iiiii Understanding Ethnic Lobbying

Understanding Ethnic Lobbying: Palestinian Statehood in the Age of Obama Khalil Marrar, Ph.D. DePaul University 990 West Fullerton, Room 2109 Chicago, Illinois 60614 (773) 325-8682 (501) 641-5431 Facsimile kmarrar@depaul.edu Submitted for the 51th Annual Convention of the International Studies Association, New Orleans, Louisiana, February 17-20, 2010 Khalil M. Marrar This is only a working draft. Please do not produce until author consultation. Like other ethnic groups in the United States, Arab Americans want their government to reflect their interests in foreign and domestic policymaking.i In order to accomplish that, they have to “lobby” for favorable policies. Political scientists define a “lobbyist” as a “person working to influence government policies and actions.”ii Lobbying is an essential activity in the US “pluralist” system, in which different factions compete to gain power by exercising influence. There are two ways to do that: direct lobbying, where lawmakers are pressured to vote on particular legislation and indirect lobbying, where the public is swayed to favor or reject certain policies and politicians. Arab Americans have experienced obstacles to meaningful political participation in general and to lobbying in particular. One of the most stubborn difficulties they face stems from the fact that “they originate from twenty-two different states,” which are divided along ideological, political, and religious lines.iii Many of those states have tended to have little or no experience with the culture of democracy, something that carries over and makes Arab immigrants to the US hesitant to take part in American politics. But the most difficult obstacle confronting Arab American attempts to influence government, particularly on the level of foreign policy is the strength of the pro-Israel lobby, which is most notably represented by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC for short.iv According to its website, AIPAC “has worked to help make Israel more secure by ensuring that American support remains strong.”v The spearhead of 2 Khalil M. Marrar This is only a working draft. Please do not produce until author consultation. pro-Israel lobbying efforts in the US since the 1950s, AIPAC has acted on numerous issues to benefit the interests of Jewish and Christian Zionists in the US, often at the expense of Arab Americans, who generally tend to be united in their sympathies for the Palestinians. AIPAC touts that it has succeeded in “securing critical foreign aid to Israel” and helping in the “passing of Congressional Resolutions that demonstrate overwhelming support for Israel’s right to self-defense” against a variety of enemies.vi While many Arab Americans cannot help but feel cynical about AIPAC’s weight on American policy, the truth is pro-Israel groups are just very skillful at playing the democratic, pluralist game. The people represented by the pro-Israel lobby often use their economic and political power in order to affect changes that favor their policy preferences. In comparison, Arab Americans have not done as well as their Zionist rivals. An astounding example of this is found in political contributions, which buy political goods and services.vii While having a wide range of opinions on Israel, Jewish Americans and their allies give astronomically more money than Arab Americans and their supporters, and therefore receive special treatment by policymakers. Since 1990, Arab and Muslim groups made political contributions in the meager amount of $296,830, compared to $57,411,794 given by pro-Israel Political Action Committees (PACs).viii The staggering difference in financial contributions between the two sides tells only a part of the story, which when examined in its entirety shows that organizations like AIPAC are better supported and staffed than all Arab American groups combined. General disparities between the pro-Israel lobby and its Arab 3 Khalil M. Marrar This is only a working draft. Please do not produce until author consultation. American opponents have led prominent scholars John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago and Stephen Walt of Harvard University to note “pro-Arab interest groups are weak to non-existent, which makes the [pro-Israel] Lobby’s task even easier.”ix Although many Jewish Americans have expressed reservations about AIPAC and other “pro-Israel” groups speaking on their behalf, the pro-Israel lobby has always maintained that it represents American Jews by looking out for Israel’s interests in Washington. On numerous occasions, however, the pro-Israel lobby’s position has even made the Israelis themselves uneasy with their self-proclaimed representatives in the US.x Nevertheless, not only has the pro-Israel lobby asserted itself as the champion of the Jewish state, AIPAC in particular has succeeded in casting its agenda in favor of Israel as inseparable from US interests in the Middle East and throughout the world. This was especially the case during the Cold War, when Israel was viewed as an American ally against Soviet proxies and continues today as the Jewish state is seen as the vanguard of Western values against Islamic fundamentalism and terrorism. In no small part, such perceptions were due to the work of pro-Israel advocates that have appealed to the American public and their representative on Capitol Hill and in the White House to view Israel as an integral part of the US welfare overseas. Americans’ understanding of Israel as a close friend persists in the present despite evidence showing that the Israel lobby “has managed to divert U.S. foreign policy in directions…far from what the American national interest would otherwise suggest.”xi How could that be? It is because Israel lobbyists are 4 Khalil M. Marrar This is only a working draft. Please do not produce until author consultation. efficacious at what they do.xii In order to secure sympathetic policies toward the Jewish state, pro-Israel lobbyists work on two primary levels: public opinion and in the halls of government. To influence public opinion, Israel supporters have engaged in endless campaigns. In universities, which exist at the center of the production of knowledge, groups like “Campus Watch” try to make sure that professors, administrators, and student groups minimize their criticism of Israel or else face sanctions, such as being included on the black list of the Zionist “Middle East