TIMES OF ISRAEL: Senate backs Israel in event of strike on Iran nuclear weapon programVote urging support should Israel be forced to act passes Senate unanimously; ‘resolution makes clear nuclear Iran not an option’ co-sponsor says

NEW YORK — In a show of force, the United States Senate on Wednesday unanimously passed a resolution urging an uncompromising US stance against Iranian efforts to acquire nuclear weapons, calling for Washington’s support should Israel strike the program.

“If the Government of Israel is compelled to take military action in legitimate self-defense against Iran’s nuclear weapons program, the United States Government should stand with Israel and provide, in accordance with United States law and the constitutional responsibility of Congress to authorize the use of military force, diplomatic, military, and economic support to the Government of Israel in its defense of its territory, people, and existence,” the resolution reads.

While senators are careful in their calls for US military intervention, the resolution, which passed 99-0, is seen as the most direct expression yet heard from Washington reflecting support for a potential Israeli strike.It also calls for the US to take “such action as may be necessary” to keep Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapons capability.

“I cannot emphasize enough my strong concerns about Iran’s nuclear program and the extraordinary threat it poses to the United States, to Israel and to the entire international community,” Senator Bob Menendez (D-NJ), the powerful chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said in a speech on the Senate floor before Wednesday’s vote.

Diplomatic efforts “have failed to achieve their central objective — getting Iran to make concessions on the nuclear program,” Menendez said. “It is clear to me that we cannot allow the Iranians to continue to drag their feet by talking while all the while they grow their nuclear program.”

Menendez cited an International Atomic Energy Agency report released earlier Wednesday which said Iran was speeding up its enrichment work at Natanz.

“We cannot allow Iran to buy more time talking — even as the centrifuges keep spinning. There is no doubt, there has never been a doubt – not in my mind – that a nuclear-armed Iran is not an option,” he said.

The resolution, he said, “makes clear that a nuclear Iran is not an option, and that the Unites States has Israel’s back… Iran’s leaders must understand, that unless they change course their situation will only get worse and economic struggles and international isolation will only grow. They must understand that at the end of the day their pursuit of a nuclear weapons capability will make them less, not more secure.”

It also contained a message for Israel, Menendez continued.

“The bottom line: Israel should always understand that the United States has its back, that we will not allow Iran to obtain nuclear weapons capability, and, if we are forced to, we will take whatever means necessary to prevent this outcome,” he said.

The resolution itself “declares that the United States has a vital national interest in, and unbreakable commitment to, ensuring the existence, survival, and security of the State of Israel, and reaffirms United States support for Israel’s right to self-defense.”

The resolution was introduced by Menendez and Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), and had 92 cosponsors (out of 100 senators) by the time it reached the Senate floor for a vote. It passed unanimously.

Reactions to the resolution included enthusiastic support by pro-Israel groups and criticism by groups opposed to further sanctions or military measures against Iran’s nuclear program.

The “Senate action…comes at a critical moment as Iran stands on the verge of attaining nuclear weapons capability following repeated defiance of the international community,” the American Israel Public Affairs Committee said on Wednesday.

“The passage of this resolution is an extremely significant and timely statement of solidarity with Israel and a restatement of America’s determination to thwart Iran’s nuclear quest – which endangers American, Israeli, and international security,” AIPAC said.

Meanwhile, the National Iranian American Council said the resolution amounted to “saber rattling.”

“Apparently the Senate thinks the standoff between the US and Iran suffers from a lack of brinksmanship,” the group’s policy director Jamal Abdi said. “Washington and Tehran are stuck in vicious cycle of mutual escalation that can only be broken through the give and take of serious negotiations, not through further saber rattling.”

He called on Congress to “abstain from any more reckless threats or sanctions that push us closer to the brink of war with Iran. Instead, Congress should ensure diplomacy can succeed by making it absolutely clear and credible that, in exchange for verifiable concessions that prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, sanctions will be lifted.”

The resolution urges US support in the case of an Israeli strike, but includes a few key caveats. It only supports an attack conducted “in legitimate self-defense” and directed “against Iran’s nuclear weapons program,” both phrases added to the resolution as it went through committee.

The resolution also states outright that “Nothing in this resolution shall be construed as an authorization for the use of force or a declaration of war.”

“No one wants another conflict anywhere in the world militarily, but we also don’t want a nuclear-capable Iran,” the resolution’s Republican sponsor, Lindsey Graham, told reporters at a February press conference.

