Hagel’s homework

on 7 Comments

Here are two Israel-related documents brought up by Israel-loving senators at the Chuck Hagel hearing yesterday.

1. In saying that Hagel had “greater antagonism for the nation of Israel than any member of this body,” Texas Senator Ted Cruz called on Hagel to read and say whether he agreed with Chas Freeman’s speech to the Palestine Center from 2011, and particularly the fifth paragraph, which Cruz said was “not accurate and not within the mainstream.” The speech would seem to be this one from May 4, 2011. The fifth paragraph:

Similarly, the cruelties of Israelis to their Arab captives and neighbors, especially in the ongoing siege of Gaza and repeated attacks on the people of Lebanon, have cost the Jewish state much of the global sympathy that the Holocaust previously conferred on it. The racist tyranny of Jewish settlers over West Bank Arabs and the progressive emergence of a version of apartheid in Israel itself are deeply troubling to a growing number of people abroad who have traditionally identified with Israel. Many — perhaps most of the most disaffected — are Jews. They are in the process of dissociating themselves from Israel. They know that, to the extent that Judaism comes to be conflated with racist arrogance (as terrorism is now conflated with Islam), Israeli behavior threatens a rebirth of anti-Semitism in the West. Ironically, Israel — conceived as a refuge and guarantee against European anti-Semitism — has become the sole conceivable stimulus to its revival and globalization. Demonstrably, Israel has been bad for the Palestinians. It is turning out also to be bad for the Jews.

2. Both Senators Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut — Republican hawk and liberal Democrat– called on Hagel to correct his error of 2000, and endorse a letter he had declined to sign then, which was signed by 96 Senators, affirming their solidarity with Israel during the Second Intifada.

The letter was sent out in October 2000. This seems to be it, at Mitchell Bard’s Jewish Virtual Library, with this preface: “All but four members of the U.S. Senate signed the following letter to President Clinton expressing their solidarity with Israel. The four senators who did not sign were Spencer Abraham (R-MI), Judd Gregg (R-NH), Robert Byrd (D-WV) and Chuck Hagel (R-NE). The bipartisan letter was circulated by the Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-MS) and Tom Daschle (D-ND).”

Dear Mr. President:

We write to you to express our solidarity with the State of Israel at this moment of crisis and our profound disappointment and frustration with PLO Chairman Arafat and the Palestinian Authority. We are dismayed that they would allow violence by Palestinians to be carried out without restraint or comment.

Resorting to violence constitutes a fundamental violation of the Peace Process. Following the signing of the Declaration of Principles in September 1993, Chairman Arafat wrote Israeli Prime Minister Rabin that:

The PLO commits itself to the Middle East Peace process, and to a peaceful resolution of the conflict between the two sides ad declares that all outstanding issues in relation to permanent status will be resolved through negotiations.

The PLO considers that the signing of the Declaration of Principles constitutes a historic event, inaugurating a new epoch of peaceful coexistence, free from violence and all other acts which endanger peace ad stability. Accordingly, the PLO renounces the use of terrorism and other acts of violence, and will assume responsibility over all PLO elements and personnel in order to assure their compliance, prevent violations and discipline violators.

It was on the basis of these assurances that Prime Minister Rabin, among other things, recognized the PLO.

We are deeply concerned at the continuing, coordinated campaign of Palestinian violence. That campaign leads us to believe that Arafat either seeks to use violence as a negotiating tool to extort even further concessions from the Government of Israel, or that he in fact intends to end the peace process in its entirety as a prelude to a unilateral declaration of Palestinian statehood.

This stands in contrast to what the Government of Israel has -sought throughout this crisis. We note, for example, that the Government of Israel proposed unprecedented compromises to achieve a final peace agreement Despite subsequent provocations, despite the violence, despite the wanton destruction of Joseph’s Tomb -a revered Jewish holy site-Israel has sought to see the violence stopped so that peace negotiations could be resumed. Yet, Arafat has failed to issue a statement to the Palestinian community that violence is unacceptable, unlike Prime Minister Barak who has said publicly that “I urge our Jewish citizens to refrain from attacking Arabs and their property under any circumstances.”

