Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, April 2004, pages 30-31

Congress Watch

 

President Bush Has the Last Word on Syria Accountability Act

 

By Shirl McArthur

On Dec. 12 President George W. Bush signed H.R. 1828, the “Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act,” which aims to “hold Syria accountable for the serious international security problems it has caused in the Middle East,” and which was described in detail in previous issues of this magazine. Comprising 36 “findings” that amount to an indictment of Syria and 10 “statements of policy,” it prohibits the export of “dual use” goods to Syria. The legislation says the president must impose any two of six sanctions unless he certifies that Syria has cut all ties to Palestinian resistance groups, withdrawn its troops from Lebanon, stopped developing medium- and long-range ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction, and has “ceased all support for, and facilitation of, all terrorist activities inside of Iraq.” The act includes full presidential waiver authority.

In signing it, however, Bush issued a statement saying that parts of the act infringed upon the constitutional authority granted to the president to make foreign policy. Specifically, regarding section 5, which requires him to impose sanctions unless he certifies to Congress that Syria has taken certain actions, the president argued that “a law cannot burden or infringe the president’s exercise of a core constitutional power by attaching conditions precedent to the use of that power. The executive branch shall construe and implement section 5 in a manner consistent with the president’s constitutional authority to conduct the nation’s foreign affairs and as commander in chief.”

Regarding section 6, the section requiring the secretary of state to report to Congress on various subjects relating to Syria and terrorism, Bush said, “the executive branch shall construe section 6 in a manner consistent with the president’s constitutional authority to withhold information” if it could impair foreign relations, national security or the performance of the executive’s duties.

In addition, he said, “my approval of the act does not constitute my adoption of the various statements of policy in the act as U.S. foreign policy. Given the constitution’s commitment to the presidency of the authority to conduct the nation’s foreign affairs, the executive branch shall construe such policy statements as advisory, giving them the due weight that comity between the legislative and executive branches should require, to the extent consistent with U.S. foreign policy.”

 

Neocons Enlist Congress in Crusade Against Middle East Studies Centers

An important development that went unnoticed in this column was the House’s Oct. 21 passage of H.R. 3077, the “International Studies in Higher Education Act of 2003,” which could cause academic international studies programs to lose their federal financing unless they show more support for U.S. foreign policy (see “Education,” p. 66of this issue). The bill, which was introduced by Rep. Peter Hoekstra on Sept. 11, was passed by the House by voice vote, with no debate, under a procedure normally used for routine, non-controversial measures, such as renaming a courthouse.

 

Federal money would dry up if the program didn’t show enough support for U.S. foreign policy.

The bill amends the Higher Education Act of 1965 to revise requirements under Title VI for grants to international education programs. Specifically, it directs the secretary of education, “in making grants for graduate and undergraduate language and area centers and programs, to take into account the degree to which activities of centers, programs, and fellowships at institutions of higher education advance national interests, generate and disseminate information, and foster debate on U.S. foreign policy from diverse perspectives.”

Section 6 establishes an “independent International Education Advisory Board to advise Congress and the secretary on Title VI programs in relation to national needs with respect to homeland security, international education, international affairs, and foreign language training,” and to make recommendations that will result in the development of “programs at the postsecondary education level that will reflect diverse perspectives and the full range of views on world regions, foreign language, and international affairs.”

Three members of the seven-member board would be appointed by the secretary of education, at least two of whom would come from national security agencies, with the other four appointed by Congress.

In other words, the advisory board would be empowered to tell the secretary of education which studies programs meet the vague and ambiguous requirements and are therefore entitled to continue receiving federal grants. Or, put another way, federal money would dry up if the international studies program didn’t show enough support for U.S. foreign policy, contribute to homeland security, or show enough “diversity” of political opinions.

Although the measure applies to all of the academic international studies centers, it apparently is aimed at Middle East Studies centers. It was introduced after the House Education subcommittee held a hearing in June on “International Programs of Higher Education and Questions of Bias.” At that hearing Stanley Kurtz, a fellow at the Hoover Institution and contributing editor to National Review, charged that “Title VI-funded programs in Middle Eastern studies (and other area studies) tend to purvey extreme and one-sided criticisms of American foreign policy.”

