presidential
Legacy
AIPAC
table of contents
executive
summary
the u.s.–israel
partnership
the u.s.
commitment
to israel’s
security
the israelipalestinian
peace process
4 Support from the Beginning
5 Establishing New Principles
5 Commitment to Israel’s Security and the Strategic Relationship
6 A Clear Vision of Peace
7 Enduring Legacies
8 Introduction
11 Israel Is a Steadfast Ally of the United States
11 The U.S.–Israel Relationship Is Based on Shared Values
11 The U.S. Is Committed to Providing Vital Assistance to Israel
12 Introduction
14 The U.S. Is Committed to Israel’s Security
14 The Security of Israel Is a Top Priority of the U.S.
14 The U.S. Is Committed to Israel’s Qualitative Military Edge
14 The U.S. Will Strengthen Israel’s Capability of Defending Itself
15 Israel Has the Right to Defend Its Citizens from Terrorism
15 Israel’s Security Is Key to Peace with the Palestinians
15 The U.S. Will Aid Israel If It Is Attacked
16 Introduction
18 negotiations
18 A Permanent Israeli-Palestinian Settlement Must End the Conflict
18 A Final Settlement to the Conflict Cannot Be Imposed
18 Israel Must Remain a Jewish State in Any Peace Settlement
19 borders
19 Israel Has the Right to Live Within Secure and Defensible Borders
19 Israel Will Not Return to the 1949 Armistice Line
20 refugees
20 Palestinian Refugees Should Be Settled in a Palestinian State
21 Jerusalem
21 Jerusalem Should Be Recognized as the Capital of Israel
21 Jerusalem Should Remain Undivided
the israelipalestinian
peace process
IRAN
22 Palestinian Statehood
22 The United States Supports a Two-State Solution
22 A Palestinian State Will Not Be Created by Terror
22 Palestinians: Fight Corruption and Make Democratic Reforms
23 A Palestinian State Should Not Be Militarized
23 The U.S. Opposes a Unilateral Declaration of Palestinian Statehood
24 Combating Terrorism
24 The Palestinians Must Fight Terrorism
24 The Palestinians Must Dismantle Terrorist Infrastructure
24 The United States Will Pursue Those Who Support Terrorists
25 Combating Incitement
25 The Palestinians Must End Anti-Israel Incitement in Their Media
26 Arab States’ Responsibilities
26 Improve Relations with Israel, Fight Terror, and Support Moderates
27 The Arab Boycott of Israel Must End
28 Introduction
30 Iran Must Not Be Permitted to Have Nuclear Weapons
30 The United States Rejects Iran’s Destructive Policies
31 All Options to Prevent a Nuclear Iran Remain on the Table
31 Iran Must End Its Enrichment of Uranium
31 There Should Be No Nuclear Cooperation with Iran
32 The United States Rejects Iran’s Anti-Israel Rhetoric
33 Iran Must End Its Support for Terrorism
33 U.S. Allies Should Not Do Business with Iran
2 TABLE OF CONTENTS
syria and
lebanon
34
36
Introduction
The U.S. Supports a Sovereign, Democratic Lebanon
36 There Should Be No Foreign Interference in Lebanon
36 The U.S. Affirms Israel’s Full Withdrawal From Lebanon
37 Hizballah Must Be Disarmed
37 Syria Must End Its Support for Terrorism
37 Syrian Behavior Is Unacceptable
the united
nations
38
40
Introduction
The U.S. Will Oppose Any Anti-Israel U.N. Resolutions
40 The U.S. Backs Full Israeli Membership in a U.N. Regional Group
41 The U.S. Rejects Focus on Israel at the U.N. Human Rights Council
appendices 42 Appendix 1: Major Bilateral Agreements
45 Appendix 2: Major Executive Orders
47 Appendix 3: U.S. Vetoes of U.N. Resolutions
49 Appendix 4: Major Legislation
TABLE OF CONTENTS 3
executive summary
During the presidencies of William J. Clinton and
George W. Bush, the U.S.–Israel relationship has
reached remarkable new heights. Despite belonging
to different parties and adhering to differing political
philosophies, President Clinton and President Bush
have overseen a period of profound growth in the
depth and strength of the relationship; unprecedent
ed intimacy and partnership; and the convergence of
shared values, interests and common threats that
have greatly enhanced the existing ties between
the countries.
