• Home
• Issues
  • Prevent War
  • Afghanistan
  • Nuclear Disarmament
  • Federal Budget
  • Environment
  • Immigration
  • Native American
  • More Issues
• Take Action
  • Action Center
  • Contact Congress
  • Grassroots Toolkit
  • War Is Not the Answer
• Join the Network
  • On Quakers
• For Young Adults
• FCNL Green Building
• Donate
• Links

Around the Middle East in 80 Days: Our Take on Obama's Early Diplomatic Moves (April 10, 2009)

Welcome to FCNL's Greater Middle East Diplomacy Update for April 10, 2009

"To put it simply, all key issues in the Middle East… are inextricably linked." Iraq Study Group, December 2006

With Congress in recess for the Passover-Easter holiday and new life springing around us, we pause to take stock of the Obama administration's first steps to address conflicts in the greater Middle East. During its first three months in office the administration has taken a remarkable number of initiatives on Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Israel, and Palestine. Many of the early steps are promising. Some are cause for concern. Below you can find our assessment of the administration's early moves and where Congress stands on them:

Iraq

The Obama administration inherited an agreement signed in the final months of the Bush administration that committed the United States to withdraw all of its armed forces from Iraq by December 31, 2011. President Obama has said that he intends to abide by the agreement. He has also announced his own deadline for a partial withdrawal of "combat troops" by August 31, 2010. That would leave between 30,000 and 50,000 U.S. troops in Iraq to be withdrawn sometime before December 31, 2011.

Both to restore the constitutional balance of power between the president and Congress and to ensure that the withdrawal deadline cannot be extended without congressional consent, the president should submit the U.S.-Iraq withdrawal agreement to Congress for approval. The president's pledge to abide by the deadline is positive, but he is asserting, as did the Bush administration, that the agreement with Iraq can be based on presidential authority alone. Even if the U.S. meets the agreement's 2011 withdrawal deadline, bypassing Congress sets a dangerous precedent for the future.

And Congress? FCNL is working with some members of Congress who are looking for an opportunity to press for congressional approval of the U.S.-Iraq withdrawal agreement. Few, however are interested in addressing Iraq-related issues at present.

Iran

Beginning with outreach to Iran in the president's inaugural address, the administration has masterfully orchestrated a reversal of the Bush administration's belligerent approach to Iran and has prepared the ground for serious diplomatic engagement. The president's most dramatic step was his March 20 Nowruz holiday video address to Iran in which he said that his "administration is now committed to diplomacy that addresses the full range of issues before us, and to pursuing constructive ties. . . . The United States wants the Islamic Republic of Iran to take its rightful place in the community of nations." The most recent step was the announcement this week that the United States would take part in the meetings between Iran and the permanent members of the Security Council plus Germany to discuss Iran's nuclear program.

This week the president also established the ideal global context for negotiating with Iran over its nuclear program with his speech in Prague pledging to seek a new nuclear arms reduction agreement with Russia and setting the goal of a nuclear weapons-free world. With the United States and other nations moving towards nuclear disarmament, Iran will find it much easier to make the concessions needed to demonstrate that it is not making these weapons.

It would be hard to imagine how there could be a more dramatic or constructive change in the U.S. approach to Iran in such a short time. The administration deserves high marks for its early moves on Iran.

And Congress? Many members of Congress are implicitly resisting the administration's outreach and have little patience for negotiations that do not involve an almost immediate suspension of uranium enrichment by Iran, although they have not said so publically. This position is not far from the Bush administration's demand that Iran suspend enrichment as a precondition for talks. FCNL is working with other peace and religious groups to persuade Congress to give the administration's diplomacy a real chance. One facet of that work is to urge House members to cosponsor a resolution urging the administration to negotiate an incidents-at-sea agreement with Iran to prevent an accidental war in the crowded Persian Gulf.

Afghanistan/Pakistan

President Obama's new strategy for Afghanistan wisely emphasizes diplomacy with Iran and other countries whose cooperation will help stabilize Afghanistan. It also rightly calls for increased civilian development aid to both Afghanistan and Pakistan. The troop surge and the president's apparent intention to employ more aggressive military tactics against Taliban strongholds in both Afghanistan and Pakistan, however, could lead to a wider war that could overwhelm the constructive elements of his plan. Diplomacy and development must be accompanied by a deliberate effort to deescalate and move from war-fighting to policing and protection, beginning with an immediate end to the bombing attacks that kill civilians. The president has said that the United States must convince Afghans that it does not intend to remain in their country for the long-term, but his new strategy suggests the opposite.

And Congress? A few in Congress are raising tough questions about the president's strategy and the decision to send more troops to Afghanistan, but most, including opponents of the Iraq war, are either supportive or only cautiously expressing doubts. FCNL is working to support the administration's stepped-up diplomatic and development efforts, especially the effort to obtain Iranian cooperation, and to persuade Congress and the administration that the war-fighting response to extremist violence is counterproductive.

Israel/Palestine

The president has maintained a steady drumbeat of high-profile statements expressing determination to pursue a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict. Some of these statements are a direct response to the opposition of Israel's new right-wing government in opposition to a two-state solution. The president's special envoy for Middle East peace, former Sen. George Mitchell (ME), has indicated that the U.S. will soon propose that the new Israeli government and the Palestinians relax Israeli restrictions on the Gaza border crossings, freeze Israeli settlement building, and invest in further training for Palestinian security forces . We at FCNL think that the administration has the right team in place and is saying the right things, but we have yet to see the actions that will signal a decision to move forward. If the administration does not soon exert its influence to open the Gaza crossings, halt Israeli settlement construction, and encourage an end to the paralyzing rift in Palestinian politics between Fatah and Hamas, hopes for Israel-Palestinian progress will fade.

And Congress? The Israeli-Palestinian conflict remains a sensitive issue. Israel's assault on Gaza in December and January shows that, when fighting breaks out, most in Congress rally to support Israel uncritically. Members of Congress are increasingly realizing, however, that the failure to end the Israel-Palestinian conflict constitutes a strategic liability for the United States and a danger to Israel and the region. Leading Jewish members of the House have spoken out against settlements, and 100 members have co-sponsored a resolution affirming that Israeli-Palestinian peace is an essential national interest of the United States. FCNL will be working in concert with Churches for Middle East Peace and progressive Jewish, Arab, and Muslim-American organizations to make the administration's rhetoric a reality.