removal of the remaining restrictions. Berger’s response was that the administration is seeking “to find a solution that appropriately balances our significant, ongoing concern for the safety of Americans, and the desire to avoid burdening those who travel to Lebanon.” Slater’s response says simply that there has been no change: “The Department of Transportation, with the full cooperation of other federal agencies, continues its ban on ticket sales.”

(Rahall, who is facing a tough challenge in the West Virginia Democratic primary election in May, is the ranking minority member of the House Surface Transportation Subcommittee, making him important to Slater during the recent debate over the transportation bill.)

Pappas/Harman Letter Supports U.S.-Israel Joint Defense Projects

Reps. Mike Pappas (R-NJ) and Jane Harman (D-CA), joined by 35 other members of the House National Security Committee, have written to Clinton urging greater U.S-Israeli cooperation in the ballistic missile defense area. Specifically, Pappas said, in remarks on the floor of the House in support of the provision in the “Theater Missile Defense Improvement Act of 1998” that authorizes $10 million for the Israeli Arrow tactical ballistic missile defense system (see separate article on legislation), that the letter urged Clinton to “work with Israel and leverage existing technology” to further develop the Arrow, the Tactical High Energy Laser, and the Boost Phase Intercept programs. In her remarks, Harman added that sharing the costs of the Arrow system with Israel is “our best bet to protect our only democratic ally in the region.”

Signing the letter, in addition to Pappas and Harman, were Reps. Tom Allen (D-ME), Roscoe Bartlett (R-MD), Rod Blagojevich (D-IL), Allen Boyd (D-FL), Lane Evans (D-IL), Tilllie Fowler (R-FL), James Gibbons (R-NV), James Hansen (R-UT), Joel Hefley (R-CO), Van Hilleary (R-TN), Duncan Hunter (R-CA), Walter Jones (R-NC), John Kasich (R-OH), Patrick Kennedy (D-RI), Jim Maloney (D-CT), Paul McHale (D-PA), Mike McIntyre (D-NC), Martin Meehan (D-MA), Solomon Ortiz (D-TX), Silvestre Reyes (D-TX), Bob Riley (R-AL), Ciro Rodriquez (D-TX), Jim Ryun (R-KS), Loretta Sanchez (D-CA), Jim Saxton (R-NJ), Joe Scarborough (R-FL), Norm Sisisky (D-VA), Adam Smith (D-WA), Bob Stump (R-AZ), James Talent (R-MO), William Thornberry (R-TX), Jim Turner (D-TX), Robert Underwood (D-Guam), J.C. Watts (R-OK), and Curt Weldon (R-PA). [While at first glance 37 signatures is impressive, the entire committee has 57 members, and neither the chairman, Floyd Spence (R-SC), nor the ranking minority member, Ike Skelton (D-MO), signed the letter.]

Clinton Nominates Ambassadors to Syria and Jordan

President Clinton has sent to the Senate for confirmation the names of Ryan Crocker as ambassador to Syria and William Burns as ambassador to Jordan, replacing Ambassadors Christopher Ross and Wesley Egan, respectively. Both Crocker and Burns are career foreign service officers, and both speak Arabic and French (Burns also speaks Russian).

Crocker most recently was ambassador to Kuwait, from May 1994 to December 1997. He also was ambassador to Lebanon from 1990 to 1993. This will be Burns’ first appointment as ambassador, but he has had several assignments, both in Washington and overseas, relating to the Middle East, including a tour as political officer at the U.S. Embassy in Amman. Most recently he was executive secretary of the State Department and special assistant to the secretary of state.

Ross has already returned to Washington to head the State Department’s counter-terrorism unit. As of this writing, Egan has not left Amman.