Each president, faced with different circumstances
and challenges—from the initial promise of the Oslo
peace process to the wave of suicide bombings in Israel
and 9/11 attacks here at home—worked closely with
Israel to address the issues at hand, always seeking to
build upon the policies of his predecessors to lead the
relationship to its current heights.
Support from the Beginning
The United States was the first country to recognize
the new State of Israel, in May 1948, when President
Truman announced U.S. support for the fledgling
Jewish state only 11 minutes after David Ben-Gurion
announced its rebirth. The American public felt a
moral imperative to help create a haven for the
survivors of the Nazi Holocaust—the greatest act
of barbarity in history.
4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
During the course of the next six decades,
American presidents and lawmakers from both parties
built and strengthened the bond between the United
States and Israel. From presidents to ordinary citizens,
Americans have understood that solid relations
between the United States and Israel are rooted in
the shared values of democracy and the other moral
principles of Western civilization, a common history
of founding by refugees fleeing oppression and serving
as a beacon of hope for immigrants seeking freedom
and economic well-being.
During the Cold War, Israel was viewed as a
bulwark against the Soviet Union, especially in the
aftermath of Israel’s stunning defeat of Russia’s Arab
proxies in the 1967 Six-Day War and the 1973 Yom
Kippur War. Americans deeply understood that
Israel’s victories represented an important success for
the West and further solidified the relationship
between Israel and the United States, which had previously provided only limited assistance and military
equipment to the Jewish state. This major shift in the
region paved the way for the United States to support
peace efforts, including the Israel-Egyptian agreement
at Camp David, and to emerge as the chief provider
of economic and security assistance to the Jewish state.
While the United States recognized Israel as a
“major non-NATO ally” in the 1980s and strategic
Americans saw Israel’s stunning victory over the Arab states in 1967 as a
major boost to U.S. efforts to counter the Soviet Union during the Cold War.
Terrorism in both the United States and Israel brought the two allies closer
to combat shared threats.
cooperation between the two countries grew, a rapid
expansion in U.S.–Israel relations occurred during
President Clinton’s tenure in the 1990s and has
evolved and solidified further under President Bush.
During this time, America’s view of Israel’s importance grew. In a region of increasing turmoil,
instability and dictatorships, the United States saw
Israel as its sole reliable ally.
Establishing New Principles
With the crumbling of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Middle East became a
major focus of the international community and of
the United States. From the Oslo peace process supported by President Clinton to President Bush’s
efforts to combat terrorism in the aftermath of 9/11,
both administrations reaffirmed existing principles
while establishing important new ones to guide the
U.S.–Israel relationship not only for today but well
into the future.
These important U.S. principles centered on supporting the safety and security of Israel as a thriving
democratic Jewish state, working closely with Israel
to face common challenges and dealing with limited
disagreements through private dialogue rather than
public pressure.
This successful approach is the guiding vision
for the future of the U.S.–Israel alliance and is
manifested in key policies of the Clinton and Bush
presidencies. These leaders have strengthened the
relationship beyond where it had been, most importantly on the two fundamental components of the
bilateral relationship: the U.S. commitment to ensur
ing Israel’s security and a common vision on the
necessary principles needed for successful Israel-
Palestinian peace negotiations.
Commitment to Israel’s Security and
the Strategic Relationship
In the early 1990s, new threats emerged, supplanting
those of the Cold War–era. Foremost among these
were radical Islamists groups employing violence and
terror against the United States, its values and its
interests. Radical Islamists also attacked Israel and
fought to undermine any possibility of success of the
nascent peace process that had emerged after the
collapse of the Soviet bloc. Radical Islam, led by an
Iran pursuing a clandestine nuclear weapons program, grew stronger with the growth of Hizballah,
Hamas and other jihadist groups.
America and Israel united to face this common
threat while demonstrating their capabilities as reliable and stable allies. The two countries deepened
robust intelligence and strategic cooperative programs, including the joint Arrow missile defense
system aimed at protecting against the increasingly
dangerous ballistic missile arsenal of Iran. By the
end of the Clinton presidency, the U.S.–Israel
relationship could readily be characterized by the
president as “an unshakable bond.”
President Bush, starting with this existing solid
relationship, brought it to a new level of strategic
partnership. The attacks of 9/11 occurred during the
first year of Bush’s term in office and, perhaps more
than any other single event, demonstrated to
Americans and Israelis alike their shared security
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5
The United States and
Israel significantly increased their
strategic cooperation during
the presidencies of Bill Clinton
and George W. Bush. Opposite
page: Despite hailing from different parties and adhering to
different political philosophies,
Presidents Bush and Clinton
worked to bring the U.S.–Israel
relationship to new heights.
interests. As Israelis wept for America’s losses on
that fateful day, Americans were able to fully grasp
what had been Israel’s predicament since its founding.
In the aftermath 9/11 and amid continuing terrorism in Israel, the United States strongly backed
Israel’s right to defend itself against such attacks
and opened up new areas of cooperation in the
homeland security arena. Today, America is able to
make use of Israel’s long experience in defending its
citizens from terrorism, signing in early 2007 a
Memorandum of Understanding with the Jewish
state to promote homeland security cooperation.
Delegation after delegation of Americans from the
first-responder community—including police, firefighters, and emergency medical professionals—now
visit Israel to learn Israeli techniques and procedures.
The United States and Israel also expanded their
cooperation in the critical missile defense arena
while the United States utilized Israeli technology and
systems to boost America’s military performance and
save American lives on the battlefield.
The United States, during both administrations,
invested in this mutual strategic relationship
through groundbreaking 10-year aid agreements,
which demonstrated the strong U.S. commitment to
working closely with Israel and ensuring the Jewish
state’s security and qualitative military edge over
potential adversaries in the region.
Beyond providing generous funding to help
ensure Israel’s security, the United States has demonstrated its commitment to helping Israel when
attacked, whether at the United Nations or on the
battlefield. The Clinton administration successfully
pushed for Israel to be accepted into a U.N. regional working group for the first time in the country’s
history, while the Bush administration has articulated a clear policy of vetoing any one-sided U.N.
Security Council resolutions attacking Israel.
On the more dire threat of an attack by Iran on
Israel, President Bush has repeatedly and unequivocally stated that the United States would come to
Israel’s defense in such a dire scenario. The fact that
this response is now accepted as a matter of course
bears witness to how far the relationship between
the United States and Israel has come in the past
15 years.
A Clear Vision of Peace
While the end of the Cold War brought new threats
and challenges, it also presented new opportunities
to explore peace between Israel and its Arab
neighbors. President Clinton embarked on an
unprecedented effort to reach this goal, helping
Israel reach a peace settlement with Jordan and
working to his waning days in office to do the
same between Israel and the Palestinians.
Over the course of the eight years of the Clinton
presidency, the partnership between the countries
developed an unprecedented level of intimacy.
Discussions at the highest levels were marked
by their frequency, and, over time, by a sense
6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
of shared views and coordination reserved for
America’s closest allies. Such intimate discussions
and coordination have further expanded as the Bush
administration worked closely with Israel to support
its disengagement from Gaza and to renew high-
level Israeli-Palestinian negotiations.
The two countries now also share a more fully
developed vision in the pursuit of peace that has
been articulated by both President Clinton and
President Bush.
This common vision emerged from the Oslo
peace process and the rejection in 2000 by
Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat of an unprecedented
Israeli peace proposal to create a Palestinian state.
Instead, Arafat unleashed a campaign of terrorism
that has killed more than 1,100 Israelis and wounded thousands while bringing greater suffering to his
own people.
The United States and Israel continue to maintain
their common vision to advance Israeli-Palestinian
peace negotiations. President Bush, building on the
foundation established under President Clinton, has
further developed U.S. principles toward an Israeli-
Palestinian peace that have forged a common basis
for Israel and the United States to advance the
process. Both allies today agree on a two-state
solution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that would
allow the two states to live side by side in peace
and security.
The United States, working with Israel, also developed and solidified other key principles during the
past 15 years. These include an American commitment to Israel as a democratic, Jewish state living
behind secure and defensible borders and recognition
that Palestinian refugees will exercise the right of
return to a Palestinian state, not to Israel. The United
States also announced its position that the major
Jewish settlement blocks in the West Bank (about
eight percent of the land mass of the area) will be part
of Israel as border adjustments are made in a final
settlement. America further asserted that Jerusalem
should be recognized as the capital of Israel.
As part of their efforts to support Israeli-
Palestinian negotiations, both administrations pressed
Syria to end its support of terrorist groups seeking to
undermine such efforts and urged the Arab states to
normalize relations with Israel.
Enduring Legacies
Two presidents, William J. Clinton and George W.
Bush, one a Democrat and one a Republican, each
raised the relationship between the United States and
Israel to new heights, enabling the allies to work as
partners to advance the goals both nations share:
defeating terrorism, containing radical Islam, safeguarding their citizens, defending Western values and
tirelessly pursuing peace.
In the pages that follow, their words, and those
of their top officials, will illustrate the legacy of their
presidencies over a 15-year span, demonstrating the
remarkable friendship and closeness between the
United States and Israel.
January 2008
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Introduction
the u.s.–israel partnership
Since the early days of the Jewish state, the United States and
Israel have maintained a deep partnership based on shared values and common
threats. During the 1960s, ’70s and ’80s the United States and Israel cooperated to
counter the influence of the Soviet Union in the Middle East. During the past two
decades, Israel and America have united in an effort to seek peace while at the
same time combatting radicalism, terror and weapons of mass destruction.
Despite hailling from different parties and adhering to different political
philosophies, both President Clinton and President Bush viewed Israel as a key ally
in the post-Cold War–era, which was marked by the emergence of extremist Islamic
terrorism. From the 1993 World Trade Center bombing to the aftermath of 9/11,
the two allies have stood shoulder to shoulder against common enemies. Both the
Clinton and the Bush administrations consistently articulated and implemented
key principles of the U.S.–Israel relationship, including supporting the safety and
security of Israel as a thriving democratic Jewish state; working closely with Israel
to face common challenges; and dealing with limited disagreements through private
dialogue rather than public pressure.
THE U.S.–ISRAEL PARTNERSHIP
“For more than half a century, the United
States has stood proudly with Israel
and for the security of its people and
its nation.”"
President Clinton
Remarks with Israeli Prime Minister
Ehud Barak, July 15, 1999
Above left: President Clinton
worked closely with Israeli Prime
Minister Yitzhak Rabin during the
1990s to pursue peace efforts with
the Palestinians. Above right:
President Bush strongly backed
Israeli Prime Minister Ariel
Sharon’s efforts to defend the
Jewish state against terror attacks.
Right: The joint U.S.–Israeli
Arrow missile defense system is a
tangible manifestation of America’s
commitment to ensuring Israel’s
security during the Clinton and
Bush presidencies.
10 THE U.S.–ISRAEL PARTNERSHIP
ISRAEL IS A STEADFAST ALLY OF THE UNITED STATES
President William J. Clinton “Israel and the United States are friends and allies,
Remarks with Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres and will be…no matter who is elected.”
April 30, 1996
President George W. Bush “For more than 50 years, the United States and
Remarks to the AIPAC Policy Conference Israel have been steadfast allies.…Our nation is
May 18, 2004 stronger and safer because we have a true and
dependable ally in Israel.”
THE U.S.–ISRAEL RELATIONSHIP IS BASED ON SHARED VALUES
President Clinton “…the United States and Israel are still partners,
Remarks to the AIPAC Policy Conference based on shared values and common strategies.”