Senator Bob Menendez' passionate defense of Israel From the AIPAC conference, the climax of a speech by Bob Menendez, US Senator from New Jersey

What is remarkable about this is that it was not part of his prepared remarks. The bulk of this section appears to be extemporaneous.

The text:

While the Shoah has a central role in Israel’s identity, it is not the reason behind its founding, and it’s not the main justification for its existence. That extreme characterization of that mistaken view is that Western powers established Israel in 1948 based on their own guilt; at the expense of Arab peoples who lived there. Therefore the current state is illegitimate and should be wiped off the face of the map. This flawed argument is not only in defiance of basic humanity dignity, but in plain defiance of history. It is in defiance of ancient history as told in biblical texts and through archaeological evidence. It ignores the history of millennia. Several thousand years of history leads to an undeniable conclusion: the establishment of the State of Israel in modern times is a political reality with roots going back to King David and the time of Abraham and Sarah. The argument for Israel’s legitimacy does not depend on what we say in any speech. It has been made by history; it has been made by the men and women who made the desert green; by Nobel prizes earned; by groundbreaking innovations and enviable institutions; by lives saved; by democracy defended; by peace made; by battle won. There can be no denying the Jewish people’s legitimate right to live in peace and security in a homeland to which they have a connection for thousands of years.

Notice also that what makes this effective is that he is doing what I recommend pro-Israel activists do - he uses the proper framework of Jewish history.

Too bad too many Jews can't do the same in defending Israel.

---

Thank you Lonny Kaplan for your always kind introduction, and for your support and friendship over the years. And thank you to AIPAC for the warm welcome you have always given me every year, at every event I’ve attended. Thank you. Let me also recognize the New Jersey delegation – some 500 this year. Some are here this morning – with Steve Klinghoffer and Mike Levin leading the way. Let’s hear it for New Jersey!

Let me just say to all of you at AIPAC, all who are committed to the strongest possible relationship between the US and Israel — as I have been throughout my public service career — I look forward to working with you in my new role as Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee.

It is one of the Senate’s original ten standing committees and has helped shape American foreign policy through the complex geopolitics of our ever-changing world. The Committee has helped every American president – from Harry Truman to Barack Obama – protect and defend our fundamental promise to stand with Israel and the Israeli people in a strong and lasting alliance.

As Chairman, I can say – without hesitation – I will keep that promise as I always have. There will never be daylight between the United States and Israel on my watch – never — not on my watch!

I follow in the footsteps of two great Chairmen – Secretary of State John Kerry, and Vice President Joe Biden who yesterday, in his speech, stressed that Israel and the United States have always agreed on the strategic imperative that Israel be able to defend itself, and I couldn’t agree more. And I look forward to doing even more to strengthen our commitment to Israel, to shared democratic values — no matter what may bloom from the shifting sands of the Arab Spring.

Whatever challenges lay ahead, whatever new threats we face… whether in the form of rockets from Gaza, a nuclear threat from Iran, the spillover of violence from Syria, or the rise of Islamist extremists anywhere in the region – the strength of Israel’s democracy will remain a beacon of hope for good governance, economic progress, and the power of an enlightened society to foster democratic ideals.

In my view, the challenges of the 21st century world will require two things:

First — we continue to project the wisdom of our democratic ideals everywhere and the power of our military strength where necessary.

Second — we be fully prepared to adjust our policies and our preparedness to the shifting nature of the new threats we will face.

Today we see these new threats taking shape from the Northwest Frontier Province of Pakistan across Afghanistan to Iran, Iraq, the Middle East and now increasingly in North Africa.

We heard Secretary Clinton issue a clear warning to the Committee last month of an evolving threat in Mali and North Africa from Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb. She told us it is more than a terrorist organization; it’s a criminal enterprise armed with heavy weapons spreading from the conflict in Libya.

The fact is we need to be ahead of the curve and, as Chairman, I intend to keep us ahead of the curve when it comes to present and future threats to our security.

But, even in the face of uncertainty and upheaval around the world – there is room for optimism.

Even amidst revolutionary change in the Middle East, the US-Israeli relationship has reached unprecedented levels… Simply put, our two countries’ military and security cooperation have never been better.

From Egypt to Syria and beyond, the Arab revolutions have been, at best, a mixed bag for Israel.

We cannot help but admire the courage of those willing to risk their lives for universal freedoms and human dignity. But these revolutions will have been for nothing if they replace secular dictatorships with religious ones.

The challenge to the United States is as clear as it is daunting — to forge long-term, durable relationships with a more democratic Middle East instead of relying on authoritarian regimes that may support our interests one day, but could be gone the next.

