If Dean Renounces His Promises To Sharon, The Subject Will Be Closed

[DrFunkenstein]

People have accused me of being disingenuous about posting the Dean petition to change his stance on I/P, only to attack him when he makes calls for an even-handed brokering of peace.

But, as Dean is fond of saying, actions speak louder than words. I've always thought that was ironic coming from someone who didn't have to vote on the IWR, but that's another story.

I have heard words from Dean. Encouraging words. Words not far from my own beliefs. Lots of very nice words. But not the right ones.

In Dean's foreign policy speeches, he presented the need for unilateral concessions from Palestinians before the peace process could begin. I would like that cleared up. From Dean's recent statements, it seems this may actually happen.

I am somewhat more skeptical about the most important issue. Dean made several very un-Presidential promises to Ariel Sharon to quadruple both the military aid and loan guarantees without any conditions. I find this outrageous on many levels. This position is more radical than even Paul Wolfowitz is willing to propose.

I know, or at least I hope, that Dean supporters are anxious to clear up this issue. This was, in my opinion, the whole point of the petition. Not for him to make statements that sound more balanced, but for him to actually renounce the foolish promises that made such balance an impossibility.

If he does so, I will still find his character suspect because of the trip itself, but I will also gain newfound respect for his integrity. It will give much more credibility to claims that he is able to "evolve," as his supporters claim. For now, the term seems more a euphemism for waffling and/or hypocrisy.

But if he renounces his promises, I will consider him truly evolutionary. I know my opinion matters little to many Dean supporters by this point, but I am being sincere.

[hedda_foil]

1. That's bullshit and you know it.

Provide an actual link that says this rather than rumor mongering. Dean doesn't carry water for Sharon.

[DrFunkenstein]

6. Actually, He Kinda Does

Dean traveled to Israel on a trip sponsored by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). After meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, Dean stated: “I do not think that as long as Yasser Arafat is president there will be peace." Before leaving, Sharon asked if Dean would support requests for new loan guarantees to Israel. Dean “promised him he would.”

http://www.aaiusa.org/countdown/c120602.htm

Last December, Dean told the Jerusalem Post that he unequivocally supported $8 Billion in US loan guarantees for Israel. "I believe that by providing Israel with the loan guarantees...the US will be advancing its own interest," he said. His unconditional support for the loan package, in addition to $4 Billion in outright grants, went further than even some of the most pro-Israel elements in the Bush administration, like Paul Wolfowitz, who wanted to at least include some vague restrictions like pushing Israel to curtail new settlements and accept a timetable to establish a Palestinian state.

http://www.muslimwakeup.com/mainarchive/000119.html

Dean believes the Bush administration should be giving Israel $4 billion in military aid to fight terrorism, not the $1 billion it proposed last month.

http://www.jewishsf.com/bk030418/us02.shtml

And, finally, Dean's foreign policy speech at Drake. Note how one-sided it is.

When they have bothered to state them, the Administration's guiding principles in the Middle East are the right ones. Terrorism against Israel must end. A two-state solution is the only path to eventual peace, but Palestinian territory cannot have the capability of being used as a platform for attacking Israel. Some degree of separation between Israelis and Palestinians is probably necessary in light of the horrible bloodshed of the past two years. To be viable, the Palestinian Authority must become democratic and purged of corruption.

But none of this will happen naturally. The United States is the only country with the ability to give both sides the confidence to move toward a future of coexistence. Appearances matter, and if we are not engaged, it looks like we simply do not care and that we have condemned the entire Palestinian people because of their leadership. In my view, this hurts the United States, it hurts Israel, and it makes it less likely the violence and the terrorism will end.

http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=policy_speech_foreign_drake

---

To sum up: Dean says we shouldn't "take sides" - despite promising a leader of another country unconditional financial aid (more than even Paul Wolfowitz would concede). That's 4x the military aid ($1 billion to $4 billion) and 4x the guaranteed loans ($2 billion to $8 billion). He also supports unilateral concessions from the Palestinians, and a "separation" wall that even George W. Bush has reservations about.

[helleborient]

40. With all respect Dr. F....

Why does John Kerry ignore Howard Dean's past supportive comments about Israel and only attack when he makes comments that seem to shift a bit the other way...is John Kerry in agreement with the Israeli government and Dean's past statements??

[liberalnurse]

7. She's right, that is bullshit.

This is just more Dean bashing. I prefer DU friends to be more responsible when discussing our candidates.

[MercutioATC]

2. I appreciate your openness. How do you react to his calling Hamas

fighters "soldiers" rather than "terrorists"?

Sounds pretty unbiased to me....

[DrFunkenstein]

4. Not Very Presidential

But not the end of the world, either. It wouldn't be me making an issue of it.

[MercutioATC]

5. I think it was VERY Presidential.

My reaction to naysayers on another thread:

http://democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=329734#329942


comments?

[DrFunkenstein]

12. Are You Really Going To Legitimize Reagan's "Freedom Fighters?"

Just because Reagan called the Contras "freedom fighters" doesn't mean they were. In fact, many of their human rights violations are still coming to light. But even the contras engaged in military to military actions. Hamas strikes at civilians.

I am very sympathetic to the Palestinian cause, but that doesn't mean I have to lend legitimacy to violent extremists to do so.

[Mairead]

33. I think Mercutio's point, Dr F --and it's one with which I agree--

is that we use labels to legitimise or delegitimise people committing equivalent acts. Until we stop doing that, then we've no kick coming when others do it too.

The historical record is clear: the Israelis are invaders and occupiers, and, as Uri Avnery has pointed out (at the risk of his life!), IDF members are committing war crimes every day for which they are criminally liable before the ICC. But fat chance that you'll ever hear any US politician call them on it. No, Israel is 'the only democracy in the region' and 'our staunch ally' that's under siege by the filthy Arab terrorists.

[DrFunkenstein]

34. The Call Israeli Attacks "State-Sponsored Terrorism"

Rather than calling Hamas "freedom fighters."

[Mairead]

37. I agree that that might be marginally more honest

but I suspect it would be an even bigger lightning rod politically. And I say 'marginally' because calling both sides terrorists blurs what seems to me an important distinction between powerful invaders who have other options and (comparatively) powerless invadees who don't.

[MercutioATC]

48. Who called Hamas "freedom fighters"?

I simply said that we have a tendancy to forgive many evils as long as the group in question is following OUR direction.

And thanks, Mairead, for making a clearer point than I did. That was, indeed, the point I was trying to make.

[helleborient]

42. Israeli soldiers strike at civilians as well...

They killed an American civilian with a bulldozer after all...

As well as bulldozing Palestinian homes, raiding and looting Palestinian businesses, etc.

I don't find legitimacy in tactics of the Israeli Army, but I still call them soldiers because they are engaging in warfare...isn't that what soldiers do?

[blm]

39. And were his promises to Sharon Presidential?

Or are those just to be forgotten for his newly shifted stance?

[helleborient]

41. Unfortunately, John Kerry is...

And it doesn't look very presidential to me...is it not ready for prime time? amateurish? All of the other crap that has been tossed at Howard Dean if he says something imperfect?

[eileen from OH]

8. I invoke the NGR

the No "Gotcha" Rule, which I made up. No more quoting isolated words or phrases or even sentences, without giving context. That is nothing more than giving Rove ammunition and playing right into the hands of the rightwing media. It's what turned a few stories about Gore as an "exaggerator" into conventional wisdom.

I am sick to DEATH of it, no matter who the candidate is.

eileen from OH

[w13rd0]

3. yawn

i'd had this silly notion some might have been above this sorta thing...maybe it's just been a bad day...we'll see what tomorrow brings...

[w4rma]

9. lol! And *you* support Sen. Kerry?

When are you going to hold Sen. Kerry to the same lofty standard you try to hold Gov. Dean to, DrFunkenstein?

[liberalnurse]

10. I'm seriously

concidering putting this dude on ignore. Maybe we all should....It just is not going to change.

[DrFunkenstein]

11. Did I Not Provide Enough Links To You?

I'm trying to get to the heart of the matter. Why don't you actually present an argument. I've backed up everything I've said.

[liberalnurse]

13. All you need to provide is the asprin

cause you give me a headache. I have learned a lot about behaviors here at DU. Just because one claims to be a democrat they don't always behave with the party spirit.

I will defend and support any democrat except Lieberman. I don't need to bait and bang my democratic peers to feel better.

[DrFunkenstein]

17. This Is Not Bashing!

This is a legitimate issue. Not only that, it is a crucial issue. The Mid-east is one of the main problems confronting us in the war against terrorism. We absolutely must solve this problem, and I have a hard time believing that Dean can broker peace without renouncing his very problematic pledges to Sharon.

Those pledges come in the context of two major foreign policy speeches that make tremendous demands on the Palestinians, and none from Israel. Feel free to check this out.

I give Dean alot of grief, but I honestly think he has the right idea with progressive internationalism. I obviously think Kerry would do a much better job of it, but Dean - more than any other candidate - has put out a policy that I can get behind. However, the I/P crisis is a glaring flaw in that policy. I am glad he has made more even-handed overtures, but they are no substitute for renouncing these pledges. That's not a bash. That's the truth.

[w4rma]

15. Name a candidate who you believe to have a good position on this (n/t)

[DrFunkenstein]

18. Kerry, Naturally

"Without demanding unilateral concessions, the United States must mediate a series of confidence building steps which start down the road to peace. Both parties must walk this path together - simultaneously. And the world can help them do it.

While maintaining our long term commitment to Israel's existence and security, the United States must work to keep both sides focused on the end game of peace.

Extremists must not be allowed to control this process.

American engagement and successful mediation are not only essential to peace in this war-torn area but also critical to the success of our own efforts in the war against terrorism."

http://www.johnkerry.com/news/speeches/spc_2003_0123.html

[w4rma]

24. Statement of Principles on the Middle East Peace Process

Howard Dean is committed to achieving a negotiated, comprehensive, and just peace between Palestinians and Israelis and remains optimistic about the chances for peace. The greatest asset in that effort is that majorities of both Palestinians and Israelis accept a two-state solution which would guarantee security, sovereignty, and dignity.

Recent developments in the region have created a new sense of opportunity. Any steps that lead away from violence and toward peace need to be encouraged and assisted. Continuing this progress will require the full engagement of the United States at the highest level. U.S. disengagement from the process during much of the Bush Administration has been unacceptable. No other country but the United States has the credibility necessary to facilitate negotiations and to mediate between the parties. Yet, in the end, only the Palestinians and the Israelis themselves can make and keep the peace and work out the specifics of a lasting agreement. Peace cannot be imposed by outside parties.

The basic framework for peace between the Israelis and Palestinians is a two state solution -- a Jewish state of Israel living side by side in peace and security with an independent, demilitarized Palestinian state. The best approach to achieving lasting peace is a comprehensive one, providing for fully normalized relations, peace, and security as part of an overall negotiated settlement between Israel and the Arab states.

To get there, the Palestinian Authority will have to fight terrorism and violence on a consistent basis to create the conditions necessary for a viable peace process. The Israeli government will have to work to improve the living conditions of the Palestinian people and ultimately will have to remove a number of existing settlements. These issues and others will all be elements of a final agreement negotiated by the parties.

Through it all, the United States will maintain its historic special relationship with the state of Israel, providing a guarantee of its long-term defense and security. And the United States will have to take responsibility with its international partners for helping the Palestinians establish a middle-class democratic society in which women fully participate in economic and political decision-making. The international community must support these economic reconstruction efforts which are essential to the long-term success of any agreement between the parties.
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=policy_policy_foreign_mideast

[DrFunkenstein]

28. Compare The Demands On Palestinians and Israel

This text is even an improvement over the more specific policy speeches he made, but compare:

"To get there, the Palestinian Authority will have to fight terrorism and violence on a consistent basis to create the conditions necessary for a viable peace process. The Israeli government will have to work to improve the living conditions of the Palestinian people and ultimately will have to remove a number of existing settlements."

There is (yet a thrid time) no mention of curbing the violence on the part of the Israelis. Nor does it mention that Israelis are actively destroying the Palestinian infrastructure to enfeeble any future Palestinian State. Nor is their mention of the separation wall, which is a bald-faced land-grab. And while it talks about the need for Palestinian reform with women, it makes no mention of the fact that Arabs are legally second-class citizens in Israel.

There is nothing Dean says here that George Bush does not also say.

And finally, let's take a look at this gem:

"The basic framework for peace between the Israelis and Palestinians is a two state solution -- a Jewish state of Israel living side by side in peace and security with an independent, demilitarized Palestinian state."

So Israel will be a nuclear power, and a Palestinian state will be demilitarized?

[helleborient]

43. Do you have a link where John Kerry...

Puts demands on the government of Israel?

You seem to think Howard Dean should be...but is John Kerry?

[Nicholas_J]

47. Nope but Kerry Stated:

Israel's security will be best assured over the long term if real and lasting peace can be brought to the Middle East. I know from my own trips to Israel that the majority of the Israeli people understand and expect that one day there will be a Palestinian state. Their frustration is that they do not see a committed partner in peace on the Palestinian side. Palestinians must stop the violence - this is the fundamental building block of the peace process. The Palestinian leadership must be reformed, not only for the future of the Palestinian people but also for the sake of peace. I believe Israel would respond to this new partner after all, Israel has already indicated its willingness to freeze settlements and to move toward the establishment of a Palestinian state as part of a comprehensive peace process.

Without demanding unilateral concessions, the United States must mediate a series of confidence building steps which start down the road to peace. Both parties must walk this path together - simultaneously. And the world can help them do it. While maintaining our long term commitment to Israel's existence and security, the United States must work to keep both sides focused on the end game of peace. Extremists must not be allowed to control this process. American engagement and successful mediation are not only essential to peace in this war-torn area but also critical to the success of our own efforts in the war against terrorism. When I visited the region last year, in meetings with King Abdullah of Jordan, President Mubarak of Egypt, and Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, it became clear that September 11th had changed the imperatives of these countries. The Bush Administration has missed an opportunity to enlist much greater support in the peace process and needs to focus on this urgent priority- now.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_02/012503A.kerry.no.rush.htm

Kerry has been involved with, and has laid a very clear path for the U.S. role, and how it should behave with regrads to both the Palestinians and the Israeli's.

If you take this speech, and put it side by side with Deans later foreign policy speech, it willbecome obvious where Deans speechwriters got their ideas for Deans speech from.

[Mairead]

35. You might be surprised at who's being considered for the ignore list.

Dr F is invariably careful and polite...something that is not true of some others I could name.

[DrFunkenstein]

14. I Have

You are probably talking about IWR, but I've gone 15 rounds on that already. In a nutshell, I understand his vote in my head, but my heart still disagrees. I have also given Kerry crap for supporting welfare reform, as an example, which I am totally against (at least in the draconian form it was presented).

[w4rma]

16. Actually, I've never really cared about his IWR vote

I'm talking about his recent criticism of Dean on the words 'evenhanded' and 'Hamas soldiers'.

[DrFunkenstein]

20. I Didn't Find Them Particularly Compelling

They were gaffes that Dean made, that we all knew he would eventually make. I'm much more concerned about policy, but I understand why these statements would be considered un-Presidential. Remember when Bush sent the Asian markets into a tailspin over a gaffe?

Personally, I think it is kind of like taking Kerry to task for saying "authorizing the threat of war," which is to say political BS. I find Dean's AIPAC-paid trip to visit Sharon infinitely more troubling.

[w4rma]

22. I didn't find Kerry's statments compelling

IMHO, Kerry made the gaffe with his 'gotcha' politics. And Kerry has been the one getting slammed by us non-insider folks. I think Sen. Kerry needs to apologize for this. Gov. Dean said nothing that wasn't similar to anything President Clinton has said on the peace process. 'Evenhanded' was similar to Clinton's 'honest broker'. Dean is even using the term 'honest broker'. Even the Los Angeles Times has refered to the term 'Hamas soldiers' on headlines.

I also don't see any quotes from Dean saying that he has made any promises for stringless loans, so I think it's possible that these pro-Sharon? newpapers may have their information wrong.

Dean's statement on his website looks pretty agreeable to me.

[DrFunkenstein]

30. I Don't Think "Muslim Wake Up" Is Pro-Sharon

These sources are from both sides of the conflict.

And as for "gotcha" politics, you have to realize that with foreign policy it really is all gotcha politics. A single change of phrase can determine an infinite number of actions. Diplomatic language is very specific, which is one reason the world is going nuts at George W. In the realm of foreign policy, even-handed does not mean same as honest brokering.

[Tim The Enchanter]

19. As a Dean supporter, I agree

If I am going to support a candidate, I want to be able to promote that candidate's platform. Dean does have potential, but, if he doesn't get his act together, it will all fall apart. Ultimately, I want Bush out, so I will advocate for the strongest candidate. Although I have my problems with Kerry, he is very articulate, has great experience and is playing the race smart (at least from what I can tell) by hanging back a bit. I want Dean to succeed, but he must earn it with clarity and honesty. Otherwise my support will go elsewhere.

[DrFunkenstein]

21. I'm Not Asking People To Abandon Their Candidate

I would much rather see Dean supporters give him hell until he makes the renunciation. Clearly, he has heard the grassroots voices on this issue. That in itself is impressive. But I want to see real changes, not just the cosmetic.

[Tim The Enchanter]

26. My Candidate

I don't really feel that I have a particular candidate. Since I am a Democrat, I believe they are all my candidates. I will simply support the candidate that I can identify with and one that I feel is the best for the country. If Dean derails, he would have served his purpose in energizing the base and changing the way campaigns are run. That in itself would be an admirable achievement.

I admit Dean's inexperience is a problem. He is cramming to solidify his positions and, in the process, he is "evolving" too rapidly. Can he do it in time? I don't know. I believe he could surround himself with the right people and serve successfully as our president, but any of these candidates could as well. I'm pulling for Dean, but I have to be realistic and prepare myself to support whoever wins the nomination. Just keeping on my toes.

As far as giving Dean hell, I have been utilizing his website's feedback feature frequently (I always have suggestions), and I hope others are doing the same.

[jarab]

32. Welcome to DU, Tim The Enchanter

jarab - DU moderator

[helleborient]

44. And I want to see John Kerry speak with more substance...

Than whining about the word "soldiers"...none of this has improved my image of the candidates as a whole.

We seem to have most of the candidates engaged in much more apologistic behavior for the government of Israel than I am comfortable with.

Why didn't Kerry come forward with a real policy statement opposing Howard Dean's policies? Instead of a stupid semantics argument?

[LuminousX]

23. Sadly for me

Dr.Funk your opinion does matter. I've followed many of your postings and for the most part, while disagreeing in the principle of the matter, I respect your basic premises. You raise solid issues and rarely delve into the muck.

This happens to be one of the issues the troubles me most deeply about Dean but I am least concerned about. I would like to see a more clarified position from Dean regarding this matter.

[DrFunkenstein]

27. That's What I'm Looking For

Although he doesn't have Kerry's record, Dean has real potential in foreign relations. It is where I disagree least with him (although I wish he would fill out his ideas), except on this issue. I am a firm believer in progressive internationalism. And to me truly having an even hand in the Mid-East is crucial. And until I see Dean at least clear up this issue, I am going to have real problems with it (although I admit the candidates besides Kerry and Kunicich are nothing to brag about on I/P).

PS - I'm sorry if I got caught up in the negativity lately. There was a guy in General Discussion posting all kinds of lies about Kerry and it really put me in a crappy mood.

[LuminousX]

29. We all descend into the muck

it is a matter of whether or not we choose to dwell there or not.

I appreciate the spirit of this post. An effort needs to be made to stengthen all of our candidates. Honestly see the weaknesses and work to correct them.

[RevolutionStartsNow]

31. Fair Enough, Funk

And I've strayed a bit myself lately. Hard not to.

I just posted a picture of my dog in the Doonesbury thread, just for you. :)

[DuctapeFatwa]

25. No candidate can renounce Sharon and stay in the game

Any who strays too far from the positions of Tom DeLay and Gary Bauer on the subject effectively renounces his career.

That's not in the best interests of ordinary Americans, or ordinary Israelis, and it's certainly not in the interests of ordinary Palestinians, but that's the way the money boys say it's gotta be.

[Rose Siding]

36. Doc-

Could it not be that Dean is entering his policy development in the carrot phase? He had, after all, no control over whether monies were given.

I see you feel strongly about this and I really lean that way myself but it doesn't rise, for me, to the level of deal breaker because my trust in Dean's ability to find solutions that surprise me has been frequently reinforced.

Considering the ENORMOUS waves of a few well reasoned comments, it looks to me like he actually *has* exibited a desire to be evenhanded.

[DrFunkenstein]

38. Dean Had Total Control Of The Promises He Made

This is not about current levels of spending on aid, if I get you correctly. Dean has promised to quadruple spending on military aid and loan guarantees for "construction" (which frees up money for defense, and pays to pave over Palestinian homes).

Those are pledges of what he will do when he becomes President. He did not ask for conditions to those pledges, which is more than even Wolfowitz was willing to broker. I appreciate the seeming change in language, but even that is insufficient. He called on a reduction of violence ONLY from Palestinians, and promised that a Palestinian state would be "demilitarized." His words, not mine.

---

I have yet to see him reconcile these quotes:

“Perhaps Dr. Dean's most unequivocal policy stance is his staunch, hawkish support for Israel, which will attract the support of America's hugely influential Jewish lobby. Earlier this month Dr Dean, whose wife is Jewish, traveled to Jerusalem for a meeting with the Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, declaring afterwards: ‘I do not think that as long as Yassir Arafat is president there will be peace.’”

"That Sharon agreed to meet him at all shows how seriously the Israeli leader takes Dr Dean as a political force. Just as significant is that Sharon asked him to support the Israeli request for new loan guarantees from Washington, ‘and I promised him I would.’ Israel is asking the Bush administration for up to $10 billion in loan guarantees to shore up its economy.” (The Times of London, December 18, 2002)

Note: That's 2 billion more than I've previously seen mentioned. That would make it 5x the current level.

--

“Asked if his appearance at the Peace Now event should be read as a signal of his views on the Middle East, Dean said, ‘No, my view is closer to AIPAC's view…At one time the Peace Now view was important but now Israel is under enormous pressure,’ he continued. ‘We have to stop terrorism before peace negotiations.... I don't do things for political reasons. I'm very loyal to my friends. Nobody should read anything into my ideology.’” (The Forward, November 22, 2002)

http://www.aaiusa.org/dean_quotes.htm

[Upfront]

45. Yawn

[DrFunkenstein]

46. Is That Another Way Of Saying

Bump?