Lantos demands UN reform at farewell dinner for Ayalon

Lantos demands UN reform at farewell dinner for Ayalon
HILARY LEILA KRIEGER, Jerusalem post correspondent, THE JERUSALEM POST Jan. 16, 2007
Link to Article

New US House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Tom Lantos warned Sunday that American funding of the United Nations could be in jeopardy if it doesn't reform, speaking ahead of new UN Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon's first trip to Washington since assuming office on January 1.

Lantos (Dem.-California), who will be hosting Ban during his visit, said that America "has to make it clear" to the UN that the institution "cannot expect" the US to unreflectively foot the 25 percent of the organization's dues the country contributes.

As the foreign affairs committee's ranking minority party member, Lantos proposed legislation giving the secretary of state the authority to withhold UN dues if it hasn't met certain benchmarks for reform. The bill never became law, but Lantos's own authority on the issue has increased with his ascension to the chairman's seat.

Lantos spoke of the issue at a gala dinner farewell for former Israeli ambassador to the US Danny Ayalon, sponsored by Christian groups in association with Jewish organizations.
Lantos made his comments about the UN after describing attempts "to make anti-Semitism acceptable in this country" as well as to "deligitimize Israel."

Earlier he said that anti-Semitism in America was "becoming increasingly more acceptable" as seen in statements in the political arena, on college campuses and sometimes "just on the street."

But, he stressed, "We have a powerful antidote: It is the decent Christians, of whom we have so many in this room," going on to compare Christian supporters of Israel and the Jewish people to righteous gentiles who saved Jews during the Holocaust. Lantos is the only Holocaust survivor to become a congressman.

Lantos proceeded Ayalon, who spoke of the importance of the ties he helped foster as ambassador with Christian organizations, many of them evangelical, who support Israel.

Ayalon said that before assuming his post more than four years ago, then prime minister Ariel Sharon emphasized the importance of working with this constituency.

Ayalon related that as Sharon's one-time foreign policy advisor, he was spared the normal instructions on Iran and the other pressing issues of the day when he received his "marching orders" before leaving Israel for Washington.

"The one thing he [Sharon] said is: Reach out to the Christians," he recalled.

Surveying the room of 700 congressmen, diplomats and Christian pro-Israel activists, he told them that he hoped his legacy would be the continuation of this coalition.

Danny Ayalon, who last week assumed the role of co-chair of Nefesh B'Nefesh, also emphasized the importance of bringing Jews to Israel. And now that he himself would be in Israel, he told the Christians in the crowd that he would be their "ambassador to Israel."

Lantos is one of my favorite congressmen and now that he has a commanding title to stand on he can be heard! Farewell to Daniel Ayalon, you upheld the US-Israel in a steller manner, may you continue to do great work with NBN and bring many Jews to Israel!

-Dan Goodman

Friends of Israel

The University of Minnesota Democrats have recently given their full support to GIPAC and our cause. Not only have they agreed to the signing of a letter in support of the Congressional decison to uphold the Iran Freedom Support Act, but they have recently advertised Israel Fest on their blog; encouraging members to attend.

http://udfl.blogspot.com/

US Provides balance in sticking to dual accountability in Veto of UN Sec Council Resoultion Condemning "Israeli Attacks"

I think this is the most important quote of the NY Times story.

The United States ambassador, John R. Bolton, told the Council that the resolution “does not display an even-handed characterization of the recent events in Gaza, nor does it advance the cause of Israeli-Palestinian peace.”

The LA times reporting of Bolton's comments:

"But in his remarks to the Security Council, Bolton said the draft was still too one-sided. He said it compared legal Israeli military operations with the firing of rockets into Israel -- an act of terrorism. He called the fact-finding mission unnecessary and said the text failed to condemn the ruling Hamas party's refusal to renounce terrorism.

Both Bolton and Deputy British Ambassador Karen Pierce voiced support for returning to the internationally backed "road map" peace plan, which has been stalled for years."


The New York Times
November 12, 2006
U.S. Vetoes Security Council Resolution Assailing Israel for Attacks
By WARREN HOGE

UNITED NATIONS, Nov. 11 — The United States vetoed a Security Council resolution on Saturday that condemned Israel for its military actions in Gaza and called for an immediate withdrawal of Israeli forces from the area.

The United States ambassador, John R. Bolton, told the Council that the resolution “does not display an even-handed characterization of the recent events in Gaza, nor does it advance the cause of Israeli-Palestinian peace.”

The resolution, introduced by Qatar, the Arab representative on the Council, had been amended during two days of negotiations to meet objections that it was not balanced. But Mr. Bolton said it remained “in many places biased against Israel and politically motivated.”

In the vote, 4 countries abstained — Britain, Denmark, Japan and Slovakia — and 10 were in favor — Argentina, China, Congo, France, Ghana, Greece, Peru, Russia, Qatar and Tanzania.

The original draft had made no mention of Palestinian rocket strikes into Israel and accused Israel of conducting a “massacre” of civilians in its attack at Beit Hanun on Wednesday that killed 18 civilians.

New language was inserted condemning the firing of rockets from Gaza into Israel and calling upon the Palestinian Authority to take “immediate and sustained action” to end the rocket fire. But while the resolution named Israel as liable for the attacks on Gaza, it was silent on who or what group was responsible for the attacks on Israel.

In other changes, a reference to “indiscriminate” Israeli violence became “disproportionate” violence, and the words “military assault,” “aggression” and “massacre” were dropped in favor of the general phrase “military operations.”

Another provision had proposed that a new United Nations observer force be sent into the area to monitor a cease-fire, but it was substituted with language suggested by France that called for the creation of “an international mechanism for the protection of civilians.”

