Iraq and Region Update for October 3, 2008
In this update . . .
- House passes Iran sanctions bill; blockade resolution blocked for now;
- FCNL meets Iranian President Ahmadinejad;
- Israel’s Olmert calls for withdrawal; Senators question settlements;
I. In Congress
House Passes Iran Sanctions Bill with Ambiguous Nod to Diplomacy
On September 26, the House passed an Iran sanctions bill (H.R. 7112) that would close loopholes in existing sanctions, freeze U.S. assets of persons with ties to the Iranian government, make a U.S. company liable for the sanctions violations if it maintains a foreign subsidiary to circumvent the sanctions, and permit state and local governments to divest their pension funds from companies investing $20 million or more in Iran’s oil industry. It also includes a sense of Congress statement that the United States “should use diplomatic and economic means to resolve the Iranian nuclear problem.” The bill is similar to the Senate Iran sanctions bill sponsored by Christopher Dodd (CT) and Richard Shelby (AL) (S. 3445), which does not mention diplomacy.
The House bill was sponsored by Foreign Affairs Committee Chair Howard Berman (CA). Berman acknowledged that the bill was a “diluted version” of previous bills passed nearly unanimously by the House but not voted on in the Senate. He also said the bill reaffirmed U.S. commitment to “multilateral diplomacy to increase pressure on Iran” but did not define what was meant by “diplomacy.” Some in Congress and the administration have used the term "diplomacy" to mean a policy limited to building international support for economic sanctions against Iran.
Ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (FL) said she supported the bill but also criticized it as “weak legislation” that “will send a message to our enemies of a weakened U.S. position” on Iran. An attempt to move the Senate version of the bill by unanimous consent failed on October 2, but the Senate will probably return in November for a short lame duck session and is likely to try to take up the House-passed version then.
Press Reports Declare Demise of Iran Blockade Bill—for Now; FCNL Sees Shift in Iran Debate
News stories in the Washington Times, Interpress Service, and the blog Talking Points Memo this week proclaimed the demise of H.Con.Res. 362, the Iran blockade resolution that FCNL has been working against and that had gained 280 cosponsors, more than half the House. The media reports said the resolution had been the top legislative priority of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) this year but the Democratic leadership decided not to put the measure to a vote after strong lobbying efforts by Iranian-American, Jewish-American, peace, and religious groups. The bill’s supporters, however, say they will try to pass it again if there is a lame duck session in the House, or if not they will introduce a similar bill in January.
Whatever the ultimate fate of this proposal, it is partly responsible for a shift in the Iran debate in Congress. Opposition to direct negotiations with Iran is declining. The Berman sanctions bill just passed includes a nod to diplomacy. Many members who still declare their strong support for H.Con.Res. 362 say they also support direct diplomacy with Iran. One congressman wrote in response to a constituent, “the United States must retain all options in dealing with Iran and I strongly believe diplomacy must be one of those options.”
Special Note: FCNL Meets Iranian President in New York
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad met twice with U.S. peace and religious groups in New York last week. FCNL participated in both meetings, as well as in previous meetings with Ahmadinejad in New York in 2006 and 2007 and in Tehran in 2007. In response to a question from FCNL, President Ahmadinejad provided the first public confirmation by an Iranian official that the United States and Iran had engaged in unofficial negotiations until May 2003, when the United States cut off contact after Iran proposed a comprehensive agenda for official talks.
At the meetings Ahmadinejad repeated some of the more conciliatory statements that Iranian leaders have made in the past. He said Iran wanted a “positive dialogue” with the United States, that a compromise solution to the nuclear impasse involving an international consortium to enrich uranium in Iran merited discussion, and that if a representative Palestinian government agreed to a two-state solution with Israel “everyone should accept their choice.”
The Iranian president also expressed openness to engagement with the United States in an interview in the New York Times and kept to a relatively positive tone, but in his speech to the U.N. General Assembly he again descended to crude stereotypes, speaking of “a small but deceitful number of people called Zionists... dominating an important portion of the financial and monetary centers" of the West.
