zondag 3 mei 2009

Joodse lobbygroep VS tegen sancties voor Iran

 
J-Street, het Amerikaanse EAJG, beweert pro-Israel en pro-vrede te zijn maar oefent telkens druk uit op de Amerikaanse regering om Israel meer onder druk te zetten en Israels vijanden minder. Dat is niet mijn definitie van pro-Israel zijn.
Zou ooit de dag aanbreken dat er een Arabische lobbyclub komt die het steeds voor Israel opneemt?
 
RP
---------
 

J-Street thinks it understands Obama better than Obama on Iran sanctions

J Street tries reading Obama's mind (but forgets to look at his record)

 

J Street has sent out a mass e-mail opposing a bipartisan push in Congress for tougher sanctions on Iran. Here's the relevant passage:

On Iran, the President is promoting tough, direct diplomacy to address concerns over their nuclear program, support for Hamas and Hezbollah, and threats against Israel. The President has made clear that the diplomatic road ahead will be tough -- but the chances of success won't be helped by Congress imposing tight timelines or a new round of sanctions at this moment.

Yet, just this week, the Orwellian-named "Iran Diplomacy Enhancement Act" was introduced in the House -- a bill that in reality does nothing to "enhance diplomacy" but instead imposes further sanctions on Iran, directly undercutting the President's diplomatic message.

The only thing Orwellian here is J Street's implication that lawmakers are undercutting the Obama administration by pushing for sanctions. Senator/presidential candidate Obama could not have been clearer on this subject: He favored stepped up diplomacy and tougher sanctions -- they were two halves of a comprehehsive policy that he was marketing as a shift from the Bush administration. Dennis Ross -- a top campaign surrogate in the Jewish community who Obama then tapped as the administration's point man on Iran -- was fond of stressing the need for stronger carrots and stronger sticks (and not necessarily in that order).

At a briefing just a few weeks before the election, I asked Ross if once Obama were to reach the White House, would he suddenly come around to President Bush's point of view, which was that Congress should simply take its cues on sanctions from the administration. Ross' response: As a negotiator on Israeli-Arab issues, he found it useful to be able to warn interlocutors that the only way to head off tough measures in Congress was to produce solid results at the negotiating table.

And Senator/candidate Obama wasn't just looking for Congress to take tougher action. His proposed legislation was aimed at making it easier for pension plans to divest from Iran. In other words, his goal was to unleash a growing, grassroots, hard-to-control divestment movement that would serve as a backdrop to negotiations.

It's always possible that Obama will end up filp-flopping on this issue, now that he is the one sitting in the Oval Office, but until then... J Street may or may not be right that the mostly good cop approach is better than the carrots-and-sticks strategy, but this much is clear: By coming out against sanctions, J Street is the one undermining Obama's Iran policy.

Geen opmerkingen:

Een reactie posten