WILL ABC NEWS ATONE FOR ITS SINS AGAINST AMERICANS URGING CONGRESS TO SCRUTINIZE, HALT ABUSE OF U.S. TAX-DOLLARS?
(Washington, D.C.): On the eve of Yom Kippur — the Jewish
holy day on which the religious seek to atone for their sins —
ABC News aired an appalling segment on its “World News
Tonight With Peter Jennings” program. In the 2 October
broadcast, reporter David Ensor impugned the activities,
integrity and motives of Jewish Americans and others who are
practicing their constitutional rights — and insisting that the
U.S. Congress fulfill its constitutional responsibilities.
At issue is the allocation and use of American foreign aid,
the disposition of U.S. troops overseas and the protection of the
Nation’s interests abroad. These are clearly legitimate, indeed
essential, duties of the Congress. Specifically, organizations
like the Zionist Organization of America, the Christian-Israel
Public Affairs Committee, Americans for a Safe Israel and the
Center for Security Policy have been calling on legislators to
exercise careful oversight of such dubious Clinton Administration
initiatives as: the commitment to Yasser Arafat of 500 million
U.S. tax-dollars; the prospective deployment of U.S. forces on
the Golan Heights; and Washington’s de facto recognition
of a Palestinian Arab state on the strategic highlands and
watersheds of the West Bank.
Where’s the Beef?
In recent months, proponents of these initiatives — notably,
the Israeli government of Yitzhak Rabin — have largely refused
to defend them on their merits. Naturally, this tends to
confirm suspicions that no credible defense can be mounted.
After all, Arafat has been shown to be wantonly violating his
commitments to: stop encouraging and supporting Palestinian
terrorism; delete from the PLO Charter the thirty out of
thirty-three provisions calling for attacks on Israelis and/or
the destruction of the Jewish State; extradite suspected
terrorists to Israel upon demand; etc. What is more, there is
persuasive evidence that foreign funds being provided to Arafat’s
organizations are being systematically diverted to his personal
and political purposes, instead of the humanitarian activities to
which they are supposed to be applied.(1)
Similarly, there has been no rigorous rebuttal offered to
arguments against the deployment of American personnel on the
Golan Heights put forward by the Center for Security Policy and
others.(2) Neither has
there been any coherent explanation of how U.S. interests in a
safe and secure Israel will be safeguarded if, as now seems
inevitable, a sovereign Palestinian state is declared on the West
Bank. The result seems certain to be a new safe haven for
terrorism and conflict over control of precious water resources.
Shooting the Messengers
The Israeli government, its representatives and allies in the
United States have, instead, engaged in vitriolic personal
attacks against those who seek to have Congress examine and
debate their concerns. Typically, the latter are characterized as
mere tools of the opposition Likud party and their efforts on
Capitol Hill are denounced as interference in the internal
affairs of Israel. Far from encouraging responsible debate
leading to informed congressional decision-making, the objective
appears to be one of stifling debate and, to the extent
possible, preventing relevant – – but adverse — information from
influencing such decisions.(3)
In the wake of the latest White House signing ceremony, even
Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin has engaged in such attacks. At a
Washington meeting with Jewish activists held the day of the
event, Mr. Rabin railed at length against those American Jews who
dared to lobby the Congress in opposition to the Israeli
government’s policies vis à vis Arafat and Syria. In
remarks carried by Israel Radio, he subsequently denounced
“the very audacity of going to the U.S. Congress with the
aim of foiling policy (sic) of an elected government in
Israel.” According to the Associated Press, Mr. Rabin said
“American Jews have ‘no moral right’ to lobby in Washington
against Israel’s peace agreement with the PLO.” AP reported
that he reviled as “‘loathsome’ a Jewish group’s demand that
Congress withhold U.S. aid from the cash-strapped Palestinian
autonomy government.”
Enter ABC News
Unfortunately, ABC News appears to have bought into the
self-serving and increasingly shrill party line being trumpeted
by Prime Minister Rabin, Israel’s Ambassador to the United
States, Itamar Rabinovitch, and others. In the space of less than
two minutes of air-time, Jennings and Ensor lent unwarranted
credibility to Rabin & Co.’s charges — and collaborated
(presumably unwittingly) in the assault on their targets.
