Wednesday, November 24, 2010 - 1:13 AM
While the White House continues to negotiate with Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ) in an attempt to convince him to allow a vote on the New START treaty this year, it is also undertaking a massive effort behind the scenes to rally foreign governments and non-governmental organizations to support the treaty’s ratification and put public pressure on Republicans to yield.
As part of that effort, the White House has been in contact
with pro-Israel and pro-Jewish organizations, encouraging them to be vocal
about their support for the New START treaty, and warning them that the failure
of the treaty could have negative implications for the drive to halt Iran’s
nuclear program.
“Certainly we’ve been
in touch with all sorts of different groups saying if you feel strongly about
the treaty, we hope your voice will be heard,” a senior administration official
said when asked about whether Jewish groups had been contacted. The official
added that the administration had not asked anyone to contact lawmakers.
Over the last three days, three major pro-Israel
organizations issued strong statements of support for New START: the National
Jewish Democratic Council (NJDC), the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), and the
American Council for World Jewry (ACWJ).
"We are deeply concerned that failure to ratify the new
START treaty will have national security consequences far beyond the subject of
the treaty itself," the ADL said in
a Nov. 19 letter sent to all senators. "The U.S. diplomatic
strategy to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons requires a U.S.-Russia
relationship of trust and cooperation."
The ACWJ said
on Monday that Russia's "cooperation is indispensable to assuring
global security and American goals, notably in blocking Iran’s dangerous quest
for its own nuclear capability."
NJDC President David
Harris told The Cable in an
interview that he had been in touch with the administration and had meetings
that included discussions of New START with officials.
“The White House
made it very clear that this was a very high priority of this administration,”
Harris said. “They’ve been helpful in providing resources, but they cannot and
would not encourage outside the groups to lobby. But we have had conversations
about the level of importance of New START.”
“To me the nexus is clear,” Harris said. “Ratifying New START
is should be a central objective of the entire pro-Israel community.”
Missing from the list of groups endorsing New START,
however, is the largest pro-Israel non-governmental organization, AIPAC. Also
missing from the list of endorsements is any public statement from the Israeli
government itself, despite the fact that several European leaders have come out
strongly in support of New START.
“We have no position on the treaty. We are staying above the
political discussion in Washington,” one Israeli official told The Cable. The official could not
confirm rumors we’ve heard that the administration asked Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren to speak out, but that
Oren declined. Recently, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak has been
strengthening ties with Russia, even
saying in September, “Our views on many challenges of today are close or
identical.”
The official said that the Israel government was sensitive
to perceptions that they were interfering in American domestic politics, following a meeting earlier this month between Israeli
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
and the new House Majority Leader Eric
Cantor (R-VA).
Vice President Joseph
Biden explained why the New START treaty was critical to the effort to
isolate Iran in a small roundtable with foreign policy columnists, including
your humble Cable guy, at the White
House Nov. 19.
“I’m not suggesting that if START fails, all of the sudden
we’re back in the Cold War with Russia but I am saying that the things in the
margins that make a big difference right now might very well be different,”
Biden said, referring to what he called “unprecedented” Russian cooperation on
Iran and Afghanistan.
He praised Russia’s decision to forgo selling the S-300 air
defense missile to Iran as well as Moscow’s cooperation in bringing new
multilateral sanctions against Tehran via the U.N. Security Council. “Absent
that cooperation I think [it] is problematic whether or not China or even
Europe would have made some of the tougher sanctions decisions that we made,”
Biden said.
Back on Capitol Hill, staffers on both sides of the issue are
well aware of the administration’s recent activity but had starkly different views
on its wisdom and efficacy.
“The idea that this administration, which has manifestly
undermined the U.S.-Israel relationship at every turn, would gin up pro-Israel
groups to ram this treaty through in the lame duck [session] is a new low, even
for an administration that has made a habit of alienating friends and allies,”
said one senior GOP Senate aide involved in the issue.
But another Senate aide who is involved in both the New START
and Iran issues saw the logic of linking the two.
“It’s politically smart to do this. Once of the central
arguments that the administration has been making is that the START treaty is
important due to its impact on U.S.-Russia relations and one of the
achievements has been to convince Russia to adopt a more cooperative approach
on Iran,” the aide said.
But the jury is still out on whether advocacy by pro-Israel
groups can cause senior Senate Republicans to rethink their positions. “The
center of gravity is still Jon Kyl so I don’t know how it effective it will be
in influencing his calculations,” the aide said.
A Democratic congressional staffer who is also a strong
supporter of Israel argued that, if it were Democrats holding up the treaty,
Republicans would surely be playing the Israel card.
“If the roles were reversed and the Democrats were playing
politics with Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons, we’d be eviscerated by the pro-Israel
community,” the staffer said. “We’d be getting our ass kicked about it, no
question.”
EXPLORE:INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, IRAN, ISRAEL/PALESTINE, NUKES, OBAMA ADMINISTRATION, U.S. CONGRESS, U.S. FOREIGN POLICY
AIPAC has its own Nuclear Policy
Back in the early 1960s, one of AIPAC's (and the Democratic Party's) key money guys was Abraham Feinberg. He was Ben Gurion’s US funding coordinator for Israel’s secret nuclear weapons program. He even funded a US propaganda campaign (coordinated with AIPAC) to convince Americans that Dimona was a scientific endeavor, even as Kennedy was fighting to get inspections and get Israel into the fledgling NNPT.
http://www.irmep.org/ila/azc/
Nobody was more estatic that AIPAC and Feinberg when Kennedy abruptly left the scene in 1963.
Today Israel/AIPAC still have an independent nuclear policy that also demands US administrations don't mention the Israeli stockpile (so called “opacity”).
It would be hypocritical for AIPAC to sign on to START or any arms treaty. AIPAC supports the Israeli nuclear weapons program, though it has not yet gone public with that policy.
(1)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE