Iraq and Region Update for May 30, 2008
Welcome to FCNL's Biweekly Iraq and Region Update for May 30, 2008
This update includes reports on . . .
- Senate action on war funding;
- Congress and Iran;
- Israeli-Syrian talks and Israeli-Palestinian peace;
- and a selection of important articles, documents, and reports.
I. In Congress
The Senate Votes on War Funding
The Senate approved a $165 billion war funding bill May 22 by a vote of 70 to 26 without any policy restrictions. The House had earlier approved a war funding bill with policy restrictions but no funding (owing to 132 Republican votes of “present” to protest the procedure that brought the bill to the floor).
After Congress returns from recess next week the House is expected to concur with the Senate. The likely result will be to send a $165 billion unrestricted war funding bill to the president. But doubt remains about how much domestic funding will be included in the final bill. The Senate version has nearly $10 billion in domestic funding, approved by a veto-proof majority; the House version has much less, and the House would be unlikely to override a presidential veto. Read details of the Senate action.
A Significant Victory: House Amendment Warns White House on Long-Term Agreement with Iraq
A House vote May 22 represents a significant victory in the effort to prevent the Bush administration from concluding an agreement with Iraq that would lock in Iraq policy for the next administration. The House voted 234 to 183 to approve an amendment, offered by Rep. Barbara Lee (CA), to the 2009 military (defense) authorization bill. It would require congressional approval of any agreement obligating the United States to defend Iraq.
The Lee amendment may not become law, since the president has already raised multiple objections to the military authorization bill and threatened to veto it. If the amendment does become law it would still leave the administration wiggle room to conclude a nonbinding agreement with Iraq. But approval of the Lee amendment is nonetheless an important political signal that Congress will not passively accept an attempt to dictate Iraq policy beyond January 2009. Your action in response to FCNL alerts to block the administration’s attempt to lock the United States into the long-term occupation of Iraq has helped win this significant victory.
Sharp Divide on Iran Emerges in Congress
Anonymous sources in the Bush administration and elsewhere are again feeding the media with speculation about a U.S. attack on Iran. One scenario in circulation envisions a “surgical” airstrike in August against selected Revolutionary Guard bases in Iran. Another predicts a massive bombing campaign in November against Iranian nuclear facilities. We at FCNL don’t know if the United States would launch a pre-emptive military strike against Iran. But the dangerous climate created by war-like rhetoric in the United States and Iran could lead to an inadvertent war.
Against this background Congress continues to weigh in on U.S. Iran policy. Whether or not the United States should engage Iran in direct negotiations is the main issue that defines the divide.
Reps. Gary Ackerman (NY) and Mike Pence (IN), two opponents of real dialogue, last week introduced H. Con. Res. 362, which calls for more stringent U.S. and international sanctions against Iran and defines “regional diplomacy”—a phrase used by the Iraq Study Group to mean talking to Iran—as building an anti-Iran alliance in the Middle East.
Sens. Arlen Specter (PA) and Diane Feinstein (CA), two advocates of an energetic dialogue to reduce tensions and prevent war, are continuing to call for negotiations with Iran. Referring to the administration’s position that Iran must suspend uranium enrichment before the United States will negotiate, Specter recently told a Senate hearing, “To offer bilateral negotiations with a precondition is no offer at all, in my judgment, especially when the precondition is the object of the negotiations.” Beyond that, Specter said, “I'd be more direct and say that it was insulting, which I think characterizes a good bit of U.S. foreign policy.” Speaking at the same hearing, Feinstein said, “I believe we should begin to pursue a robust diplomatic initiative with Iran on all issues and, like Senator Specter, without preconditions. Working with our European allies, the United Nations, the International Atomic Energy Agency, we should put together a package of carrots and sticks that will serve as the basis for discussion with Iran.”
Almost lost in this debate is the consensus reached by five former U.S. secretaries of state from both major political parties that an expanded diplomatic dialogue with Iran is essential. Many in the military also say dialogue is the way to avoid war.
FCNL is joining other organizations in a national call-in day June 10 to urge Congress to support direct and comprehensive talks with Iran without preconditions. See section III, below, for how you can participate and urge as many of your friends and colleagues as possible to take part in this important action to avoid war with Iran and start negotiating to resolve differences between Iran and the United States.