Consider the following bill of particulars:
Ensor: “Mort Klein, the president of the Zionist
Organization of America, is in the halls of Congress,
breaking a cardinal rule — a 42-year sacred tradition of
Jewish organizations. He is lobbying congressmen to vote
against what the current government of Israel wants.”
- In fact, if ever there were such a “cardinal
rule,” it was broken during the Bush Administration
by myriad American Jewish activists and organizations who
aggressively lobbied against loan guarantees being sought
by the then-Israeli government of Yitzhak Shamir. Interestingly,
they were blatantly urged on in such activities by the
leaders of the opposition Labor party in Israel —
Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres.
Ensor: “Palestinian violence against Israelis has
convinced Klein and others that Israel’s government is wrong
to put faith in deals with Arafat. The U.S. government
disagrees, and so do most American Jews. Polls show only 15%
of American Jews oppose Israel’s peace deals with its
neighbors, but the opponents have a political impact out of
proportion to their numbers.”
- The relevant question is not whether American Jews will
declare themselves opposed to an abstract “peace
process” but whether they agree with the ZOA, the
Center for Security Policy, etc. that no further U.S. aid
should flow to Yasser Arafat. According to the latest
poll sponsored by the American Jewish Committee, “most
American Jews” — 63% to be exact — oppose
further U.S. “economic aid to the Palestinians”
while just 30% support it. What is more, 56% of the
AJC poll’s sample averred that the Arabs’ goal remained
the destruction of the State of Israel (versus only 37%
who disagree); 71% responded that Arafat and the PLO
cannot be relied upon to honor their commitments or
refrain from terrorism (versus just 17% of American Jews
who think they can be); and a stunning 91% agree that the
PLO is not doing enough to prevent Arab terrorism against
Israelis.
Rabbi Arthur Hertzberg, Vice President Emeritus of the
World Jewish Congress was shown opining: “I’m going to
say, very bluntly, this kind of activity [i.e., lobbying
Congress against aid to the PLO] is treason. This is an
American Jewish minority, in league with the party out of
power in Israel, trying to impose its will on the Israeli
government, and it has to be called exactly that.”
- The use of the term “treason” in this context
is evidence of the rhetorical excesses of the current
party line. Surely, few Americans would consider it
treasonous to try to discourage Congress from squandering
$500 million by giving foreign aid to a proponent of
terrorism. And such a decision is entirely within
the purview of the elected representatives of U.S.
taxpayers. If anything, the Rabin government’s
efforts to prevent some of those taxpayers from
expressing opinions to their representatives is an
interference in the internal affairs of the United
States.
Ensor: “The party out of power in Israel is Likud,
led by Benjamin Netanyahu, who calls Prime Minister Rabin a
traitor because of his deals with Arafat. Netanyahu does not
have the votes at home to block the Israeli government’s
peace deals with its neighbors so, his critics say, he has
set up a rival American Jewish lobby to undermine the Israeli
government.”“Among the ways to sink the peace [is] undermining
the U.S. role as a mediator. One way to do that, demand that
the U.S. immediately move its embassy from Tel Aviv to
Jerusalem. Such a move is privately opposed by the Israeli
government, publicly opposed by the Palestinians, but the new
lobby has convinced some of the Republican candidates for
president to make it part of their platform.”
- Offering no more evidence than Rabbi Hertzberg’s
unsubstantiated assertion that the objects of his
criticism are “in league with the party out of power
in Israel,” ABC News appears to lend credence to
that claim. It suggests that there is a “new
lobby,” that it has been “set up” by Likud
and that it is pursuing policies “to undermine the
Israeli government.” Then it goes on to cite by way
of example a congressional initiative aimed at moving the
U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Israel’s capital. Ensor
claims that this move is “privately opposed
by the Israeli government.” What he does not say
is that the Rabin government’s public position is
in favor of such a move. It is hard to see how a step
that is formally favored by Mr. Rabin can be construed as
“designed to undermine his government.”