Kurtz is one of the three most prominent advocates of gaining neoconservative control over Middle East Studies programs. The other two are Martin Kramer, editor of the right-wing Middle East Quarterly and also a senior associate in the Moshe Dayan Center at Tel Aviv University, and Daniel Pipes, director of the Middle East Forum and recently appointed by Bush, over senatorial and Arab-American objections, to the board of directors of the United States Institute of Peace.

After passage by the House the bill was sent to the Senate and referred to the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. That committee is chaired by Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH) with Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) the ranking minority member. As these are two of the Senate’s responsible members, there is reason to hope they will be able to prevent the bill from going any further.

 

Omnibus Appropriations Bill Passes

After reconvening on Jan. 20, the Senate quickly passed the FY-04 “Omnibus” appropriations conference report (House Rpt. 108-401) on Jan. 22. Included in the Omnibus—which was appended to H.R. 2673, the agriculture bill—are both the State Department and Foreign Operations (foreign aid) appropriations bills. As expected, the sections relevant to the Middle East remained as described in the March 2004 Washington Report. Specifically, $2.69 billion for Israel ($480 million in economic aid, $2.16 billion in military aid, and $50 million for “refugees resettling in Israel”); $1.875 billion for Egypt ($575 million in economic aid and $1.3 billion in military aid); $250 million in economic aid and $206 million in military aid for Jordan; and $35 million for Lebanon, of which not less than $4 million should be for American educational institutions. The bill also says that up to $100 million can be transferred from the “Iraq Relief and Reconstruction Fund” to Turkey.

In addition, the bill includes a section called “Palestinian Statehood,” which is identical to the same section included in the FY ‘03 Omnibus appropriations bill. The section says that no funds may be provided to support a Palestinian state unless the secretary of state certifies to Congress that the new Palestinian leadership has jumped through a number of difficult hoops. The section includes full presidential waiver authority, plus an “exemption” that says this restriction shall not apply to assistance intended to help reform the PA or a newly elected governing entity to help it meet these requirements.

The Omnibus bill also includes just one of the three sections inserted into previous bills that have amounted to recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. The section included in the Omnibus says that U.S. citizens born in Jerusalem may, upon their request, have their place of birth recorded as Israel.

 

Resolutions Supporting Private Peace Initiatives Gaining Co-sponsors

The resolutions introduced in the Senate and the House resolving that Congress applauds the private efforts “of Israelis and Palestinians who are working together to conceive pragmatic, serious plans for achieving peace,” as described in detail in the previous issue of the Washington Report, gradually are gaining co-sponsors. However, H. Res. 462, introduced on Nov. 21 by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA), has gained no co-sponsors after being replaced by H. Res. 479, introduced on Dec. 8 by Rep. Lois Capps (D-CA).

The latter bill has gained 11 co-sponsors in addition to those named in the previous issue of this magazine. They are Reps. Julia Carson (D-IN), William Lacy Clay (D-MO), Danny Davis (D-IL), Sue Kelly (R-NY), Karen McCarthy (D-MO), Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC), John Olver (D-MA), Major Owens (D-NY), Hilda Solis (D-CA), Tom Udall (D-NM), and Lynn Woolsey (D-CA). The identical Senate bill, S. Res. 276, introduced Nov. 25 by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), has gained only one co-sponsor—Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT)—in addition to those named in the previous issue.

The counter bill, H. Res. 478, introduced Dec. 8 by Israel-firsters Reps. Shelley Berkley (D-NV) and Anthony Weiner (D-NY), “urging a return to the principles outlined in the ‘Road Map for Peace’ as a viable framework for achieving a peaceful solution in the Middle East,” and claiming that the Geneva Accord “compromises the principles of the Middle East Road Map for Peace,” has gained no co-sponsors.

