SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
friends committee on national legislation
Van Hollen Backs Sanders Resolutions to Block US Arms Sales to Israel
"President Biden has failed to hold Netanyahu accountable—ignoring U.S. law and undercutting his own stated policies as well as America's interests and values," said the Democratic senator from Maryland.
Nov 18, 2024
Support for U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders' resolutions that would block U.S. weapons sales to Israel continued to grow on Monday, with Sen. Chris Van Hollen releasing a letter to colleagues urging them to join him in trying to pass the measures later this week.
Sanders (I-Vt.)—backed by Sens. Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), and Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii)—introduced the joint resolutions of disapproval (JRDs) in September and announced last week that he would bring them to the floor for a vote.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) endorsed the JRDs last week, citing the failure of U.S. President Joe Biden's administration "to follow U.S. law and to suspend arms shipments" after warning Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government last month that it could be cut off from American weapons absent serious action to improve humanitarian conditions in the Gaza Strip.
Van Hollen (D-Md.) followed suit Monday, unveiling his letter and saying in a statement that "U.S. taxpayer-funded assistance should not come in the form of a blank check—even to our closest partners. We need assurances that U.S. interests, values, and priorities will be respected by foreign governments that receive American support. That principle should apply universally, including to the Netanyahu government."
"We've seen Prime Minister Netanyahu repeatedly violate the terms of American security assistance, disregard U.S. priorities, and ignore our requests, only to be rewarded by President Biden."
"But even as the United States has provided billions of dollars of American taxpayer-financed bombs and other offensive weapons systems, we've seen Prime Minister Netanyahu repeatedly violate the terms of American security assistance, disregard U.S. priorities, and ignore our requests, only to be rewarded by President Biden," he continued. "That pattern undermines the credibility of the United States and should not persist."
Van Hollen highlighted that he has "repeatedly supported Israel's right to defend itself and end Hamas' control of Gaza" since the Palestinian group's October 7, 2023 attack—which includes his vote for an April aid package—but also argued that "a just war must be waged justly."
"That's why recipients of U.S. weapons must comply with American laws and policies. Recipients of security assistance must facilitate and not arbitrarily restrict the delivery of humanitarian assistance into war zones where U.S. weapons are being used, and American-supplied weapons must be used in accordance with international humanitarian law. The Netanyahu government is violating both of these requirements in Gaza," he explained. "It is also rejecting a host of other priorities advanced by the United States, yet President Biden has failed to hold Netanyahu accountable—ignoring U.S. law and undercutting his own stated policies as well as America's interests and values."
"Doing so undermines American global leadership and is a disservice to the American people, the people of Israel, and people throughout the Middle East," the senator warned. "That is why I have repeatedly stated that the United States should pause the delivery of offensive weapons to the Netanyahu government until it complies with U.S. law and policy and until we can advance the security interests, priorities, and values of the American people."
While stressing his support for "the transfer of defensive systems, like the Iron Dome," and his opposition to an arms embargo, which many rights groups have called for, Van Hollen concluded that he will vote for the JRDs this week because "a partnership must be a two-way street, not a one-way blank check."
The JRDs would have to pass both the Democrat-controlled Senate and the Republican-held House of Representatives to reach Biden's desk. They would require a two-thirds majority in both chambers to override presidential vetoes. The push to pass the resolutions comes as lawmakers prepare for the GOP to control Congress and the White House next year following the elections earlier this month.
"The United States government must stop blatantly violating the law with regard to arms sales to Israel," Sanders wrote in The Washington Post on Monday. "The Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 and the Arms Export Control Act are very clear: The United States cannot provide weapons to any country that violates internationally recognized human rights. Section 620I of the Foreign Assistance Act is also explicit: No U.S. assistance may be provided to any country that 'prohibits or otherwise restricts, directly or indirectly, the transport or delivery of United States humanitarian assistance.'"
The resolutions are also backed by over 100 organizations, including the Center for Civilians in Conflict and Friends Committee on National Legislation (FCNL), which led a letter to senators last month.
Hassan El-Tayyab, legislative director for Middle East policy, described the upcoming vote as "historic," tellingAl Jazeera on Monday, "Just the fact that this is happening is already sending that political signal that it's not business as usual."
"There is no military solution to the conflict in Gaza—only a diplomatic one that addresses root causes of violence," El-Tayyab said as the death toll in the Palestinian enclave neared 44,000.
"Instead of sending more weapons, Congress and the administration should leverage military aid with Bibi [Netanyahu] and the Knesset to finally get them to accept a cease-fire deal in Gaza and Lebanon," he added. "And that, I think, is a far better strategy to secure Israel's defense and protect Palestinian human rights."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Aid Groups Applaud US Bill to Restore UNRWA Funding
"The need for U.S. support is more urgent than ever," said one advocate. "The lives and well-being of millions depend on it."
Sep 19, 2024
Rights groups on Thursday applauded three Democratic lawmakers for their proposal of a bill to restore United States funding to the United Nations' key agency tasked with providing services and humanitarian assistance to Palestinians in Gaza, six months after the U.S. suspended contributions following unverified accusations against the agency.
James Zogby, president of the Arab American Institute, expressed gratitude to Reps. André Carson (D-Ind.), Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), and Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) for introducing the UNRWA Emergency Restoration Act of 2024, aimed at restoring funding to the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East—legislation that Zogby said would be "lifesaving" if passed into law.
"UNRWA plays a vital role in providing essential services to millions of Palestinian refugees across the occupied Palestinian territory, Lebanon, Jordan, and Syria," said Zogby. "The ongoing genocide in Gaza has resulted in increased displacement, starvation, and death. It is both inhumane and unconscionable to continue withholding financial support from UNRWA."
