MJ Rosenberg of the IPF sent this around. I thought you should know about it.
The Good Guys Come Out to Play
One of the comments about Middle East policy that one hears from Senators, House Members and staff with ever-growing frequency is: “Why are obstructionist hawks so forceful a presence on Capitol Hill when they represent only a minority of the community?”
If that were so, why is Israel being forced to capitulate?
One can hardly exaggerate how often this question is posed to us — albeit only by those who feel confident that we will not “blow the whistle” on them by publicizing their doubts about the long-standing U.S. approach to the Middle East.
I have doubts too but wonder why no one challenges the two-state solution.
It is not a pleasant question to encounter. After all, the mission of Israel Policy Forum (and our allies) is to help break the deadly status quo by encouraging policymakers to return to the proactive diplomacy of former Presidents Jimmy Carter, George H. W. Bush, and Bill Clinton. It does not make us happy to hear “we read your stuff and agree with it, but we need to see more action.”
[..] The good news is that the majority of the pro-Israel community is being heard today as never before. There are several good reasons for that, first among them is that the current situation and the policies favored to sustain it have so completely failed. Hardly anyone on Capitol Hill favors those policies but simply go along with them as the path of least resistance.
That’s a laugh, it considers itself to represent “the majority of the pro-Israel community”.
Our goal is to make the path of least resistance the one that leads to an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict rather than to continued violence, terrorism and suffering.
There was a good sign this week that some of Israel’s most powerful supporters on Capitol Hill are coming to understand that status quo policies do not advance Israel’s security.
They assume that a “peace” agreement will secure Israel. On this we obviously differ.
Congressman Gary Ackerman (D-NY), chairman of the Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia of the House Committee of Foreign Affairs, is currently circulating a letter to his colleagues urging support for the upcoming Annapolis conference, for significant additional aid to the Palestinians, and for the two-state solution.
This please them a lot. And here are their fellow travellers.
The Ackerman-Boustany partnership is reflected in the Washington advocacy groups that have come together to support their effort: Israel Policy Forum, the American Task Force on Palestine, Americans for Peace Now, Brit Tzedek v’Shalom, the Arab American Institute, the Union of Reform Judaism (which represents 1.5 million Reform Jews, the largest Jewish denomination), and Churches for Middle East Peace (representing 21 Christian denominations and tens of millions of congregants).
They seem to think that the right is well financed whereas the left is not. News to me.
These efforts build on the success of last year when we succeeded in blocking a House-passed bill that would have stopped virtually all humanitarian aid to the Palestinians. The House bill, a top priority of the “status quo” lobby, was stopped dead in the Senate, which passed, in its place, a far more moderate bill.
Nevertheless, the going is never easy for those of us who believe that America’s hands-off policies are disastrous for the United States, for Israel and for the Palestinians.
The reason is simple. Although the overwhelming majority of policymakers agree with us, we simply do not have the resources to level the playing field.
Writing in the New York Jewish Week yesterday, James Besser, its influential Washington correspondent, noted there is a media blitz against the Annapolis conference being launched by the right.
While opponents of negotiations are “buying full-page ads in the New York Times critical of Palestinian leader Abbas, groups like APN and IPF ‘just don’t have those kinds of resources,’ said an official with one of the groups. “Maybe if we did, our strategy would be different.”
As Lyndon Johnson used to say, “money is the mother’s milk of politics.” Although even LBJ could not have imagined the obscene heights to which money-driven politics have risen.
The other day, a prominent legislator told me that it was no surprise that the hawks have such a “stranglehold” on Congress, considering how much money they spend.
That spending, he added, is combined with a single-mindedness that also advances their views. “They are single-issue people while the people on your side care about a host of issues. That combination, lots of money, the willingness to spend it, and being single-issue is the winning combination,” he said.
The majority is with us. Once we have the resources, that majority will carry the day.
Sounds like an appeal for money. What do you think?
Yamit don’t apologize. If that’s what it takes, then so be it!I believe extreme wiolence and extra damage is in order for that’s ALL THEY UNDERTAND!
. He has a made a long career of undermining Israel, preaching appeasement to terror.and advocating every policy that has proved disastrous to Israel and world Jewry. He is always at the forefront of Israels capitulating to her enemies Policies! He and his organization are endowed by all of Israels enemies be it EU or wealthy self interested Jews. I would not be surprised if the Saudis were not also funding him as a better spokesperson and advocate for Israels destruction can hardly be found today. He does all of this within the framework of Israel advocacy, not bad ploy or tactic if one does not know better.
One way to beat these guys with doing them bodily harm is to marginalize them, which is in part to deny them all forums to speak and to advance their insidious anti Israel positions. Free speech should not be used as a crutch to do otherwise.