Mr. Bolton said the United States considered this “a promise which is unwise and unnecessary and which, at any rate, raises false hopes.”

The resolution that was voted on requested that Secretary General Kofi Annan establish a fact-finding mission to investigate Wednesday’s attack and report back within 30 days and called for the resumption of international efforts to achieve peace by the so-called quartet — the United Nations, the European Union, Russia and the United States.

Israel has apologized for the deaths at Beit Hanun, blaming a “technical error,” and has announced its own investigation of the episode. But it has said it will continue to try to stop militants from launching rockets into Israel from Gaza.

The United States traditionally opposes what it considers one-sided Security Council resolutions on Israel, and Saturday’s vote was the fourth time in three years that Washington had taken such action.

In July the United States vetoed another resolution on Gaza; in March 2004 it vetoed a resolution condemning Israel for killing the Hamas leader, Sheik Ahmed Yassin; and in December 2003 it blocked a measure protesting the construction of the Israeli separation barrier in the West Bank.

Almost all of the 45 nations that spoke during a daylong debate on the Middle East on Thursday condemned Israel. Arab nations are now expected to move for a vote in the 192-member General Assembly, a path they have followed in the past when such measures have failed to pass the Security Council.

Unlike Security Council resolutions, those passed in the General Assembly are nonbinding and largely symbolic. But they generally attract widespread support when Israel, and, by extension, the United States, are the targets.

Jean-Marc de la Sablière, the French ambassador, said he felt the final negotiated text was “a balanced one” and would have sent the right message to both Israel and the Palestinians. He added, “I hope that the fact this text has not been adopted will not renew tensions on the ground.”

'First Muslim in Congress' goes to Israel

Yup that is right, our very own Keith Ellison, who is Muslim and running in the 5th district, will visit Israel after his election victory. How often does Minnesota get mentioned in an Israeli newspaper... I am going to go for almost never.

This was printed in Ha'aretz on October 17, 2006
'First Muslim in Congress' goes to Israel

Keith Ellison, a candidate for Minnesota's Fifth District congressional seat, is best known as the probable "first Muslim in Congress." Right after winning, he intends to travel to Israel (or so they say).

"The template set forth by the roadmap for peace currently provides the best outline for achieving a two-state solution to bringing about a lasting settlement. Right now Hamas represents the greatest obstacle to this path, and until Hamas denounces terrorism, recognizes the absolute right of Israel to exist peacefully and honors past agreements, it cannot be considered legitimate partners in this process."

These words are Keith Ellison's - a candidate for Minnesota's Fifth District congressional seat, best known to most political junkies as "the first Muslim Congressman."

Well, not yet, but he is getting closer. The Democrat Ellison is leading the polls and likely to win. And here's some news for you: Plans are being made for Ellison to travel to Israel right after winning - and I'm not talking about plans that are being made without his knowledge or approval. Ellison told people he'd go.

Even the dates are almost set by now: It will be mid-November, sometime between the 15th and the 20th. Ellison will also visit Jordan and the Palestinian Authority. In Israel, there's a good chance that he will be meeting with some senior officials. Some good-hearted people even thought about the possibility of him meeting with the Prime Minister, but there's a timing problem, as he is coming in a week in which both Prime Minister Olmert and Foreign Minister Livni are expected to be in the U.S.

This will be an important visit by someone who's relationships with the Jewish community were somewhat complicated by his past. Endorsed by a Minneapolis Jewish newspaper not long ago, the 42-year-old criminal defense lawyer who converted to Islam while in college, had ties to black Muslim leader Louis Farrakhan's Nation of Islam. He has since denounced both Farrakhan and the organization, and was obviously forgiven. He has many supporters from the Jewish community, and most of them are relatively confident that Ellison will not let them down.

Being the first Muslim congressman can be a heavy burden. So many expectations, and prejudices, and scrutinizations. So many disappointments. The inevitable disappointments. So many issues on which one has to decide what to do as an American, and a congressman, and a Democrat - and an icon.

So how can one overcome all these obstacles and stay in the game without compromising too much? How can this first American-Muslin-congressman maneuver the treacherous question of Israel?

Evidently, Ellison chose not to make it a constant drag on his career. It's a good choice, if he can really stick to it. A Muslim congressman giving his voice and vote to Israel can be refreshing and encouraging. But it is not going to be easy for him and some patience is needed. Here's the trade-off his Jewish supporters condone: Better him voting pro-Israel seventy percent of the time than somebody else voting a hundred percent with Israel.

And I think they are probably right.

But Ellison will have some limitations. People who know him say that he can't afford to go to Israel with AIPAC. It is just too much for him, and there's an alternative option available - the local Jewish Community Relations Council. Of course, the council can't make anything official or final until after the election, as it wouldn't want to pre-judge the outcome of the race, but through back channels it was already agreed, that if Ellison, as expected, will be winning the race, the trip plan can move forward immediately.

And of course, there's some fear among the Jews of Minnesota that Ellison is playing with them just to get their support before the election. However, one of them told me, such trip is a good test case. If Ellison decides not to go with it after winning the race, they'll know that he tricked them (yes, he admitted, it will be to late for them to do something about it - but election come every two years). And anyway - I talked to several people and most of them thought that Ellison is sincere. This trip, one of them told me, is a good way for him to put the past behind him once and for all.

MN Daily incorporates Israel voice into Lebanese Benefit Concert Review

9/11/06
Group holds benefit concert for homeless Lebanese civilians

Julia and Dan quoted in MN Daily criticizing Lack of UMN travel abroad to Israel program

July 12, 2006

Student group pushes University for official study-abroad program to Israel

Dan quoted in MN Daily Article GIPAC name drop!

http://www.mndaily.com/articles/2006/07/05/68554