Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, July 2009, pages 28-29

Congress Watch

Congress Increases Its Focus on Iran After Presidential Decision to Expand Contacts

By Shirl McArthur

PRESIDENT Barack Obama’s decision to increase U.S. diplomatic and other contacts with Iran has caused Israel’s congressional minions to step up their efforts to strengthen or expand sanctions on Iran. (Many Israeli leaders apparently see Obama’s decision as somehow bad for Israel and a “modern form of appeasement.” The right-wing Israeli publication Arutz Sheva reported that Israel Defense Forces Intelligence Chief Gen. Amos Yadlin told the Israeli cabinet on March 8 that Iran “is hoping to take advantage of the dialogue with Washington to buy time to advance toward the ability to build a bomb.”)

On cue, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD), joined by six other senior House Democrats, all chairmen of important committees or subcommittees, sent a letter to Obama on March 26 that, while appearing to support direct engagement with the government of Iran, insisted that there should be a short time limit on the negotiations. The letter said that “our goal should be to bring about Iran’s near-term suspension of uranium enrichment, and we should offer Iran meaningful incentives in order to achieve this goal.” But it also said that “Iran must verifiably suspend its uranium enrichment program within at most a few months of the initiation of discussions.”

The rest of the letter was devoted to punitive measures Washington should take against Iran should the talks “fail.” As Americans for Peace Now’s (APN) Lara Friedman said in APN’s “Legislative Round-Up” of April 3, negotiations that are “predicated on the threat of harsh consequences if ”˜success’ is not achieved by a pre-defined end date are...akin to asking one party to sit at a ”˜negotiating’ table across from a negotiating partner who keeps a loaded gun at his side, in plain sight.”

The letter’s signers, in addition to Hoyer, were fellow Democratic Reps. Gary Ackerman (NY), Howard Berman (CA), Silvestre Reyes (TX), Ike Skelton (MO), Henry Waxman (CA) and Robert Wexler (FL).

In addition, three separate bills were introduced in the House and Senate to expand economic sanctions against Iran by amending the Iran Sanctions Act of 1996 to include as sanctionable activities aiding in the development of Iran’s petroleum resources or providing or facilitating the export of refined petroleum resources to Iran. First, Rep. Mark Kirk (R-IL) on April 21 introduced H.R. 1985, which has 26 co-sponsors, including Kirk. Then, in the Senate, Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN) on April 28 introduced S. 908, which is more comprehensive than Kirk’s bill, in that it expands the list of possible sanctions and includes a “sense of Congress” section recommending additional actions the U.S. government should take.

A similar bill, H.R. 2194, was introduced in the House by Berman on April 30. S. 908 has 31 co-sponsors, including Bayh, and H.R. 2194 has 25 co-sponsors, including Berman. Among the non-binding “sense of Congress” recommendations in both S. 908 and H.R. 2194 is one urging the imposition of “sanctions on the Central Bank of Iran and any other Iranian bank or financial institution engaged in proliferation activities or support of terrorist groups.”

Also, on March 5, Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) introduced H.R. 1327, which would “authorize state and local governments to direct divestiture from, and prevent investment in, companies with investments of $20,000,000 or more in Iran’s energy sector.” At first, the bill had little support, but in late March and April, as AIPAC’s annual Washington conference grew nearer, many more co-sponsors signed on. The bill has 142 co-sponsors, including Frank.

The draconian H.R. 485, introduced by Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) in January to strengthen and toughen both the Iran Sanctions Act and the Iran, North Korea, and Syria Nonproliferation Act, still has no support. However, H.R. 1206 and H.R. 1208 strengthening sanctions on Syria and Iran, which she introduced in February, continue to gain co-sponsors. H.R. 1206 would strengthen sanctions against Syria and “enhance multilateral commitment to address [Syria’s] threatening policies.” H.R. 1208 would amend the Iran Sanctions Act to, among other things, expand the list of sanctionable activities and sanctionable “persons.” It would also prohibit “service module payments to the Russian Aviation and Space Agency.” H.R. 1206 has gained 20 co-sponsors and has 74, including Ros-Lehtinen. H.R. 1208 has gained 44 co-sponsors and has 93.

One positive bill regarding Iran was introduced. On April 2, Reps. John Conyers (D-MI) and Geoff Davis (R-KY) introduced H.Con.Res. 94 that would give “the sense of Congress that it should be the policy of the U.S. to promote the negotiation of an ”˜Incidents at Sea Agreement’ between the U.S. and the Government of Iran.” The resolution is strongly supported by the National Iranian American Council, which says that “current procedures for avoiding an accidental naval confrontation are dangerously inadequate.”

Supplemental Appropriations for PA Face Predictable Criticism

On April 9 Obama sent Congress his $83.4 billion supplemental budget request, mostly to fund ongoing operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, but also including $7.1 billion for the State Department and international programs. Of that, $790 million would be for programs and projects in the West Bank and Gaza (about $100 million less than pledged by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at the March 2 donors conference to raise funds for Gaza recovery, as detailed in the Washington Report’s May/June issue); $50 million for Egypt for training and equipment to prevent smuggling into Gaza; $25 million for aid to Palestinian refugees in Lebanon; and $98.4 million for additional training and equipment to strengthen the Lebanese Armed Forces.

On April 22 and 23, Clinton appeared before the House Foreign Affairs Committee and the Appropriations Committee’s Foreign Operations Subcommittee to support the administration’s request. Not surprisingly, she faced harsh questioning regarding the funds for the Palestinians, especially from Foreign Operations Subcommittee Chair Nita Lowey (D-NY) and Reps. Kirk (who was the top House recipient of pro-Israel PAC money in the 2008 election cycle), Steve Rothman (D-NJ) and Adam Schiff (D-CA).

Most of the questioning did not concern the amount of funds for the Palestinians—although Kirk said he “worried about the wisdom” of “giving” that much money to the Palestinians, and Rothman, who has authored several resolutions attacking the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees (UNRWA), was concerned that some of the money might go to UNRWA.

Instead, most of the pointed questions concerned language in the budget request that would allow the U.S. to help an eventual power-sharing government between Fatah and Hamas if that government recognizes Israel, renounces violence, and agrees to all previous agreements. The sticking point is that one of the provisions of the Omnibus Appropriations bill passed in March prohibits any aid to a power-sharing government unless Hamas (as opposed to the government) accepts those conditions.

Lowey was skeptical. She said “it must be all the ministers, including any minister appointed by Hamas, that comply with these principles.” Schiff said he thought it “unworkable to have Hamas organizing terrorist attacks against Israel at the same time it has the power to appoint ministers to a coalition government.” Clinton pointed out that, in the peace process in Northern Ireland, “not everyone in Sinn Fein and not everyone in the IRA initially agreed to the principles, but the leadership did.” She also pointed out that “we are currently funding the Lebanese government, which has Hezbollah in it.”

Then Kirk, in an incredible display of hubris, said, “You are picking up some pretty strong bipartisan concern here, which means that an amendment is coming. So I would urge you to beat a strategic retreat on this point, and then use the Congress as the bad guy.” Clinton said she appreciated the advice.

Some Positive Nuggets...

One new positive bill was introduced in the House. H.R. 1605 was introduced on March 19 by Rep. Joe Crowley (D-NY), with three co-sponsors. It would urge “the president to establish an International Fund for Israeli-Palestinian Peace to support cooperation, peaceful coexistence, joint economic development, and reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians, and Muslims, Christians, and Jews.”

Also, H.Res. 130, introduced in February by Rep. Bill Delahunt (D-MA) continues to gain co-sponsors and has 102, including Delahunt. It expresses “support for the appointment of former Senator George Mitchell as Special Envoy for Middle East Peace,” and would commit the House to supporting Mitchell, the president, and the secretary of state “in their vigorous pursuit of a diplomatic resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian and Israeli-Arab conflicts.”

However, the other positive measures described in the May/June issue have languished. H.R 981, introduced by Rep. Jim McGovern (D-MA) in February, prohibiting the use of cluster munitions unless certain conditions are met has gained only two co-sponsors and now has 26, including McGovern. The identical S. 416, introduced by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) in February, still has 24 co-sponsors, including Feinstein. Also, H.R. 578, introduced in January by Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL), which would “address the impending humanitarian crisis and potential security breakdown as a result of the mass influx of Iraqi refugees into neighboring countries, and the growing internally displaced population in Iraq” has gained only one co-sponsor, and now has 28 including Hastings.

But Attacks on U.N. and UNRWA Gain Support

H.R. 557, introduced by Ros-Lehtinen on Jan. 15 “to promote transparency, accountability, and reform within the United Nations system,” has gained 16 co-sponsors and now has 86, including Ros-Lehtinen. As described in detail in the previous issue, major parts of the bill are devoted to correcting the U.N.’s transgressions against Israel. Among other things, it would withhold U.S. contributions to UNRWA, urging that its functions be transferred to the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, and require an audit of U.N. entities concerned with Palestinians and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to “ensure balance in the approach to Israeli-Palestinian issues.” Also, H.Con.Res. 29, introduced by Rothman and Kirk in January attacking UNRWA for the sins of helping Palestinians and periodically criticizing Israel, has gained three co-sponsors, and now has 29, including Rothman and Kirk. It says that the U.N. “should take immediate steps to improve the transparency and accountability of [UNRWA] to ensure that it is not providing funding, employment, or other support to terrorists.”

And similar resolutions were introduced in the House and the Senate “condemning all forms of anti-Semitism and reaffirming the support of Congress for the mandate of the Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism.” S.Con.Res. 11, introduced by Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) on March 19, has 55 co-sponsors, including Collins, and H.Res. 364, introduced by Rep. Ron Klein (D-FL) on April 27, has 35 co-sponsors, including Klein.

Shirl McArthur, a retired U.S. foreign service officer, is a consultant based in the Washington, DC area.

SIDEBAR

”˜Nuff Said:

Now, That’s Lobbying

“Speaking of Iran and that region, House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) and Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-Va.) sent out a ”˜Dear Colleague’ e-mail Tuesday asking for signatures ”˜to the attached letter to President Obama regarding the Middle East peace process.’

“The letter says the usual stuff, emphasizing that Washington ”˜must be both a trusted mediator and a devoted friend to Israel’ and noting: ”˜Israel will be taking the greatest risks in any peace agreement.’

“Curiously, when we opened the attachment, we noticed it was named ”˜AIPAC Letter Hoyer Cantor May 2009.pdf.’

“Seems as though someone forgot to change the name or something. AIPAC? The American Israel Public Affairs Committee? Is that how this stuff works?”

Source: Al Kamen, “In the Loop” column, The Washington Post, May 15, 2009