Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, July 2000, pages 90-94

Arab-American Activism

 

Thomas Pickering Defends the U.S. Policy on Iraq Sanctions at ADC Conference

In a June 9 luncheon speech at the three-day annual American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee convention, Undersecretary of State Thomas Pickering told an audience of several hundred delegates that he would be glad to see members of the Arab-American community exercise their influence on U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East.

As proof of the increasing visibility and significance of the Arab-American community in the U.S., he cited the May 2000 edition of The Foreign Service Journal, the magazine for professional foreign service officers, which featured on its cover three articles labeled collectively, “Arab-American Connections.” (One of the articles cited by Ambassador Pickering was written by Washington Report executive editor Richard Curtiss, another by Prof. Elizabeth Fernea of the University of Texas, and the third by president James Zogby of the Arab American Institute.)

Pickering said that he shared with the audience a deep interest in the Middle East. “This interest is not merely a matter of politics,” he said, “but comes from deep appreciation of the history and culture of the region.”

“I spent almost eight years in the Middle East, first serving as an ambassador to Jordan and then as an ambassador to Israel,” Pickering said. “At the time of my foreign service there I had an opportunity to meet many fascinating people and to get embroiled in one of my favorite occupations—archeology.”

Speaking of the Middle East policies of the current and previous U.S. administrations Pickering said: “Our common objective is a peaceful, stable and prosperous Middle East, fully involved in the global economy. It is in our own interest and it is within the interests of all the people living in the Middle East.”

Stressing progress made over the years, Pickering said, “I remember the times when the goal of comprehensive peace in the Middle East seemed illusive, uncertain and unrealistic. I remember that every peace agreement was an uncertain prospect for us. But now it is a reality. Jordan, Egypt and Israel are now at peace, and peace is really achievable between Syria, Lebanon and Israel, especially in the light of the Israeli withdrawal from south Lebanon in the past two weeks.”

The audience applauded Pickering’s statements that the Israeli withdrawal from south Lebanon has been completed, and the U.N. is now working on restoring effective Lebanese authority over all south Lebanon.

Pickering said also that Palestinian and Israeli authorities have committed themselves to reaching an accord on the most difficult issues of the peace process—borders, settlements, refugees and Jerusalem—by Sept. 13.

“Both Ehud Barak and Yasser Arafat are working within the constraints of their own political realities,” Pickering said, “They realize that they can’t expect to obtain 100 percent of everything they want.

“We are doing everything we can,” he continued. “But Israelis and Palestinians must decide themselves the terms on which they could coexist. And they must continue to work for peace.”

In his speech, Pickering also addressed the situation in Iraq as a topic of particular concern to his Arab-American audience. He charged that the present regime in Iraq is a particularly destabilizing factor and an obstacle to peace in the Middle East.

“We share the concerns of the Arab-American community about the humanitarian situation in Iraq,” he said. “But we need to continue to pressure Saddam Hussain while promoting humanitarian assistance to the people of Iraq and helping them to bring forth a new government which respects the rights of its people and its neighbors.

“When Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1991, it stripped Kuwait of its property resources and burned its oil,” he continued. “Foreign ministers of Syria, Egypt and the Gulf states again called on Iraq to recognize that these acts were violations of Arab and international conventions.”

Further listing the Iraqi government’s violations of international law, Pickering cited United Nations Security Council resolutions requiring Iraq to declare and to destroy chemical, biological and nuclear weapons of mass destruction, cooperate with U.N. weapons inspectors, return stolen Kuwaiti property and to account for prisoners of war and others missing since the Iraqi occupation of Kuwait.

“But nine years later Saddam has not fully complied with these resolutions and still refuses to cooperate with the U.N.,” Pickering said. When he added that for this reason it is critical for sanctions against Iraq to remain in place, however, it provoked an intensely negative reaction by members of the audience (see box in “Affairs of State” p. 13).

After organizers of the conference called the audience to order, Pickering resumed by reminding the audience that he was an invited guest and should be permitted to present his point of view, just as he was prepared to hear contrary viewpoints later.