Forum,” an organization that claims to be “promoting American interests.”xiii Similar tactics are used against print and electronic media outlets, which serve as conduits of information on which public opinion is built. In order to control information, particularly as it relates to Israel, there is a dedicated watch group known as the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA) that monitors journalists, newspapers, magazines, television programming, films, radio, books, journals, and the Internet.xiv At the policymaker level, the pro-Israel lobby has two main components: AIPAC in the legislative branch and the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations (Presidents Conference), which seeks to influence the administrative branch.xv While AIPAC targets individual members of Congress for rewards or punishment based on their stances toward Israel, the Presidents Conference, aside from directing all American Jewish groups’ activities, tries to persuade the US President and his administration to undertake advantageous policies for the Jewish state. Years ago, these efforts led 5 Khalil M. Marrar This is only a working draft. Please do not produce until author consultation. Republican Congressman Paul Findley, in an interview with the Journal of Palestine Studies to observe, “our political system is seriously handicapped by the absence of unfettered discussion of what is best for the United States Middle East policy. The Israeli side is the only one that is seriously considered.”xvi Because of the nature of American electoral democracy—i.e., Congress members go up for elections more frequently than the President—the pro-Israel lobby tries to exercise quite a bit more influence on the legislative branch than on the executive branch. Consequently, Capitol Hill is often buzzing with pro-Israel lobbying troopers that force Congress members to appreciate the consequences in either votes or political monies of their positions on legislation toward Israel in particular and the Middle East in general.xvii Meanwhile, the Presidents Conference tries to whisper in the ears of the President and his advisors about the US posture toward the Jewish state. Whether operating in Congress or in the White House, the pro-Israel lobby has ensured US priority on Israel in policymaking.xviii The pro-Israel lobby presents nothing new about ethnic lobbying efforts in the US. However, it is unique insofar as it has experienced wild success in shaping American foreign policy whereas other groups have faced limited accomplishments. Ethnic lobbying in its direct and indirect forms is as old as the American republic.xix For early examples, one may only at take a cursory glance at the past, which shows Native Americans trying to blunt the harsh effects of treaties with the US government.xx Later, groups like the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), sought to advance the rights and 6 Khalil M. Marrar This is only a working draft. Please do not produce until author consultation. citizenship of their constituents, the majority of which were either Jewish or African American and other people of color. Even Harriet Beeher Stowe’s Uncle Tom’s Cabin exemplifies a poignant lobbying effort as that nineteenth century novel sought to convince Americans that slavery was wrong.xxi Simply put, trying to influence public opinion or policymaker behavior is a form of lobbying even though people that engage in such activities may not consider themselves to be “lobbyists.” Presently, ethnic lobbying is on the rise. Lobbies engaged in that type of work focus on the variety of issues important to their grassroots supporters. One of the most notable ethnic groups engaged in such a focus is the Indian lobby, which is headed by the US India Political Action Committee (USINPAC). Its “mission is to impact policy on issues of concern to the Indian American community in the United States.”xxii Specifically, USINPAC works to 1. strengthen US relations with India, 2. “promote a fair and balanced policy on immigration,” 3. fight hate crime and enhance equal rights, and 4. advocate “entrepreneurship and business.”xxiii Although these goals may overlap with other ethnic lobbying aims, they sometimes are zero-sum. For instance, while other groups, Pakistani Americans for instance, may benefit from anti-hate crime legislation supported by USINPAC, that organization’s policy positions may be harmful to India’s rival Pakistan, and therefore to Pakistani Americans. An example of this is the American acceptance of India’s nuclear weapons program by removing sanctions imposed after the 1997 nuclear tests in South Asia. US removal of sanctions had 7 Khalil M. Marrar This is only a working draft. Please do not produce until author consultation. serious backing by the pro-Indian lobby in order to place India in a better competitive position against Pakistan. Such action worked against the interests of Pakistani Americans. Despite the often zero-sum nature of the lobbying game, alliances between ethnic lobbies exist both on the domestic and foreign policy levels. As mentioned above, cooperation against hate-crime between Pakistani and Indian Americans is one example of common ground on an important domestic issue between two groups that would otherwise be opposed. Alliances exist on the determination of foreign policy as well. For instance, the Turkish lobby, sponsored by the government of Turkey, has spent millions of dollars in order to “whitewash its record” on the Armenian genocide.xxiv Just as Turkey and Israel have allied themselves against neighboring Arab states in the region, the Turkish lobby and AIPAC have worked jointly on influencing US policy toward the Middle East in order to maximize benefits to the respective nations represented by them. Currently, dozens of ethnic lobbies operate in Washington and throughout the US. There is a Greek lobby led by the Coordinated Effort of Hellenes (CEH) and the World Council of Hellenes Abroad (SAE) which works for closer ties between the US and Greece.xxv Cuban Americans, most of whom live in southern Florida have formed the Cuban American National Foundation (CANF), which “is a non- profit organization dedicated to advancing freedom and democracy in Cuba” by directing US energies toward opposing the Castro regime.xxvi A Taiwan lobby tries to dampen US-China cooperation while the opposing Chinese lobby seeks to strengthen the ties between Washington and Beijing. An