We urge you to express American solidarity with Israel at this crucial moment, to condemn the Palestinian campaign of violence, to do everything possible to secure the return of the three kidnaped Israeli soldiers from Lebanon, and to stand with Israel in international arenas – not only because we should, but because such actions are also the best way to restore the negotiating process. Arafat vast understand that he will achieve none of his political objectives through violence, that a unilateral declaration of statehood will not be recognized by the United States that only through negotiations can the Palestinians’ legitimate political aspirations be realized, and that abandoning the negotiating process will have serious repercussions.

This is a very dangerous hour in the Middle East. America’s open and abiding commitment to the security of Israel is the surest way to see our way safely through it.

Sincerely yours,

About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .

Posted In:

7 Responses

  1. John Douglas
    February 1, 2013, 2:58 pm

    How can this not bring to the mind of any thinking person all the Inquisitions and totalitarian processes throughout the ages that have forced dissenters to recant their ideological failings and humble themselves before the alter of coerced opinion.
    It’s a pathetic display. And the fact that no colleague of Hagel’s rises to demand of the interrogators, “Have you no shame?” is a pox on Right Wingers and Progressives alike.

  2. pabelmont
    February 1, 2013, 3:46 pm

    Thanks for publishing para 5. A GREAT analysis — wish Freeman were in gov’t. Glad Hagel didn’t sign that letter the other 96 signed.

    What’d he say, BTW? Does he say he agrees with the document? with para 5?

    Did he ask permission to READ PARA 5 ALOUD INTO THE RECORD AND OVER LIVE-TV? Or was he asked/forced to denounce, repudiate, and abominate something the public was not invited to know more of? You know, like asking someone, “Are you now or have you ever been a —, ” without pronouncing “—“.

  3. DICKERSON3870
    February 1, 2013, 4:33 pm

    RE: “All but four members of the U.S. Senate signed the following letter to President Clinton expressing their solidarity with Israel. ~ Jewish Virtual Library

    SEE: “Bibi and the Yo-Yos”, by Uri Avnery, Antiwar.com, 05/26/11:

    [EXCERPT] It was all rather disgusting.
    There they were, the members of the highest legislative bodies of the world’s only superpower, flying up and down like so many yo-yos, applauding wildly, every few minutes or seconds, the most outrageous lies and distortions of Binyamin Netanyahu.

    It was worse than the Syrian parliament during a speech by Bashar Assad, where anyone not applauding could find himself in prison. Or Stalin’s Supreme Soviet, when showing less than sufficient respect could have meant death.
    What the American Senators and Congressmen feared was a fate worse than death. Anyone remaining seated or not applauding wildly enough could have been caught on camera – and that amounts to political suicide. It was enough for one single congressman to rise and applaud, and all the others had to follow suit. Who would dare not to?
    The sight of these hundreds of parliamentarians jumping up and clapping their hands, again and again and again and again, with the Leader graciously acknowledging with a movement of his hand, was reminiscent of other regimes. Only this time it was not the local dictator who compelled this adulation, but a foreign one.
    The most depressing part of it was that there was not a single lawmaker – Republican or Democrat – who dared to resist. When I was a 9 year old boy in Germany, I dared to leave my right arm hanging by my side when all my schoolmates raised theirs in the Nazi salute and sang Hitler’s anthem. Is there no one in Washington DC who has that simple courage? Is it really Washington IOT – Israel Occupied Territory – as the anti-Semites assert? . . .

    ENTIRE COMMENTARY – http://original.antiwar.com/avnery/2011/05/25/bibi-and-the-yo-yos/

  4. sardelapasti
    February 1, 2013, 5:08 pm

    Interesting. In case anyone was asleep: non-signers D 1, R 3.

  5. Citizen
    February 2, 2013, 2:46 pm

    What does it say about democracy in de facto plutocratic America, the world’s bellwether on both democracy and the only superpower, that the top $ donors influencing US foreign policy are Saban (D Lefty) and Adleson (R Rightwing) have both declared in public their sole concern is the state of Israel?

  6. mcohen
    February 3, 2013, 3:41 am

    Demonstrably, Israel has been bad for the Palestinians. It is turning out also to be bad for the Jews.

    what rubbish

    this statement leaves no doubt in my mind that this outcome was the intended purpose of european powers on the day that the state of israel was founded

    the time for building of the third temple has come -the jews must stand firm

Leave a Reply