The U.S.—the largest international funder of the agency, which relies almost entirely on voluntary contributions from donor states—promptly suspended funding for UNRWA last January after Israel claimed without evidence that 12 out of the agency's 13,000 staff members in Gaza had been involved in a Hamas-led attack on southern Israel last October.
Congress later passed a bill prohibiting UNRWA funding through at least March 2025.
In 2022, the U.S. contributed more than $343 million to the agency.
"UNRWA is the backbone of humanitarian aid in the Gaza Strip. U.S. funding should be restored immediately."
The Biden administration's decision to suspend donations to UNRWA pushed a number of U.S. allies to do the same, but countries including Germany, Sweden, Japan, and the United Kingdom have since reinstated their funding after an independent probe found that Israel had provided no supporting evidence of its claim.
"The United States should join our key allies in restoring this urgently needed funding for UNRWA. There is no time to lose," said Hassan El-Tayyab, legislative director for Middle East policy at the Friends Committee on National Legislation, expressing support for the newly introduced bill.
Bridget Moix, general secretary for the group, added that cutting of funding was "simply unconscionable" because the U.S.—as the Israeli military's largest international funder—bears responsibility for the "horrific violence and a massive humanitarian crisis" in Gaza.
"UNRWA is the backbone of humanitarian aid in the Gaza Strip," said Moix. "U.S. funding should be restored immediately."
Cavan Kharrazian, senior policy adviser for Demand Progress, noted that since the U.S. suspended funding to UNRWA, the humanitarian crisis in Gaza has worsened, with U.N. experts warning in July that famine had spread across the enclave.
"The need for U.S. support is more urgent than ever," said Kharrazian. "The lives and well-being of millions depend on it."
"We call on leaders in Congress to take principled stands like this as future funding bills move," he added, "removing these harmful prohibitions against UNRWA funding."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Militarism Doesn’t Stop International Terrorism. What Does?
As militarism increasingly demonstrates that it is incapable of resolving conflict with non-state armed groups, the need to reevaluate the approach to such violence is as pressing as ever.
Jul 28, 2024
More than 38,000 dead in Gaza. Fighting with the Houthis in the Red Sea and Yemen. A never-ending stream of back and forth strikes between American forces and Iran-backed groups in Iraq and Syria.
Conflict in the Middle East is escalating, fueled by weapons and military actions that increase the very real risk of a greater regional war. All the while a wave of military coups in Africa continues, aided by training and assistance carried out in the name of “counterterrorism.”
As militarism increasingly demonstrates that it is incapable of resolving conflict with non-state armed groups, the need to reevaluate the approach to such violence is as pressing as ever.
It is long past time to move beyond Band-Aid counterterrorism that only fuels the very injustices that cause the formation and growth of violent non-state groups in the first place.
Following the horrific events of 9/11 and the beginning of the so-called “Global War on Terror,” the United States embarked on more than two decades of using war as the foundation for its response to terrorism threats abroad. Today, it remains in armed conflict with numerous non-state groups across the Middle East and Africa, including ISIS, al-Shabaab, al Qaeda, and others.
However, while the War on Terror was intended to quash terrorism, the United States’ violent approach has instead served to fuel it. Annual attacks from non-state groups increased by 1900%—or 20 fold—in the seven countries the U.S. either invaded or conducted air strikes in between 2001 and 2018. Annual attacks worldwide increased fivefold during the same time period. And as the U.S. continued to pour billions of dollars into training foreign forces to combat “militants,” the result was increasing reports of gross violations of human rights by government forces, exacerbated violence, instability, and military coups. This approach has proven deeply counterproductive while failing in combatting terrorism worldwide.
So, what can the U.S. do to more effectively address the threat of international terrorism?
A new report from the Friends Committee on National Legislation (FCNL) provides concrete recommendations for critical non-military tools to both prevent and respond to this complex issue. These recommendations fall into three broad categories: (1) diplomacy; (2) development and peacebuilding; and (3) law enforcement, intelligence gathering, and restorative justice.
The report details the need for increased investment in and use of State Department experts in strengthening state stability and other core competencies, as well as using leverage to support negotiated settlements to wars with non-state armed groups. This requires properly resourcing and deploying the State Department’s Negotiations Support Unit of trained, experienced experts in negotiating and implementing peace agreements; effectively executing long-term economic development and peacebuilding programs like the Global Fragility Act; and moving away from a war paradigm and the use of lethal force as a first resort in responding to international terrorism. Instead, the U.S. should prioritize the use of law enforcement and intelligence gathering to disrupt plots and hold individuals accountable through Article III courts—a strategy which has been highly effective and grossly underappreciated throughout the post-9/11 period.
Rather than partnering with autocratic regimes and training their militaries to kill suspected militants, we must pursue nonviolent means that are grounded in respect for human rights and help address the root causes of violence. In regions suffering from discrimination and corruption, non-state militants rise up to oppose the current power structure. By addressing the issues that contribute to the formation and expansion of these groups, the U.S. and its partners can more effectively counter global terrorism. But responding to the emergence of violent groups through greater violence and oppression, with resulting civilian casualties and destabilizing impact, serves only to reinforce the beliefs of non-state actors and bolsters their ability to recruit others to their cause.
For too long, the focus in the executive branch and Congress has been on the question of whether or not to utilize force against non-state actors. It is time to expand this question and prioritize other avenues for counterterrorism. These nonviolent approaches have proven to be highly successful: Peaceful negotiations have accounted for the resolution of 43% of conflicts involving non-state actors. In contrast, just 7% of these conflicts were resolved through military action.
It is long past time to move beyond Band-Aid counterterrorism that only fuels the very injustices that cause the formation and growth of violent non-state groups in the first place. Addressing the core reasons for international terrorism and responding to it strategically and skillfully is the only realistic avenue toward a safer, more just world.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular