Barbara Boxer, AIPAC seek to codify Israel's right to discriminate against
Americans
A bill introduced by the California Democrat would uniquely exempt Israel from
long-standing requirements imposed on all other nations
* * Glenn Greenwald
* guardian.co.uk, Saturday 13 April 2013 11.15 EDT
Democratic Sen.
Barbara Boxer introduces an Aipac-favored bill that would allow Israel,
uniquely among all countries, to discriminate against Americans of Arab
descent Photograph: Joe Marquette/EPA
(updated below - Update II)
In order for the US to permit citizens of a foreign country to enter the US
without a visa, that country must agree to certain conditions. Chief among them
is
reciprocity: that country must allow Americans to enter without a visa
as well. There are 37 countries which have been permitted entrance into
America's "visa wavier"
program, and all of them - all 37 - reciprocate by allowing American
citizens to enter their country without a visa.
The American-Israeli Political Action Committee (Aipac) is now pushing
legislation that would allow Israel to enter this program, so that Israelis can
enter the US without a visa. But as JTA's Ron Kampeas reports, there is one
serious impediment: Israel has a practice of routinely
refusing to allow Americans of Arab ethnicity or Muslim backgrounds to
enter their country or the occupied territories it controls; it also
bars those who are critical of Israeli actions or supportive of Palestinian
rights. Israel refuses to relinquish this discriminatory practice of exclusion
toward Americans, even as it seeks to enter the US's visa-free program
for the benefit of Israeli citizens.
As a result, at the behest of Aipac, Democrat Barbara Boxer, joined by
Republican Roy Blunt, has introduced a bill that would provide for Israel's
membership in the program while vesting it with a right that no other country
in this program
has: namely, the right to exclude selected Americans from this visa-free right
of entrance. In other words, the bill sponsored by these American senators
would exempt Israel from a requirement that applies to every
other nation on the planet, for no reason other than to allow the
Israeli government to engage in racial, ethnic and religious
discrimination against US citizens. As Lara Friedman explained when the Senate
bill was first introduced, it "takes the extraordinary
step of seeking to change the current US law to create a special and
unique exception for Israel in US immigration law." In sum, it is as
pure and blatant an example of prioritizing the interests of the Israeli
government over the rights of US citizens as one can imagine, and it's
being pushed by Aipac and a cast of bipartisan senators.
Israel's religious- and ethnicity-based entrance exclusions of American
citizens are so well-documented and pervasive that even the US State Department
provides an official warning about it in its official travel advisory for
Israel, noting:
>Some
US citizens holding Israeli nationality, possessing a Palestinian
identity card, or of Arab or Muslim origin have experienced significant
difficulties in entering or exiting Israel or the West Bank."
Friedman notes that the bill is specifically designed to protect "Israel's
regular and arbitrary denial of entry to US citizens . . . in particular US
citizens of Arab descent or US citizens viewed as sympathetic to the
Palestinians". As the former Director of the US Office of B'Tselem,
Mitchell Plitnick, explained this week, concern over Israel's discriminatory
exclusions was heightened by Israel's refusal this January to allow an American
teacher of Palestinian descent, Nour Joudah, to
enter Israel to teach English in the West Bank despite her holding a
valid visa. As Plitnick noted, "Israel, undoubtedly, is concerned that a
reciprocal agreement would compromise its ability to bar not only
Palestinian-Americans, but also pro-Palestinian activists, from entering the
country."
To accommodate this desire to discriminate, Boxer,
Blunt and Aipac are now attempting to create a special exemption for
Israel from the requirement to which all other countries are bound, and
by which the US will be bound vis-a-vis Israelis. More amazingly, the
only purpose of this exemption from these US senators would be to allow
Israel to discriminate against the citizens of the country these
senators are supposed to represent. As Mike Coogan of the US Campaign to End
Israeli Occupation wrote in the Hill this week, "given that Israel views the
mere existence of Palestinians as a
threat, the [Boxer/Aipac bill] would essentially codify Israel's
discrimination against Palestinian-, Muslim-, and Arab-Americans into US law."
Indeed, Aipac is not even attempting to pretend this exemption
has a non-discriminatory purpose. He further explained:
According to off the record accounts, AIPAC officials told members of Congress
that there would need to be flexibility on this legal requirement to
accommodate Israel's ongoing discrimination against Arab- and
Muslim-Americans who attempt to travel to Israel and the Occupied
Palestinian Territories."
So brazen is this
bill in the special favors it showers on Israel at the expense of
American citizens that even normally loyal factions in Congress are
balking. As Kampeas reported:
'It's
stunning that you would give a green light to another country to violate the
civil liberties of Americans traveling abroad,' said a staffer for
one leading pro-Israel lawmaker in the US House of Representatives.
Stunning indeed, but unfortunately far from surprising. Coogan similarly
reported:
"Numerous public reports and off-the-record accounts from legislators and staff
signaled that the brazenness and late release of the Israel lobby's
legislative demands blindsided both individual members and various
committees. Provisions appeared tone deaf and legally problematic, even
among Israel's strongest supporters. . . .
>"Behind closed doors,
members of Congress and legal counsel alike balked at the idea that
Israel be allowed in the program but remain exempt from the reciprocity
requirement. Attorneys for both individual members and committees
privately advised that complying with the request would be a
flagrant violation of certain US laws barring discrimination, and would
undermine the US government's call for the equal protection of all its
citizens traveling abroad."