Some here in Washington look at the challenges in this new Middle East and advocate disengagement. I strongly disagree.

We can’t advocate America’s interests – including the protection of Israel – from the sidelines. We need to roll up our sleeves and engage in support of our ideals, values, and interests.

This means engaging with emerging, populist, immature political actors whose views we will sometimes, undoubtedly, find objectionable. But these new actors must know that America will never compromise our democratic principles, our commitment to human rights, to tolerant political discourse, and – above all — to Israel’s security.

In the long term they can result in the establishment of democracies that increase economic growth everywhere and lead to a peaceful settlement that secures Israel’s future and, ultimately, stabilizes the region.

But, in the short term, they can threaten the security of the United States and Israel and test our resolve.

We have already seen instability on Israel’s borders both in Syria and the Sinai.

This turbulence will likely continue for the foreseeable future, but one thing will remain constant – the strong-unshakeable-unbendable-unbreakable-and-always-rock-solid relationship between the United States and Israel. That relationship is – and will always remain — a given.

Israel – and its adversaries — must always know that it will not stand alone in meeting any challenge or any threat to its security. America will always stand shoulder-to-shoulder with Israel.

Recently it has been necessary to reaffirm our commitment to Israel in several ways:

First, in condemning comments by the Turkish Prime Minister equating Zionism – the foundation of the Jewish state and the movement for Jewish self-determination — with fascism and anti-Semitism, and labeling it “a crime against humanity.”

Clearly, we are committed to the long-standing alliance between the United States and Turkey, but the Prime Minister’s remarks were uncalled for and offensive, which is why I signed a letter with my colleagues expressing our grave disappointment and calling on Prime Minister Erdogan to retract his remarks.

Second, I reaffirmed – with Senator Lindsay Graham — our commitment to Israel with the introduction of a bipartisan resolution that simply calls on the United States to stand with Israel and provide diplomatic, military, and economic support to the government of Israel in defense of its territory, people, and existence.

There are new challenges that emerge every day in the region.

One might say that the first challenge is Israel’s relationship with Egypt — which presents a dynamic set of issues for both Israel and the United States.

The Camp David Accords have been the cornerstone of 35 years of peace between the two nations. They are essential to maintaining regional stability and Israel’s security.

The fact is the United States derives significant security benefits from our ongoing bilateral military and intelligence relationship with Egypt. It has meant close counterterrorism cooperation, privileged access through the Suez Canal, and overflight rights.

Those of us who have met with senior Israeli officials since the 2011 revolution have heard concerns about the prospect of suspension of American military assistance to Egypt.

The November 2012 Israeli military operation in Gaza is a reminder of the critical importance of Egypt as a mediator in the Arab World.

We should be focusing more of our efforts on keeping Egypt stable by helping a struggling Egyptian economy, which is the context in which I accept Secretary Kerry’s announcement over the weekend pledging $250 million in non-military assistance.

Still, we must be ever-vigilant in monitoring the situation. American security assistance to Egypt can’t be a blank check.

That’s why Congress made it abundantly clear – in the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2012 – that US assistance to Egypt would be contingent upon upholding its 1979 Peace Treaty with Israel. That is our bottom line, and it will remain our bottom line when it comes to the US-Egyptian relationship.

In short, for the good of the region — for the good of Israel, and for our own security interests – we must work with Egypt and help steer it in the right direction.

They are an essential partner in the region… It will require patience as Egypt works through a difficult but hopeful time for its people.

But we will also make clear, in no uncertain terms, where our interests lie and what type of actions we cannot and will not accept as we try to move forward.

As for the prospects for the peace process, it has always been my position – as it is yours — that we must move toward an acceptable two state solution.

.If we can finally achieve that goal, it will be in Israel’s interest, it will be in the Palestinian’s interest, and it will be in America’s interest.

I’m hopeful that with the President’s upcoming trip to Israel, and with the diplomatic skill Secretary Kerry brings to the table, we will not only re-engage and re-connect, but we will make real progress toward a two state solution.

But let’s be clear: if we are to get there, it is critical that the Palestinians come back to the negotiating table and stop the stunts, distractions, and grandstanding at the United Nations.

Unilateral Palestinian action at the United Nations will not work. In fact, it is counterproductive and fundamentally jeopardizes the Palestinians’ relationship with the United States and undermines their own interest.

Let’s be clear — Palestinian membership in any UN organization – whether it’s the IAEA or the World Health Organization, or any other UN organization – could have a ripple effect that will only serve to set back the peace process, and potentially do grave damage to America’s role in the UN system.

We must be careful not to allow US engagement on strategic international security and economic issue like nuclear non-proliferation or intellectual property rights to be jeopardized by mercurial Palestinian actions at the UN.

Frankly, in my view, President Abbas’ misguided actions at the UN will not help bring peace to the Palestinian people… it will not help restart peace negotiations with Israel, and it will not bring any political advantage to the Palestinian Authority.

To create a sovereign Palestinian state with clear boundaries, there has to be a negotiated settlement. There must be partners for peace. There are no shortcuts. The only way to achieve a true, lasting peace for the Palestinian people is through comprehensive negotiations and dialogue with Israel.

And we cannot stand idly by and allow the Palestinians to evade the peace process by pressing their political cause in a different way – a backdoor approach.

Real state building – the kind that America can energetically support, doesn’t happen at the UN… it happens with the Palestinians themselves.

To keep the peace process moving forward – it is also critical that Egypt and Israel continue to work closely to implement the cease fire that was agreed to after the November conflict in Gaza.

This means – first and foremost – making certain no more weapon-smuggling into Gaza. It must end – Period! It threatens Israel and it could lead to a repeated cycle of violence that none of us wants to see.

I’m optimistic that – if we can continue progress on this front –economic activity between Gaza and Israel can increase; it will stabilize the situation, directly benefit Israelis and Palestinians — and it will give us reason to be hopeful that progress is possible.

What has also proven to be most effective, and what I consider to be absolutely vital, is our continued security assistance to Israel.

That’s why I cosponsored the bill authorizing Israel’s Iron Dome anti-missile defense system to intercept short-range missiles launched against Israel.

And why I cosponsored the United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation Act that will ensure Israel has the defensive and offensive capabilities it needs — when it needs them.

And one more thing: I fully support funding the Arrow-3 missile defense interceptor. It is an essential part of Israel’s security in the changing dynamic in the region.

While Iron Dome has demonstrated the importance of defending Israel from rockets that can be launched from across its border, Arrow-3 allows Israel to defend itself against longer range missile threats – specifically from Iran.

As Chairman, I can assure you I will vigorously support Israeli development of a multi-tiered missile defense system that protects the Israeli people from any missile launched from anywhere, anytime.

Of course, the greatest threat to Israel’s security, is Iran.

It is clear to everyone in this room that there can never be any daylight between the United States and Israel – not ever, but certainly not when it comes to Iran’s drive to achieve nuclear weapons capability.

We cannot – we must not — and we will not stand for a nuclear Iran. Period!

Let’s put the Iranian threat to Israel and the region in perspective:

An Iran with a nuclear weapons capability would be emboldened to take more aggressive actions against both Israel and the United States.

Yes, a Shahab-3 missile can hit Israel, but it can also hit a NATO ally… and, under our NATO treaty agreement, we are obligated to respond on behalf of any NATO ally.

It’s already unacceptable and deplorable support for terrorist groups like Hezbollah and Hamas would only increase…

Its provocative behavior around one of the world’s most important strategic waterways – the Strait of Hormuz – could escalate. And a nuclear Iran could unleash an arms race in the world’s most dangerous tinderbox.

Clearly, the threat to Israel’s existence would increase and the situation would become far more dangerous.

Once we put the extent of the nuclear threat in this context, it is easy to see why we need to be prepared to act.

We need to be absolutely clear that it is the unequivocal policy of the United States to do everything in its power to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapon capability and absolutely clear that we reject policy options designed simply to contain a nuclear-armed Iran. Containment is not an option.

Any policy built around the containment of a nuclear Iran is unacceptable… Our clear intention must be to prevent Iran from ever reaching nuclear capacity.

One way to prevent that from happening is through the tough sanctions I sponsored and Congress passed.

In fact, over the past year and a half I have authored three pieces of legislation that have imposed the toughest sanctions that Iran has ever faced – sanctions that are now strangling the Iranian economy – and have had a real impact on the behavior of those companies and countries that were in bed with the regime.

But we must still do more to fully implement these sanctions and make absolutely clear to the Iranian government that unless they change course their situation will only get worse, and economic struggles and international isolation will only grow.

An indication of how well the sanctions are working is that more 20 countries — like the EU, Korea, and Singapore — have either stopped purchasing oil from Iran or decreased purchases… and others, like Japan, who despite difficult domestic circumstances, have gone farther than we even expected.

And, according to the International Energy Agency, Iran’s crude oil exports have already dropped 1 million barrels day – from 2.5 million barrels per day in 2011 to 1.5 million barrels per day – a cost to Iran of nearly $8 billion in lost revenues every quarter.

Not only that, but the Iranian rial suffered a dramatic devaluation that is now causing major concerns among the powerful merchant class in Iran.

Iran’s leaders must understand that we will deprive Iran of crude oil revenue that represents 50 to 75 percent of its budget…sanctions so overwhelming that Former Secretary Clinton fittingly called these sanctions that I and Senator Mark Kirk authored — “the most crippling in world history.”

We should not close the door to further discussions. I’m hopeful that last week’s negotiations between the P5+1 and Iran will bring real progress.

But let’s be clear — we will not, and cannot, talk for talking’s sake… We cannot allow the negotiations to become just a stalling tactic for Iran to buy time.

The P5+1 and the broader international community must unite around a simple message — two simple points: We will never accept a nuclear Iran… and you cannot outwait us.

In my view, these steps – taken together – will hopefully convince the Iranians that the only option is to give up their nuclear ambitions.

Barring verifiable compliance with all Security Council Resolutions and full cooperation with the IAEA, I see no reason to relieve the pressure of sanctions.

Of course, sanctions are only a means to a clear end – in this case Iran engaging in serious, meaningful, fruitful negotiations that result in an end to its nuclear ambitions.

Sanctions are our last peaceful diplomacy tool, but we must also make clear – as President Obama has said – that all options are on the table… and I’d add that those options must be credible – which is why the Graham-Menendez resolution is so important at this time.

We cannot know what the future will hold. We do not know what will bloom from the shifting sands of the Arab Spring.

But what we do know – what we must understand – is that the United States must be the one to step-up to help protect the Israeli people – to “have their back” as the President said.

Finally, having Israel’s back means fighting back on the efforts to delegitimize the Israeli state.

The Holocaust was the most sinister possible reminder that the Jewish population in exile was in constant jeopardy. It was a definitive argument that anti-Semitism could appear anywhere, and its horrors galvanized international support for the State of Israel.

But let’s be very clear: while the Shoah has a central role in Israel’s identity, it is not the reason behind its founding and it is not the main justification for its existence.

The extreme characterization of this mistaken view is that Western powers established Israel in 1948 based on their own guilt, at the expense of the Arab peoples who lived there. Therefore, the current state is illegitimate and should all be wiped off the face of the map.

This flawed argument is not only in defiance of basic human dignity but in plain defiance of history. It is in defiance of ancient history, as told in Biblical texts and through archaeological evidence. And it ignores the history of the last several centuries.

Several thousand years of history lead to an undeniable conclusion: the reestablishment of the state of Israel in modern times is a political reality with roots going back to the time of Abraham and Sarah.

The argument for Israel’s legitimacy does not depend on what we say in speeches. It has been made by history. It has been made by the men and women who have made the desert green, by Nobel Prizes earned, by groundbreaking innovations and enviable institutions, by lives saved, democracy defended, peace made, battles won.

There can be no denying the Jewish people’s legitimate right to live in peace and security on a homeland to which they have had a connection for thousands of years.

We can and must move forward in the peace process, and look for ways to reach agreement between all sides. But we cannot erase the moral distinctions between tyranny and freedom and we must not edit history.

Different peoples of vastly different backgrounds have peacefully thrived in the Middle East for generations upon generations, and this coexistence can happen once more.

Let us pray that it be so. Shalom.

Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ) rips Obama administration for opposing Iran sanctions

In the video below, Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ), a key Obama ally in the Senate, rips Obama administration officials Wendy Sherman (State) and David Cohen (Treasury) at Thursday morning's Senate foreign relations committee hearing on the Kirk-Menendez Iran sanctions amendment.

The Kirk-Menendez amendment was introduced on Monday by Senators Marc Kirk (R-Il) and Robert Menendez (D-NJ).

Last night, Sens. Mark Kirk (R-IL) and Robert Menendez (D-NJ) filed a new amendment to the defense policy bill that represents a compromise of the two separate amendments each had filed last week. The new bipartisan language would build upon the administration's announcement last week that it was naming the CBI as a "primary money laundering concern" under the Patriot Act and go further than President Barack Obama's Nov. 19 executive order expanding sanctions on Iran's petroleum sector. The Senate amendment would add to that by barring any U.S. financial institution from doing business with any foreign financial institution that knowingly conducted any significant financial transaction with the CBI.

The Kirk-Menendez amendment got unanimous consent in the Senate on Monday for consideration on the defense bill, which is on the floor this week. It will get a vote, probably before Dec. 2, and is expected to pass overwhelmingly. The administration has resisted any congressional efforts to force the imposition of Iran sanctions ahead of its own schedule, but Obama will be hard pressed to veto the must-pass defense bill over the issue.

"The amendment is hard-hitting, responsible and, most importantly, completely bipartisan. It'll have an enormous impact on the Iranian economy without hurting our own while providing the administration additional diplomatic leverage," a GOP Senate aide told The Cable today. "Last week the administration told the world that the Central Bank of Iran was a terrorist bank; I think they'd have to agree this amendment is an appropriate way of dealing with a terrorist bank."

Sherman and Cohen came to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Thursday to testify against the amendment.

Two senior administration officials testified Thursday morning that the current bipartisan amendment to impose new sanctions on the CBI and any other bank that does business with them is a bad idea that could alienate foreign countries, make it more difficult to pressure Iran, and raise oil prices, which could actually help the Iranian economy.

The administration's strategy of working behind the scenes to change what's become the Kirk-Menendez Iran sanctions amendment, only to publicly oppose it today, angered several senators, including Robert Menendez himself. The New Jersey Democrat took seven minutes at the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing to chastise Undersecretary of State Wendy Sherman and Treasury Undersecretary David Cohen at Thursday's Senate Foreign Relations Committee meeting for asking him to negotiate on their behalf, and then criticizing the compromise he struck with Sen. Mark Kirk (R-IL).

"At your request we engaged in an effort to come to a bipartisan agreement that I believe is fair and balanced. And now you come here and vitiated that agreement.... You should have said we want no amendment," Menendez said. "Everything that you have said in your testimony undermines your opposition to this amendment. The clock is ticking."

Menendez said he regretted working with the administration on the issue, and said that perhaps he should have just agreed to Kirk's original Iran sanctions amendment, which was more severe and provided the administration with less room to maneuver than the compromise amendment that is set to be voted on and passed in the Senate as early as tomorrow.

"This certainly undermines your relationship with me for the future," Menendez told the administration officials. He also urged for more drastic measures, such as a gasoline embargo on Iran. "If the Europeans are considering an embargo, we shouldn't be leading from behind, we should be leading forward."

The break between this Democratic senator, who is up for reelection next year, and the Obama administration comes two days after the administration sent three very senior officials to meet with senators to try to get them to scuttle the amendment. On the morning of Nov. 29, Treasury Deputy Secretary Neal Wolin, Deputy Secretary of State Bill Burns, and Deputy National Security Advisor Denis McDonough called an emergency meeting on Capitol Hill, multiple Hill sources told The Cable.

They sat down with Sens. Kirk, Menendez, and SFRC Chairman John Kerry (D-MA). The officials argued that the Kirk-Menendez would get in the way of their efforts to build a multilateral coalition designed to increase pressure on Iran, and they warned the amendment might cause severe disruptions to the world oil markets and therefore have negative effects on the U.S. economy. Kirk and Menendez flatly refused to back down, our sources said, while Kerry reportedly said exactly nothing in the meeting.

The officials' sentiments were echoed in a letter sent today to Senate leaders by Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, who we're told is personally invested in the administration effort to thwart the Kirk-Menendez amendment.

This is Menendez's ripping the Obama administration.