“If Saddam had access to the $20 billion of revenues from the sale of oil this year he would be able to import all the weapons he wants,” Pickering continued. “And I can assure you that no one in the region would be safe. It is not only my opinion,” he said, defending his position, “but the opinion of the states neighboring Iraq, which know better than anyone the danger he represents. Lifting sanctions would free Saddam to rebuild his military and his weapons of mass destruction programs but would not give any guarantee of either money or a better life for the average Iraqi. If you know your history, President Clinton found new opportunities to expand the oil-for-food program for the benefit of the people of Iraq.”

Pickering accused Saddam of deliberately obstructing the distribution of food and medicines in the heavily populated southern and central parts of Iraq, where the Iraqi government is in charge of the oil-for-food program. He cited the report of UNICEF (United Nations Children’s Fund) that the rate of mortality of children under five in that part of Iraq is twice as high as 10 years ago, while in the northern part of Iraq, where the U.N. administers the distribution of food and medicine, the rate of child mortality is lower than it was before the sanctions were imposed. “The difference is striking,” he said.

He also told the audience that in the areas where the Iraqi government is responsible for the oil-for-food program, its orders for food are not sufficient for the needs of the people living there. He said Iraqi President Saddam Hussain refused to distribute medicines worth $250 million from government warehouses until public pressure was brought to bear. He also accused the Iraqi government of preventing the full implementation of the national pediatric immunization program to protect children from diseases.

“The U.N. is doing everything it can to get the needed food, medicine and sanitation supplies to the people of Iraq,” Pickering stated, “and we will work further on improving the Iraqi people’s conditions despite the obstruction of the regime.”

Speaking on behalf of the State Department, Pickering praised the Arab-American community for doing a great job in organizing American citizens of Arab descent to speak their minds and exercise their influence in the U.S. by democratic means.

“Each of you is a bridge between the Arab world and the U.S.,” he said, “and you can help Americans understand the complexities and values of the Middle East.”

Adding that the U.S. State Department wants to further improve its record on diversity and equal opportunity, and that the Arab-American community remains underrepresented in the U.S. diplomatic service, he invited Arab Americans to become a part of the U.S. foreign service team. He noted that the State Department had organized a booth at the ADC convention to encourage young Arab Americans to submit their applications for internships.

So many people lined up to address their questions about U.S. Middle East policy to the undersecretary of state that only a few reached the microphones. Pickering was asked about double standards of U.S. foreign policy that ignored violations of U.N. Security Council resolutions by Israel while imposing heavy sanctions on the Iraqi people when their government similarly ignores Security Council resolutions.

Pickering replied that he recognizes the deep-seated Arab sense of grievance, hurt and disturbance for what has happened in the Middle East. “But I cannot deal with the past,” he said, “I can only help with the future.”

When accused of maintaining an anti-Arab stance, and not caring for Palestinian Americans when he was U.S. ambassador to Israel, Pickering said he had never refused to see Arab Americans and had a good record with the Arab community in Israel.

As proof, he reminded the audience that seven months before the outbreak of the intifada he gave a speech in Jerusalem, telling the Israelis that they ought to change the way they deal with Palestinians. After that he was called by an Israeli Knesset member “an unfriendly ambassador of the friendly country.”

—Alima Bissenova

 

Walid Khalidi Addresses ADC Audience on Jerusalem Issues

At the concluding event of ADC’s annual conference, at the Crystal Gateway Marriott in Arlington, VA, on June 11, Professor Walid Khalidi of the Institute of Palestine Studies addressed audience members on the issue of Jerusalem.

He discussed the historical development of Zionism, which has depicted Jerusalem as the “eternal capital that shall remain united under the state of Israel.” Attempting to legitimatize Israeli claims to the city, Professor Khalidi argued, Jerusalem has been presented as the historic national center of the Jewish people. Through continued land confiscations and acquisitions, the Israeli government has given these claims physical substance by establishing its hegemony over the city under the slogan of unification and reunification of Jerusalem.

Professor Khalidi cited 100 U.N resolutions criticizing, deploring, and calling for cessation of Israeli territorial expansion and systematic discrimination in Jerusalem. The bulk of these resolutions condemn Israeli policies, which have effectively and unilaterally changed the status of the city. He argued that such resolutions have gone unheeded by the Israeli government because it does not rely on international support to legitimize its policies.

Rather, the only government capable of reprimanding Israel, the United States, has done the exact opposite. Through its right to veto as a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council, the U.S. has repeatedly vetoed resolutions by the world body to force Israel to comply with U.N. decisions. Professor Khalidi warned that despite the Arab community’s illusions about the “friendly” attitude of President Bill Clinton toward the Arab viewpoint, his administration has vetoed more U.N. resolutions intended to censure Israeli policies than that of any other American president.

Professor Khalidi stated that since the conquest of East Jerusalem by Israel in 1967, U.S. aid to Israel has increased exponentially, and now is approaching $150 billion. This includes unconditional direct aid from the U.S. government provided annually in one lump sum, tax-exempt donations from members of the American Jewish community, and revenues from Israeli-manufactured planes sold to the U.S. government. Moreover, he pointed to the absence of any mechanisms by which the U.S. public is able to check how Israel spends U.S. foreign aid.

In addition, on Capitol Hill, the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), Israel’s principal lobby in Washington, has succeeded in convincing the U.S. Congress to pass 15 resolutions and laws expressing and pledging support for Israel’s one-sided claims to the city. Even in the absence of a law authorizing the presence of the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem, Congress was persuaded to pass legislation paving the way for such a move in the future.

A case in point, Professor Khalidi stated, was the Helms Amendment in July of 1988, which provided the necessary breakthrough. The legislation authorized the U.S. government to retain two facilities in Israel: one in Tel Aviv, and the other in Jerusalem. The latter was dubbed a “facility,” as opposed to an embassy, to avoid controversy. A lease agreement between the U.S. and Israel, conveniently signed on the last day of the Bush administration, allowed for the building of a U.S. facility in West Jerusalem with an annual lease value of only $1!

Then, in October 1995, Public Law 104-45, commonly known as the Jerusalem Embassy Relocation Act, pledged an unequivocal U.S. commitment to transferring its embassy to Jerusalem by May 1999. The law stated that Jerusalem shall remain the “undivided, unified, and reunified capital of Israel.” Interestingly, the bill also imposed punitive measures on the budget of the State Department, almost cutting it by half if the facility is not opened in accordance with the deadline.

“Have you seen a government that would punish its own institutions to satisfy the interests of another country?” Professor Khalidi asked. He noted that while it is customary to provide “findings” in the preamble to justify the enactment of a piece of legislation, the preamble of the Jerusalem Embassy Relocation Act quoted resolutions of the Zionist Congress as justification. The preamble congratulated Israel for its conquest of East Jerusalem, and it premised Israeli “rightful” claims to the city on strictly religious, rather than on legal or moral grounds.

This law not only favors the claims of one religious group over all others, Professor Khalidi argued, but it also “predetermines the size of any future Palestinian state.” Nevertheless, despite assertions by the State Department and the Justice Department of the unconstitutionality of this law, the U.S. government has moved forward to finalize the shift of the U.S. Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv, where all other foreign embassies but one are located, to Jerusalem.

Meanwhile, a team of researchers, including Professor Khalidi, has determined that the bulk of the Jerusalem land which the Israeli government leases to the U.S. to build its embassy is stolen Palestinian refugee property. Over 70 percent of the land was owned by Muslim Palestinians and leased to the British government, who continued to pay the lease amount until the last day of the British mandate, on May 14, 1948. There were 76 owners of the land belonging to 19 families. To date, Professor Khalidi has been able to locate 20 percent of the almost 1,000 heirs of the original owners. Faced with these findings, there seems to be evidence, Professor Khalidi declared, that the U.S. government may back down from its plans to construct its embassy on this land assigned it by the Israeli government.

Professor Khalidi argued that the history of Israeli policies in Jerusalem reflects a set of principles embraced by the Jewish state: the so-called unity of Jerusalem is sacred and shall remain above scrutiny, Judaism has priority over Islam and Christianity, only the Israeli narrative since 1948 should be considered, Jewish secular needs are above Arab secular needs, Israel should monopolize sovereignty over East and West Jerusalem, and, most importantly, all Israeli actions are “irreversible and immune to any redress.” Therefore, the notion of establishing a binational state is contradictory to the essence of Zionism, and to these Israeli principles.

