To return to the new Peace Now website click here.

APN to the Hill: Preparing for tomorrow's lobby day -- pro-Israel positions

This morning APN sent the following message to every Hill office to help prepare them for tomorrow's AIPAC lobby day. 

Dear XXXXXX:

Tomorrow, thousands of "pro-Israel" activists will be on the Hill claiming to speak for all Americans, and especially American Jews, who care about Israel.  We want you to know: they do not speak for the entire Jewish community. 

Most American Jews want Israeli-Palestinian peace talks to succeed and understand that robust, sustained US leadership is needed.  We know that sometimes this must include pressure on Israel's government.  We also know that Iran poses a serious threat to Israel and US national security interests, and that addressing this threat requires a sober, rational approach, not a knee-jerk reaction that is more reflective of frustration than strategic thinking.

Obama, Israel, and Jerusalem/Settlements

Putting pressure on Israel to do what is necessary for peace does not threaten or contradict the US-Israel alliance.

  • Friends don't let friends drive drunk.  Israel's future depends on peace.  The fact that there is a special relationship between the US and Israel does not mean that the US should not make reasonable and public demands of its ally; indeed, being a true friend of Israel means speaking hard truths.  The US does Israel no favors by holding back honest criticism or trying to shield the Israel government from pressure when it acts in ways that are inconsistent with its own best interests and security, including with efforts to achieve peace.

  • Peace for Israel is more important than settlements.  Those of us who truly care about Israel know that President Barack Obama is right to confront Israel over new settlement construction plans in East Jerusalem - as a matter of policy and substance, not just poor timing - just as he was right to confront Israel earlier over settlement construction in the West Bank.   Such activities hurt the chances for getting back to peace negotiations.  They undermine the prospects of reaching an agreement that will resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and overlapping claims in Jerusalem, establishing two states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and with security.

  • There is no credibility without accountability.  All sides - Israel, the Palestinians, the Arab States - must know that there will be a price for frustrating peace efforts.  Because these efforts are a reflection not just of America's generosity of spirit, but of America's vital national interests in the foreign policy arena - including addressing Iran.  Israel cannot act in ways that directly undermine peace efforts and expect to still be taken seriously as a partner in peace - or expect to be able to disclaim all responsibility for the failure to re-start peace negotiations.  The US cannot tolerate actions by any party that directly undermine peace efforts and still be expected to be taken seriously as a global leader in the Middle East and South Asia.

  • US leadership is critical.  America's interests are directly tied to Middle East peace and to Israel.  Peace talks cannot get started, and will not succeed, without genuine, credible, sustained American leadership.  President Obama enjoys strong support from the Jewish community when he demonstrates such leadership.

  • US national security is at stake.  The US is fighting two wars in the greater Middle East, and is trying to mobilize an international effort to address the threat posed by Iran.  The Obama Administration is right to ask the government of Israel to behave like a true ally, recognizing that the fate of Middle East peace efforts has a clear impact on America's ability to succeed. 

Iran Sanctions

What the US needs now is a rational policy to address this challenge of Iran, not a knee-jerk reaction that is more reflective of frustration than strategic thinking. 

  • The current bill should be amended, consistent with the President's requests. The sanctions bill should be amended to ensure that it does not tie the President's hands, undermine relationships with key allies and threaten multilateral efforts, or close off important avenues of policy in the future.

  • "Crippling" sanctions are a bad idea.  Smart, targeted, and ideally multilateral sanctions can be a powerful tool for putting pressure on Iran in the context of a broader strategy that uses both engagement and pressure.  The "crippling sanctions" legislation currently under consideration by Congress, however, will undermine the President's efforts to mobilize coordinated international action on Iran.  Moreover, inflicting misery on the Iranian people in an effort to compel them to put pressure on their government is morally and ethically perilous, and the efficacy of such an approach is dubious.  It is far-fetched to imagine that a taxi driver who runs out of gas in the middle of Teheran will pound the steering wheel and curse the Iranian regime for his plight (and be moved to take action against it) - rather than curse the US and the international community.

  • "Crippling" sanctions like this don't work and could backfire.  Examples of cases where similar sanctions have caused tremendous suffering but failed to force a change in government policy include Iraq, Cuba, Gaza, Haiti and, in fact, Iran itself, where decades of US and international sanctions did little to weaken the Iranian regime.  The present leadership's loss of legitimacy stems not from frustration over international sanctions but from popular outrage over the regime's efforts to subvert the domestic political process.  Indeed, under current circumstances there is a real risk that the proposed "crippling" sanctions could spark a broad nationalist backlash, furnishing the government with a populist point around which to mobilize support, at the expense of the opposition.

  • Iran is not South Africa.  In South Africa, sanctions were about supporting the self-identified interests of a large portion of that country's population.  In every other case, sanctions have been about promoting US interests, not the interests of the people bearing their brunt.  And in every case except South Africa, the populations that were expected to rise up and act as tools of US foreign policy obstinately refused to cooperate.  

  • Multilateral/smart action is a better approach.  The US needs strong international cooperation in order to effectively address Iran - something that will be directly undermined by the imposition of the proposed "crippling" sanctions. Instead of focusing on sanctions designed to hurt the Iranian people, Congress should support the Obama Administration's multilateral effort.  It should also consider sanctions targeting those who are providing the Iranian regime with technology to censor and block internet access and other forms of electronic communications among Iranians and between Iranians and the outside world.  Such sanctions would signal real support for the Iranian people.

If you have any questions about either of these issues, or any other issue related to the quest for peace and security in the Middle East, please don't hesitate to contact me.


Lara Friedman
Director of Policy and Government Relations
Americans for Peace Now