Apparently, none
of that is a concern for Barbara Boxer, Roy Blunt or Aipac. Protecting
the equal rights of their own country's citizens quite obviously has
little significance when weighed against the supreme mandate to serve
the interests of the Israeli government. That's not hyperbole: how else
can this bill be fairly described?
The bill, formally named the United States-Israel Strategic Partnership Act of
2013, now has a total of 18 co-sponsors. That includes 9 Democrats and 9
Republicans, perfectly symbolizing how bipartisan is loyalty to Aipac on
Capitol Hill. Besides Boxer, the bill's chief sponsor, that list of
co-sponsors includes such progressive favorites as Ron Wyden, Amy
Klobuchar, Richard Blumenthal, and Benjamin Cardin, as well as reflexive
right-wing GOP Israel supporters such as John Cornyn and Saxby
Chambliss. Perhaps most disgracefully, one of the co-sponsors is
Democrat Debbie Stabenow of Michigan, whose state boasts a large Arab-American
and Muslim-American population: exactly the people who would be targeted by
this discrimination from a foreign government which she is seeking to legalize.
Coogan notes that, even with 18 co-sponsors in the Senate, the bill has
attracted an unusually low level of support for an Aipac bill, which
typically passes quickly and without much resistance. Plitnick says that "it
certainly seems like AIPAC reached a little too far with this bill" and notes
that Coogan's reporting suggests "this is a sign that AIPAC's grip on Congress
might be weakening". This all follows an article in the Forward suggesting that
Aipac's possible attempts to have Israeli aid uniquely
protected from the budget cuts mandated by "sequestration" could
"deprive aid to Israel of its broader support in the foreign aid
community" by creating resentment in Congress and in the country
generally.
Indeed, as AIPAC itself notes in touting Boxer's Senate bill, it includes
numerous other provisions
to further bolster Israel's special status vis-a-vis US policy. The bill begins
by reciting the standard narrative favored by the Israeli
government: "the Government of Iran continues to pose a grave threat to
the region and the world at large with its reckless uranium enrichment
program and defiance of multiple United Nations Security Council
resolutions." At a time when American citizens are facing severe budget
cuts, the bill vows "to continue to provide Israel with robust security
assistance". The bill accomplishes its pro-discrimination goal by
mandating Israel's entrance into the visa-free program provided that
Israel "has made every reasonable effort, without jeopardizing the
security of the State of Israel, to ensure that reciprocal travel
privileges are extended to all United States citizens'". That is the
special exemption that no other country in the program is permitted:
Israel, alone in the world, is not required to reciprocate for US
citizens but merely will make "every reasonable effort, without
jeopardizing the security of the State of Israel, to ensure that
reciprocal travel privileges are extended to all United States
citizens."
Despite the unusually tepid reaction in Congress, this
fight is far from over. Aipac rarely if ever loses when it comes to
bills they want Congress to enact. As Coogan notes, "even without a
large number of co-sponsors, it could pass under unanimous consent or
other rules used by members of Congress to stymie debate or give the
impression that legislation has more support than is really the case."
Aipac and its supporters have long expressed righteous outrage at suggestions
that they prioritize Israeli interests over US interests and those of
American citizens. Yet it is hard to imagine a clearer or purer example
of exactly that behavior than this pernicious bill. If you're a US
politician finding yourself working to allow a foreign government to
discriminate against your own fellow citizens - by vesting that foreign
country with a right that no other country (including your own) has -
then you're essentially broadcasting to the world that the interests of
that foreign government take precedence over your own and over the equal rights
of your own fellow citizens.
UPDATE
Somewhat
ironically, as Kampeas notes, what long kept Israel out of the US's
visa-free program were "concerns in Congress' Homeland Security and
Intelligence Committees that granting visa-free access to Israel's Arab
minority could pose a security risk to the United States." So what had
previously prevented this deal was that the US was long driven by the
same discriminatory mindset that is now driving Israel: we want to keep Arabs
out of our country! Notably, the Boxer/Aipac bill accommodates only the Israeli
concern
about Arabs in their country, but not the identical US concern, as they
provide this discriminatory exemption right only to Israel but not to
their own country.
UPDATE II
To illustrate how central the concept of reciprocity is in foreign relations
(and to seize the
opportunity to highlight a story I love so very much): on Friday, the US
announced it was banning 18 Russian officials from entering the US due
to human rights violations; today, Russia, in response, announced a list of 18
US officials banned from entering Russia due to their participation in the US
torture regime, including David Addington, John Yoo, and two former
commanding generals at Guantanamo. The Russians did not hide the fact
that they were driven by one consideration only: the principle of
reciprocity.
In 2004, the US began photographing and
fingerprinting upon entry to the country the citizens of various
countries, including Brazil; in response, a Brazilian court ordered the
Brazilian government to begin photographing and fingerprinting US citizens
entering Brazil. I recall quite well that a separate line was then created at
all
Brazilian airports under a huge sign that read: "for US citizens", where all
arriving Americans waited in a long line. It's likely that the
Brazilian government - which had no real interest in fingerprinting
people - threw the fingerprints and photographs away. They did it for
one reason: reciprocity.
This is the crucial, central principle
which Barbara Boxer, Aipac and friends are discarding in order to
benefit Israel. And what's most amazing is that they are discarding it
not to the benefit of their own country and its citizens, but rather to
their disadvantage, in order to benefit a foreign country. What they are
saying, in effect, is that they want to waive reciprocity so that
Israeli citizens can be treated better than US citizens in relations
between the two countries. It is hard to overstate just how
extraordinary that is.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/apr/13/barbara-boxer-aipac-israel-discrimination
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digest: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
[email protected]
[email protected]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