Professor Khalidi argued that the Arab principles regarding Jerusalem are fundamentally different. They are based on demystification and deconstruction of the Israeli myth of unity or re-unity of the city, eradicating the monopoly of sovereignty by either side, elimination of aristocracy of religious rights, removing the status of conquered and conqueror, and recognition of the religious claims of all sides.

He asserted that the Arab concept of Jerusalem is based on parity, not hegemony; inclusion, not exclusion; and balance, not usurpation. He said that it is unlikely that the Arab concept of the city will have any effect on Israel because of the tremendous support it already receives from the U.S. However, he was quick to add that the Arab concept has the advantage of not only being but also seeming “far more equitable” than the Israeli one, and therefore it has a better chance of gaining support from a wider audience.

Professor Khalidi asserted that the key to raising awareness of the issue is capitalizing on the presence of 3.8 million Palestinians in the occupied territories through massive civil disobedience. He concluded that in order for the Arab concept of Jerusalem to be present in future negotiations, Arabs have to utilize collective action. More importantly, “a solution has to be fair and recognized to be fair.”

—Asma Yousef

*****

Due to space limitations only two talks from the ADC Convention 2000 were covered in this issue. Other ADC events will be covered in the August issue.

 

ADC’s Hussein Ibish Squares Off Against Steve Emerson

Minutes after O.J. Simpson and Denise Brown exchanged bitter insults June 8 on Fox TV, equally acrimonious adversaries, American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee communications director Hussein Ibish and Muslim-baiter Steve Emerson debated newly released proposals of the National Commission on Terrorism.

While “The Edge” anchor Paula Zahn futilely told the adversaries not to shout at the same time, Ibish declared that foreign students already have been monitored by FBI agents since the commission released its anti-terrorism proposals June 5.

“Arab students were singled out for scrutiny, they were interrogated, watched and even deported in the early ‘70s and during the Gulf war,” the ADC official stated.

Investigating a student on the basis of his/her national origin is a definite form of discrimination, he continued. Ibish said he had spoken with students since the report was issued and those majoring in physics seemed to be singled out.

Emerson countered that foreign students traditionally have been allied with terrorist organizations. He asserted that one of the plotters of the World Trade Center bombing had been a student who had overstayed his visa.

“Arab students haven’t been singled out,” Emerson averred, “all foreign students are suspect, even Israeli students.”

Asserting that students from Iraq, Korea, Libya and Sudan traditionally have been linked to terrorism, Emerson criticized Ibish for his “civil libertarian arguments” which he compared to the Mafia claiming anti-racketeering laws are unfair.

Zahn asked Ibish if he would condone any type of monitoring.

“Of course, the FBI should investigate criminal conspiracies,” Ibish replied, “but not the political, religious or academic pursuits of foreign students.”

Then addressing Emerson’s remark, Ibish stated: “It is outrageous to compare foreign students to the Mafia.”

Emerson retorted that Ibish’s civil libertarian views are equivalent to the Mafia argument that anti-racketeering statutes are an infringement on its civil rights. He went on to say that if one supports Hezbollah, Hamas and the Syrian regime as he said Ibish’s ADC does, then it stands to reason Ibish does not approve of the commission’s report.

Ibish countered that wiretapping, bringing in the army to replace the police and having the CIA hire thugs around the world is an assault on all Americans’ civil liberties.

Emerson justified the commission’s recommendation to bringing in the army to police civilians because it would only be during catastrophic events such as nuclear or biological attacks. Furthermore, he argued it is justifiable to listen to phone conversations of foreigners who are terrorists.

Increasing wire taps without a criminal warrant is against U.S. principles, Ibish replied. “We fight for the rights of all American citizens and object to actions that infringe on our civil rights.”