Senator Robert Menendez Champions Jewish Rights to Israel

Senator Robert Menendez Champions Jewish Rights to Israel



Acknowledging Israel’s History
by Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ)
From the Congressional Record - Senate (S6613) June 16, 2009
Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, last Wednesday, a few blocks down the street, a neo-Nazi opened fire at the Holocaust Museum. He murdered a security guard and terrorized the museum’s visitors, including schoolchildren, who had come to learn, to express sympathy, and to pray.
That evil act was the work of a killer who had made his hatred of other religions and ethnic groups well known. And it was a reminder that intolerance, ignorance, and anti-Semitism have not yet been defeated in our world. This tragedy reminds us of the need of sound understanding of one of the darkest episodes in the history of the world.
Far too many misrepresent the significance of the Holocaust, especially in regard to the State of Israel and her people. And far too many people deny it happened altogether, out of bigotry, hatred, and spite. In the face of so much misunderstanding, I am compelled today to speak up about the role of the Holocaust in Israel’s history and Israel’s challenges in preventing anti-Semitic murder from continuing to happen. The Holocaust was the most sinister possible reminder that the Jewish population in exile was in constant jeopardy. It was a definitive argument that anti-Semitism could appear anywhere, and its horrors galvanized international support for the State of Israel.
But let us be very clear: While the Shoah has a central role in Israel’s identity, it is not the reason behind its founding and it is not the main justification for its existence.
The extreme characterization of this mistaken view is the following: The Western powers established Israel in 1948 based on their own guilt, at the expense of the Arab peoples who lived there. Therefore, the current state is illegitimate and should be wiped off the face of the map.
This flawed argument is not only in defiance of basic human dignity but in plain defiance of history. It is in defiance of ancient history as told in biblical texts and through archeological evidence. It ignores the history of the last several centuries. Because of what is at stake, it is well worth reviewing this history in detail, and let me make a modest attempt at a very broad overview.
There has been a continuity of Jewish presence in the Holy Land for thousands of years. Jewish kings and governments were established in that area that is now Israel several millennia ago. After untold years of Jewish sovereignty, based in Jerusalem, the land of the Jewish people fell repeatedly to invaders—Assyrians, Persians, Greeks, Romans, and many others. Jews were repeatedly massacred and expelled, and the departure of so many from the land they had always called home developed into an unparalleled diaspora. From the 16th century until the earliest 20th century, the land that is now Israel was under the control of a distant Ottoman caliphate based in Istanbul, and during this time, as earlier, many Jews returned to their ancestral homeland.
The Ottoman Empire collapsed after World War I, and the treaty granted Great Britain a mandate over the area then known as Palestine. The League of Nations endorsed and clarified this mandate in 1922, requiring Britain to reconstitute a Jewish national home within the territory they controlled, in accordance with the declaration made by British Foreign Secretary Balfour in 1917, making the restoration of Jewish communities in that area a matter of international law. By the time World War II had ended, there were more than 600,000 Jews living in the British Mandate of Palestine.
In 1947, the United Nations approved a plan to partition the territory into Arab and Jewish states. The Jewish Agency accepted the plan. The Arabs did not. On May 14, 1948, the State of Israel declared its independence. On May 15, five Arab nations declared war. Despite being surrounded on all sides, Israel prevailed and expanded its borders, providing a small additional measure of security against attacks which were certain to come and did. So to be clear, the more than 700,000 Palestinians who left Israel were refugees of a war instigated by Arab governments, bent on seizing more land for themselves. But the Arabs who left Israel after its modern founding weren’t the only displaced population in the Middle East. In addition to the hundreds of thousands of Jews who left Europe during and after the Holocaust in the 20th century, more than threequarters of a million Jews fled or were expelled from their homes in Arab and Middle Eastern nations—in cities that many of their families had lived in for nearly a millennium. Their possessions were taken, their livelihoods were destroyed, victims of nationalism and hatred of Israel.
Several thousand years of history lead to an undeniable conclusion: The reestablishment of the State of Israel in modern times is a political reality with roots going back to the time of Abraham. And so the way to consider the immeasurable impact of the Holocaust in Israel is not to ask whether the State would exist otherwise. It is, at least in one sense, to imagine how even more vibrant Israel would be if millions upon millions had not been denied a chance to know it. The attacks on Israel have barely stopped since 1948—not just attacks by armies but attacks by individuals, attacks by tanks and terrorists, attacks that have come in the form of stones and they have come in the form of speeches. Its enemies have attempted to assassinate its people with rockets and assassinate its national character with hateful rhetoric.
Today it is still surrounded by hostility; its back is still to the sea. It is surrounded by hostility from Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in the Gaza strip. In looking at the threat Israel faces on its southwestern border, one fact must be absolutely, indisputably, unequivocally clear: There is no moral equivalency between Israel and Hamas. Israel is a sovereign democratic state of 7.5 million people—Jews, Muslims, and Christians. Hamas is a terrorist organization. It won control of Gaza after men in ski masks waged gun battles with another branch of Palestinian leadership. It used that control to launch rockets at sleeping children in the nearby Israeli cities of Ashkelon and Sterot. This is the thanks Israel got for withdrawing from Gaza.