II. Annapolis Peace Process Watch
A week after President George Bush told Israel’s parliament that negotiating with Middle Eastern “terrorists and radicals” amounted to the same “foolish delusion” as appeasing Hitler, Israel announced that it was negotiating with Syria with the help of Turkish mediators. The Israeli-Syrian peace talks focus on the return of the Golan Heights, occupied by Israel in 1967, and Syrian recognition of and security guarantees for Israel.
Some observers have expressed concern that Israeli-Syrian negotiations could impede an Israeli-Palestinian agreement, but the precedent of talks with the Damascus government, which the United States and Israel consider a state sponsor of terrorism, could also lead to future talks with the Palestinian organization Hamas. An Israeli-Syrian peace agreement, moreover, would likely create a regional climate more supportive of Israeli-Palestinian peace, with Syria urging Hamas and the Lebanese Hezbollah movement to moderate their policies.
Olmert’s Troubles Further Cloud Prospects; Pelosi Affirms Urgency of Peace Deal
But for the present, new corruption accusations against Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert have raised further doubts about the possibility of progress in Israeli-Palestinian talks. Olmert has said he will resign if indicted, and calls for his resignation have already appeared.
On a visit to Israel that coincided with publication of the charges against Olmert, U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi affirmed that if an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal was not reached this year a new administration would have to set up “a reasonable timetable... and let's get this done... Let's not waste time.” She said either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama as president would have to make Israeli-Palestinian peace an urgent priority.
It’s time to talk to Iran! That’s the theme of an FCNL call-in to the Senate on Tuesday, June 10. Plan to phone your senators on that day. FCNL’s call-in is in cooperation with the Campaign for a New American Policy on Iran (CNAPI), an alliance including FCNL and nearly 40 other secular and religious organizations from across the political spectrum. CNAPI is calling for direct and comprehensive negotiations with Iran without preconditions. We believe that this is the crucial U.S. policy change needed to end the Iraq war and achieve regional peace.
Download FCNL’s flyer for the June 10 call-in day, complete with toll-free number, Senate legislative ask, and talking points—and send it to your friends, relatives, and colleagues. Help FCNL and CNAPI send a loud and clear message to Congress on June 10: The U.S. should talk to Iran, not start a war with Iran.
IV. Articles, Documents, and Reports
Iran Proposes International Talks On Nuclear Issue, Terrorism, Arab-Israeli Peace
The Washington Post reports on a May 13 proposal from Iran submitted to U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon. The proposal appears to be similar to one presented to the United States in May 2003, to which the United States did not respond and which Secretary of State Robert Gates referred to recently as a "missed opportunity."
New Pro-Israel, Pro-Peace Lobby Urges Talks with Iran
The head of the newly formed Jewish-American "J Street" lobby says that the only approach that might prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons "is the one approach George W. Bush and the neocons refuse to try: real diplomacy." Jeremy Ben-Ami writes in an extensive Ha'aretz blog post, "Serious diplomatic engagement should include direct high-level negotiations with Iran to address… the nuclear issue, an end to Iranian opposition to the Arab-Israeli peace process and to its support to groups using violence."
Veteran Iran Observer Argues United States Needs Iranian Cooperation to End Iraq War
Selig Harrison, a journalist with extensive contacts in Iran, argues that a "grand bargain" with Iran is needed to stabilize Iraq and the wider region. He writes in U.S.A. Today that the United States "cannot get its combat forces out gracefully or stabilize Iraq thereafter without Iran's cooperation. Tehran will continue to send weaponry to its Shiite clients until Washington is ready for a deal that ends the U.S. occupation gradually and accepts Iran as a major player in postwar Baghdad, along with the United States and, eventually, Saudi Arabia."
Brzezinski and Odom Call for Iran Talks; See Current U.S. Policy or Military Attack Leading to Iranian Nuclear Weapons Capability
Former national security advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski and Gen. William Odom write this week in the Washington Post that current U.S. policy toward Iran "will almost certainly result in an Iran with nuclear weapons." A military attack by the United States or Israel, they say, would only set back an Iranian nuclear weapons program. They advocated either talks with Iran without preconditions or a mutual suspension of U.S. and U.N. sanctions and Iranian enrichment of uranium to start talks.