We at FCNL are talking with the Iranian president not because we agree with him but because it is the people and nations who don’t agree with one another that have the greatest need to engage in dialogue. Unlike the U.S. president, Iran’s president is not the decision maker in matters of defense and foreign affairs. We are not engaging publicly with President Ahmadinejad with the expectation of changing Iran’s policies, but rather to underscore the possibility and the importance of direct negotiations between the United States and Iran.
For the Record: Congress Again Says No Permanent Bases in Iraq—Twice
For the third year in a row Congress has prohibited permanent U.S. military bases in Iraq. This provision, originally championed by FCNL, prohibits funding for permanent U.S. military installations in Iraq and was included in both the 2009 military authorization bill and the continuing resolution to keep the government running through March 2009. These bills passed both the House and Senate in late September.
II. Annapolis Peace Process Watch
Senate Hearing on Annapolis Process Criticizes Settlement Expansion
“[T]his notion that everybody has decided they want two states doesn't satisfy anybody anymore,” said Senator John Kerry (MA), presiding over the first - and so far the only - Senate hearing on the Annapolis Peace Process. “The debate now is over, how Swiss cheesy is this state going to look?”
On September 25th Senator Kerry’s Subcommittee on Near Eastern and South and Central Asian Affairs held a hearing entitled “The Middle East Peace Process: Progress and Prospects.” Senator Chuck Hagel (NE) joined Kerry in expressing his concern that the last eight years of policies have resulted in “more checkpoints, more settlements” and that the Middle East as a whole is “more dangerous, more complicated, more combustible, more unstable than maybe ever before”. Assistant Secretary David Welch tried to assure the senators that U.S. opposition to settlements had been made clear and that progress had been made toward a “real peace treaty” in the future.
Read highlighted excerpts from the hearing, courtesy of Churches for Middle East Peace. Read the Secretary’s prepared testimony. Listen to the hearing.
Olmert: Withdraw from East Jerusalem, Golan Heights, Most of West Bank
“[W]e will have to withdraw from the lion's share of the territories,” outgoing Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said in what is being called a “legacy interview” with the Israeli daily newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth. Olmert recently resigned over corruption allegations but remains prime minister until the parliament approves a new government. These statements are the clearest indications yet that he is willing to meet key Palestinian demands and marks the first time an Israeli prime minister has made such explicit demands. He also disregarded support for an Israeli attack on Iran as “megalomania,” saying that the impasse over Iran’s nuclear program is an issue Israel should work with the international community to resolve. Read the Haaretz article, and read a transcript of the entire interview from the McClatchy news service.
III. Keep on Lobbying
Attend a Campaign Forum; Ask a Question about Iran
As the November election approaches, you'll have many opportunities to attend candidate forums in your district. Engage your candidates for the House, the Senate, or even the U.S. presidency if you have the chance. Ask them this question: “Five former U.S. Secretaries of State—Albright, Baker, Christopher, Kissinger, and Powell—have said the U.S. should talk to Iran. What do you say?” See more suggestions questions for the candidates on Iran on FCNL's website.
IV. Articles, Documents, and Reports
Report on U.S.-Muslim World Relations Argues Diplomacy Must Be Primary Tool
A new report by a panel that includes former Secretary of State Madeline Albright, former Executive Director of the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee Thomas Dine, and former Middle East negotiator Dennis Ross argues that the United States must make diplomacy the primary tool for resolving conflict involving Muslim countries.
To shrink support for Muslim extremist groups worldwide, the report says, the United States should
- engage Iran,
- immediately deescalate and negotiate a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict,
- promote broad-based political reconciliation in Iraq,
- renew international commitment and cooperation to halt the resurgence of extremism in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and
- provide top-level U.S. leadership to resolve regional conflict and improve coordination with international partners.