Ensor: “And then there is the matter of Israel’s
efforts to make peace with Syria. Both the Israeli government
and the Syrians have hinted that peace may only be possible
if American troops agree to patrol the Golan Heights, so that
both sides feel safe. U.S. observers have been helping Egypt
and Israel to remain at peace by patrolling the Sinai desert
since 1979, but once again, Mort Klein and others say the
Israeli government is wrong, and that the U.S. should never
send peacekeepers to the Golan Heights.”
- Quite a number of highly respected strategic analysts
believe that the deployment of American personnel on the
Golan Heights would not serve U.S. interests. These
include five retired four-star generals, three of whom
were members of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, who
participated in the Center for Security Policy’s
blue-ribbon study of the issue.(4)
One reason for this conclusion is the profound
differences between the relatively remote and safe
operating environment of the Sinai desert and that of the
strategic Golan Heights — which is within easy striking
distance of terrorist operations based in Syria and
Lebanon. It is an affront to imply that these and other
experts and their findings are politically motivated.
Ensor: “And there, say many American Jews, and now
the prime minister of Israel as well, is the problem: a
second American Jewish lobby that could damage the chances
for peace in the Middle East.”
- The chances for peace in the Middle East will be
determined by the relentless hostility of Israel’s
enemies to her existence — not by the efforts of
pro-Israeli Americans, both Jews and non-Jews, to call
attention to that reality.
The Bottom Line
The Center for Security Policy strongly believes that
informed debate about major policy decisions is essential to the
effective workings of a democracy. Generally, those who fear such
a debate realize that the merits of the case favor the other side
— or perhaps that their position is simply untenable if exposed
to the harsh light of day. The oldest trick in the book, under
such circumstances, is to try to discredit one’s opponents rather
than rebut their arguments.
It is particularly regrettable that the Israeli government is
engaged in such a practice. As the Center noted recently:
“Free debate is in order and long-overdue. If Rabin
continues to insulate himself and to oppose such debate, he
will further fracture the pro-Israel community in this
country — leaving it ill-prepared to deal with the dangers
sure to accompany a false peace.”(5)
The Center calls upon ABC News to correct the misleading
information and unjustified allegations in its 2 October report
and give the important issues involved in decisions about U.S.
policy toward the Middle East peace process the expanded and more
balanced coverage they deserve.
(1) See, for example, the Center’s recent Decision
Briefs entitled The Saxton Solution: No P.L.O.
Compliance, No U.S. Taxpayer-Underwritten Aid
See the G.A.O. Study of P.L.O. Wealth Before Forking Over Half A
Billion in U.S. Tax Dollars to Arafat (
(2) In particular, there has yet to be an
official U.S. or Israeli response to an analysis performed a
year-ago by a distinguished blue-ribbon panel under the Center’s
sponsorship. It found that any benefits from such a deployment
would be outweighed by the likely strategic, military and
political costs.
(3) Efforts to discourage congressional
debate have become remarkably brazen recently. For example, the
Jewish Telegraphic Agency reported on 19 September 1995 that
officials of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)
had “pulled out all stops to convince House International
Relations Committee Chairman Benjamin Gilman to cancel” the
first congressional hearing on the Middle East peace process in
two years at which critics were invited to testify. In a letter
to the leadership of the influential Conference of Presidents of
Major American Jewish Organizations dated 29 September, the
presidents of three member institutions — the National Council
of Young Israel, the Zionist Organization of America and Emunah
of America — formally protested such activities on AIPAC’s part.
(4) See
An Assessment of Benefits and Costs (25 October
1994).
(5) See A Memo For Rabin: Will His
Legacy Be An Israel At Risk And An American Pro-Israel
Community Too Fractured To Help? (No.
95-D 63, 18 September 1995).
- Frank Gaffney departs CSP after 36 years - September 27, 2024
- LIVE NOW – Weaponization of US Government Symposium - April 9, 2024
- CSP author of “Big Intel” is American Thought Leaders guest on Epoch TV - February 23, 2024