Irish lobby looks out for 8 Khalil M. Marrar This is only a working draft. Please do not produce until author consultation. the interests of immigrants from Ireland to the US.xxvii With its preference for immigration reform, that lobby has an inherently common objective with Mexican American organizations like the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF), which is dedicated to easing immigration laws on those entering the country through the US southern border.xxviii Given the proliferation of ethnic lobbies in the US, alliances and conflicts between them and are inevitable. In the ethnic lobbying milieu outlined above, Arab Americans have some of the most underestimated groups in the US today, which include the American- Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC), American Task Force on Palestine (ATFP), Arab American Institute (AAI), Hala Foundation, and the National Association of Arab Americans/Association of Arab American University Graduates (NAAA/AAUG).xxix Even employees of Arab American lobbying firms often deny the existence of a “pro-Arab lobby.” Hence, when asked to furnish information on the Arab lobby for a recent study about its activities toward the US government, an anonymous Arab American activist stated “there is no Arab lobby in Washington, DC.”xxx The word “lobby” when used in the same sentence as “Arab Americans” oftentimes draws blank stares or outright denials from both within and outside of the Arab American community. From within, many inevitably but erroneously reason that since the pro-Israel lobby is so powerful, Arab Americans might as well not even try to influence government policies on their many issues of preference.xxxi 9 Khalil M. Marrar This is only a working draft. Please do not produce until author consultation. Outside of the community, almost everyone agrees either that a pro-Arab lobby does not exist or that “much remains to be done” in the realm of advocacy.xxxii While it is true that much always remains to be done in political activism, denying the existence of the pro-Arab lobby is misled. It is understandable, however, why such denials exist. They are propelled by the fact that all Arab American pressure groups are registered with the US Internal Revenue Service (IRS) as 501 (C) (3) entities, which may not engage in political campaign activities.xxxiii If they were to violate the 501 (C) (3) provisions, these organizations would lose their tax-exempt status with the IRS. To avoid that, Arab American groups with that classification take great caution to refrain from overtly political activities that would violate the letter of the statutes. But to dismiss Arab American activism in the US either based on tax code distinctions or because of the sheer strength of the pro-Israel lobby misses the point that pro-Arab lobbies have always worked for policies in favor of their constituents’ interests and that they have realized some level of success.xxxiv That success stems from the fact that Arab American organizations have been more effective at indirect lobbying than direct lobbying, particularly in the area of civil liberties/rights on the domestic stage. This is not to say that they do not engage in direct lobbying pertaining to foreign policy. Thus, for instance, ADC has a fulltime domestic and foreign policy lobbyist on Capitol Hill at the time of this writing. But pro-Israel lobbyists dominate Congress since they spend tremendous amounts of money and political power that have been hard to match by the pro- Arab side. However, in the court of public opinion, Arab Americans have always 10 Khalil M. Marrar This is only a working draft. Please do not produce until author consultation. had the aptitude to articulate the justness of their cause and how their platforms, particularly toward the Palestinian question, are in fact in the US national interest.xxxv Hence, Palestinian statehood as an answer to that question currently has overwhelming support among the American public, their policymakers, and within the Arab American community itself. Advancing the two-state solution, US President Barack Obama recently called on called on Israel to allow for the establishment of a Palestinian state.xxxvi Even AIPAC has followed suit and sought the same thing.xxxvii This is something that pro-Arab groups could seize upon since it seems as if friends and foes alike favor the creation of Palestine. Similar to the composition of their pro-Israel opposition, pro-Arab lobbying organizations working to affect change in US policy toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict may or may not be primarily controlled by Arab Americans. Examples of pro-Arab pressure groups not exclusively controlled by Arab Americans are faith- based organizations like Churches for Middle East Peace (CMEP), Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), the National Council of Churches (NCC), and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), and trade organizations such as the now defunct Arabian American Oil Company (ARAMCO).xxxviii However, groups whose constituency is dominated by Arab Americans form the core of the pro-Arab lobbying effort in the US especially since they have most at stake with their supporters. Despite assertions of its weakness, the pro-Arab lobby has in fact accomplished a good deal in changing American public opinion and official policy. This is most pronounced in US foreign policy toward the Israeli- 11 Khalil M. Marrar This is only a working draft. Please do not produce until author consultation. Palestinian conflict. Although it seems as if the pro-Israel lobby has succeeded in embedding the Jewish state as an outpost of American interests in the Middle East, US policy has shifted from supporting an “Israel only” status quo in the region since at least the 1967 war to embracing the establishment of “two independent states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side within secure and recognized borders.”xxxix It may be argued that the reason for such a change in American foreign policy had a great deal to do with public opinion changing from ambivalence toward the Palestinians’ right to a nation-state before and during the Carter and Reagan eras to embracing Palestinian statehood by a majority under the Clinton and Bush administrations.xl This is significant in the American democratic system because politicians ultimately have to care about carrying out voter wishes or risk losing