 

Other Negative Bills Make Little Headway

Most of the other negative bills described in previous issues of this magazine have made little or no progress. The possible exceptions are the identical resolutions introduced in the Senate and the House expressing Congress’s “deep concern” regarding Iran’s failing “to adhere to its obligations under a safeguards agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency” and Iran’s “activities that appear to be designed to develop nuclear weapons.” The Senate version, S. Con. Res. 81, introduced on Nov. 13 by Feinstein, has gained two co-sponsors in addition to those mentioned in the previous issue of this magazine, Sens. George Allen (R-VA) and Harry Reid (D-NV). The House version, H. Con. Res. 332, introduced Nov. 20 by Rep. Curt Weldon (R-PA), has gained six co-sponsors: Reps. Jeb Bradley (R-NH), Martin Frost (D-TX), Bart Gordon (D-TN), Michael Michaud (D-ME), Weiner, and Robert Wexler (D-FL).

The “Saudi Arabia Accountability Act of 2003,” described in detail in the previous issue of this magazine and purportedly “to halt Saudi support for institutions that fund, train, incite, encourage, or in any other way aid and abet terrorism, and to secure full Saudi cooperation in the investigation of terrorist incidents,” has made almost no progress. The Senate version, S. 1888, introduced by Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) on Nov. 18, has gained no co-sponsors in addition to those mentioned in the previous issue. The House version, H.R. 3643, introduced by Weiner on Nov. 21, has gained one co-sponsor, Rep. Steve Rothman (D-NJ).

Similarly languishing are the various anti-Palestinian bills. Of the various bills prohibiting aid to the Palestinian Authority that have been described in previous issues of this magazine, only H.R. 3048, which would “limit assistance for the Palestinian Authority and the Palestinian People during fiscal year 2004” if the secretary of state determines that the PA has provided support for acts of terrorism during the prior 3-month period,” has gained one new co-sponsor, Weiner.

Also, the latest version of the “Israeli-Palestinian Peace Enhancement Act,” S. 1944, introduced in the Senate by Sen. John Ensign (D-NV) on Nov. 24 and described in detail in the March 2004 Washington Report, has gained no new co-sponsors.

Another anti-Palestinian bill, not previously mentioned in this column, is H.R. 3460, introduced on Nov. 6 by Weiner. It would prohibit aid “to the Palestinian Authority and the Palestinian people until the perpetrators, or suspected perpetrators, of the killings of United States citizens in Gaza on Oct. 15, 2003 are surrendered to the United States Government.” It has no co-sponsors.

 

PATRIOT Act Modifications Progress

The two bills introduced in the House and Senate aimed at correcting the abuses of the “PATRIOT Act” mentioned in the November and January/February issues of this magazine continue to gain co-sponsors. In the House, H.R. 3171, introduced by Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) on Sept. 24, which calls for “an appropriate review of recently enacted legislation relating to terrorism to assure that powers granted in it do not inappropriately undermine civil liberties,” has gained one co-sponsor, Rep. Holmes Norton. In the Senate, S. 1709, introduced Oct. 2 by Sen. Larry Craig (R-ID), which would “place reasonable limitations on the use of surveillance and the issuance of search warrants,” and would “sunset” some of the act’s most controversial surveillance provisions, has gained three co-sponsors, Sens. Kennedy, Blanche Lincoln (D-AR), and Reid.

 

Rep. Anthony Weiner Strikes Again

Only one new bill concerning the Middle East has been introduced since the 108th Congress convened for its second session. On Jan. 21, H.R. 3725 was introduced by Weiner, whose Brooklyn district must be a Likud stronghold. It would “prohibit U.S. military assistance for Egypt and express the sense of Congress that the amount of military assistance that would have been provided for Egypt for a fiscal year should be provided in the form of economic support fund assistance.” The bill’s 21 “findings” include such declarations as “Egypt is not a reliable ally in the war on terrorism,” and “Egypt is a dictatorship.” The bill, which includes presidential waiver authority, has no co-sponsors.

Shirl McArthur, a retired foreign service officer, is a consultant in the Washington, DC area.

< Prev		Next >