—Pat McDonnell Twair

 

Clinton Addresses Arab Americans at The Kahlil Gibran Spirit of Humanity Awards

President Bill Clinton made a surprise appearance at the Arab American Institute (AAI) Foundation’s second annual Kahlil Gibran Spirit of Humanity Awards gala dinner on June 13 at Washington, DC’s Monarch Hotel. The awards were named for Kahlil Gibran, the Arab-American poet and author of The Prophet and other acclaimed books (available in this magazine’s book catalog). It was Gibran who first wrote, “Are you a politician asking what your country can do for you or a zealous one asking what you can do for your country?” His words were later paraphrased by President John F. Kennedy in his 1963 inaugural address.

Addressing Arab Americans who gathered to recognize individuals, corporations, organizations and communities whose work promotes coexistence and inclusion and the positive forces of diversity and cultural interaction, President Clinton praised the contributions of Arab Americans who have helped build one America.

He told his enthusiastic audience that he came to the event “because I thought it might be, perhaps, the last great chance I would have to thank the Arab-American community for the contributions that you have made to the progress of America and the strength and diversity of our administration over the last seven and a half years.”

He thanked Arab Americans for their contributions to building not only one America, but for helping America to be more effective in building “a world where peace and reconciliation and freedom and prosperity overcome the forces of fear and hatred and poverty and disease and war... So many of you have contributed to our efforts to build a lasting and just peace in the Middle East and to build strong and trusting relationships with people who previously questioned the United States.”

Clinton reminded the audience that he was the first U.S. president to address the Palestinian National Council in Gaza and the first to host an Eid al Fitr fast-breaking event at the White House. He also was the first president to invite Arab-American leaders to the White House to meet a visiting head of state, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, in order to discuss challenges faced by the Arab- and Muslim-American communities.

Speaking on the eve of the memorial service for Syrian President Hafez Al-Assad, the president also took the opportunity to offer his condolences. “I traveled to Syria to meet with President Al-Assad and met with him several times,” Clinton said. “And again I want to extend my deepest condolences to his family and to the people of Syria. They had their memorial service today. Secretary Albright represented us. And we wish them well and we hope that we can resume our relationship and the work for peace.”

After the president’s departure, the presentation of awards continued:

• The Award for Service to Humanity recipient was the Aga Khan Foundation, a non-denominational, international development agency created in 1967 by the Agha Khan, the 49th hereditary imam of the Ismaili Muslims. In 1999, it spent $89 million for 120 projects in 13 countries, including the United States.

• The Award for Institutional Accomplishment went to American Lebanese Syrian Associated Charities (ALSAC), which raises contributions to support St. Jude’s Children’s Research Hospital, founded by the late Lebanese-American entertainer Danny Thomas. This renowned hospital conducts research into childhood catastrophic diseases and treats thousands of children each year from across the globe, often free of charge.

• The Award for Corporate Commitment went to Fannie Mae for its tireless work to make home ownership a reality for millions of families and individuals, low- and middle-income families, minorities, immigrants, and people with special housing needs.

• Focus: Hope of Detroit received the Award for Community Service for its work in Detroit, Michigan. The organization’s many achievements include food programs for pregnant mothers, basic or special skills programs for young people to help launch them into the work force, and daycare so that parents can continue to learn and work.

• Radio talk show host Diane Rehm presented the Award for the Advancement of Human Rights to Kerry Kennedy Cuomo, founder of the Robert F. Kennedy Memorial Center for Human Rights. The center supports outstanding human rights activists and publishes reports on human rights around the world.

AAI recognized several companies who had donated $25,000 each to help underwrite the evening’s sparkling gala event. These were Burger King, Ford Motor Company, Hariri Interests, Inc., Philip Morris Companies, and the Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia. Other corporate and individual donors included International Graphics, MOSAIC foundation, e-Start.com-Startec Global Communications, Middle East Airlines, Betty and Jim Sams, Ghassan M. Saab and Ab and Sharon Alkassim.

Attendees of the gala event included Senators Spencer Abraham (R-MI), who was described as a Republican fighter for legal immigrants, and Chuck Robb (D-VA), Congressmen Nick Rahall (D-WV), Ray Lahood (R-IL) and John Sununu (R-NH). Former Gibran recipient Jacques Nasser, president and CEO of Ford Motor Company, presented the Gibran Award for Community Service to Focus: Hope of Detroit.

—Delinda C. Hanley

< Prev		Next >