Hamas does not recognize agreements that Palestinian leaders have reached with Israel in the past, it does not recognize Israel’s right to exist at all, and in fact it is ideologically committed to Israel’s annihilation. Gaza’s people thirst for freedom and opportunity but are held hostage to Hamas’s thirst for destruction. And even today, after the consequences of menacing Israel became clear in a disastrous war, weapons are flowing freely through tunnels into Gaza, Hamas has rearmed and is readying itself for the day when it is going to take on Israel again. Hamas and Hezbollah may be the head of the snake when it comes to terrorism, but the tail extends much further. The weapons terrorists use were sent from Iran. Money they received was sent from Iran. Propaganda supporting Hamas’s campaign of terror and calling for Israel’s destruction was conceived in, produced by, and broadcast from Iran.
The fundamentalist regime in Teheran isn’t just an emerging threat. It doesn’t just have the potential to be a threat to Israel’s existence. It is a threat to Israel’s existence. Under no circumstances whatsoever can we allow that conventional threat to become a nuclear one. Especially in light of the threat of Iran, and in light of the threat extremists pose to so many innocent civilians around the globe, the importance of Israel as a strategic ally and friend to the United States could not be clearer. It is hard to overstate the value of having such a stalwart democratic ally in such a critical part of the world—an ally in terms of intelligence gathering, economics, politics, and culture. Israel arose in a desert rampant with repression, a force of moderation against fundamentalism and extremism. It is an ally we can constantly depend on and count on to be with us in international fora and on the key decisions that affect the safety and security of Americans around the world.
For more than six decades, it has been a key U.S. trading partner and a scientific innovator. We have Israeli engineers to thank for everything from advances in solar power to cell phone technology to AOL Instant Messenger. Equipment we are using in Iraq to fight terrorism and keep American troops safe was developed in Israel. Medical treatments we are using in U.S. hospitals to fight cancer, heart disease, and chronic pain were developed in Israel. Israeli-born actors are stars of Hollywood, and an Israeli astronaut has accompanied Americans into space. So it is not only in the interest of Israel to have its full history recognized, it is in the national interest and the national security interests of the United States. It is in our interests to fully remember the unbreakable bond that has made us both stronger over the last 61 years and to make it unmistakable that our commitment is as strong as ever. The argument for Israel’s legitimacy does not depend on what we say in speeches. It has been made by history. It has been made by the men and women who have made the desert green, by Nobel prizes earned, by groundbreaking innovations and enviable institutions, by lives saved, democracy defended, peace made, and battles won.
There can be no denying the Jewish people’s legitimate right to live in peace and security on a homeland to which they have had a connection for thousands of years. We can and must move forward in the peace process, and look for ways to reach agreement between all sides. But we cannot erase the moral distinctions between tyranny and freedom, and we must not edit history. If we stay true to history and follow our moral compass, I am optimistic that talks can lead to understanding and resolution of the very sensitive, detailed, and tough issues we face. The next pages of Middle Eastern history are not doomed to be stained by an endless, senseless fight to the death. It doesn’t have to be that way. Different peoples of vastly different backgrounds have peacefully thrived in the Middle East for generations upon generations, and this coexistence can happen once more. Let us remember the words of Egyptian President Anwar al-Sadat in 1978, when he accepted the Nobel Prize for peace—words that not long before would have seemed incredibly unlikely. He said: Let us put an end to wars, let us reshape life on the solid basis of equity and truth. And it is this call . . . of the great majority of the Arab and Israeli peoples, and indeed of millions of men, women, and children around the world that you are today honoring. And these hundreds of millions will judge to what extent every responsible leader in the Middle East has responded to the hopes of mankind.
I have been to Israel. I have shaken the hands of its citizens and visited its holy places. I know that in the heart of Israelis there is a strong desire for peace. We can never lose sight of why peace is so important. After the unspeakable horrors of the Holocaust, the Jewish people would forever be mindful that no one knows what turns history will take and every day we are mindful that anti-Semitism has not gone away, whether in the form of a firebombing of a French synagogue, defamatory comments of a government official in South Africa, or a senseless murder in Washington DC. Israel is the one place in the world, the one place where anti-Semitism can be structurally impossible. It is a field of hope on which fear can be vanquished, an island of refuge that can stand firm no matter how stormy the sea of history turns. That is why we must always keep it safe and always keep it free.
The United States is not simply allied with a government, it is an ally of Israel’s people. It is an ally of Israel’s democratic ideals. It is an ally of its history, of its aspirations for peace and prosperity, its can-do spirit, and amazing resilience in the face of threats from all sides. In that sense, we are not just Israel’s allies, we are admirers, we are partners, and we are friends. I plan to do everything I can to see that we support this friendship this year, next year, and every year thereafter. Let me close by saying Martin Luther King said: The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice. We know that in Israel’s quest for security, there will be trials along the way, there will be setbacks, and there will be dangers too tremendous for words. But if we continue the work we do and continue to stay true to the values that drive our journey, then the long arc will eventually rest in place in the land of Israel and it is a just and lasting peace that will be at hand.

U.S. Senator Robert Menendez of New Jersey floor speech on Acknowledging Israel's History