April 28, 1996
President Bush “The United States and the State of Israel have a
Press Conference with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon deep and lasting friendship based on our shared
April 11, 2005 values and aspirations for a peaceful world.”
THE U.S. IS COMMITTED TO PROVIDING VITAL ASSISTANCE TO ISRAEL
President Clinton “I have reaffirmed my support for the current aid
Remarks with Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin level to Israel, as well as for certain security assis-
November 21, 1994 tance, including the Arrow missile program, in the
years ahead so that we can continue to support
the security conditions that in my judgment are the
precondition for Israel being able to make a just peace
with all their neighbors in the Middle East.”
President Bush “I am committed to reaching a new 10-year
Statement agreement that will give Israel the increased
June 19, 2007 assistance it requires to meet the new threats
and challenges it faces.”
THE U.S.–ISRAEL PARTNERSHIP 11
Introduction
the U.S. COMMITMENT TO ISRAEL’S SECURITY
During Israel’s first three decades, the United States provided
the Jewish state with limited assistance and military equipment, yet largely boosting
such help during times of war and conflict. The U.S. aid commitment firmed up dramatically in the wake of peacemaking between Israel and Egypt in the late 1970s.
The past 15 years, however, have been marked by fundamental change as
both President Clinton and President Bush significantly strengthened the U.S.
commitment to Israel’s security. Beyond merely stating that Israel must be able
to protect itself in a hostile region, both presidents took concrete action through
the signing of landmark 10-year aid agreements to ensure that this would be the
case. These agreements, known as Memorandums of Understanding, demonstrated
the profound U.S. commitment to working closely with Israel as a key strategic ally
and ensuring the Jewish state’s security and qualitative military edge over potential
adversaries in the region.
Both presidents also have made the security of Israel a key component of
U.S. foreign policy, from the peace process to dealings with Iran. Following the
Oslo agreement, President Clinton affirmed that Israel’s security was the key prerequisite for peace with the Palestinians, saying that “only a strong Israel can make
peace.” Today, with a nuclear-minded Iran calling for Israel’s destruction, President
Bush has pledged that the United States “would rise to Israel’s defense” if the
Jewish State is attacked.
12 THE U.S. COMMITMENT TO ISRAEL’S SECURITY
“America’s commitment to Israel’s security
is strong, enduring and unshakable.”
President Bush
Remarks to the American Jewish
Committee, May 4, 2006
THE U.S. IS COMMITTED TO ISRAEL’S SECURITY
President Bush “The United States is strongly committed, and
Remarks to the AIPAC Policy Conference I am strongly committed, to the security of Israel
May 18, 2004 as a vibrant Jewish state.”
President Clinton “Our commitment to Israel’s security is unshakable.”
Remarks to the AIPAC Policy Conference
April 28, 1996
THE SECURITY OF ISRAEL IS A TOP PRIORITY OF THE U.S.
President Bush “At my first meeting of the National Security
Remarks to the American Jewish Committee Council, I [said] that a top foreign policy priority
May 3, 2001 of my administration is the safety and security of
Israel. My administration will be steadfast in
supporting Israel against terrorism and violence.”
President Clinton “… the security of Israel is going to be one of the
Press Conference with Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres main pillars of America’s defense commitments,
December 11, 1995 and one of the main things we’ll be concerned
about as we move through the peace process.”
THE U.S. IS COMMITTED TO ISRAEL’S QUALITATIVE MILITARY EDGE
President Bush “I am strongly committed to Israel’s security and
Statement viability as a Jewish state and to the mainte-
June 19, 2007 nance of its qualitative military edge.”
President Clinton “We have made an explicit policy commitment,
Press Conference with Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres which has been carried through under presidents
December 11, 1995 of both parties, to maintain the qualitative
and technological edge...that Israel needs to
guarantee its security.”
THE U.S. WILL STRENGTHEN ISRAEL’S CAPABILITY TO DEFEND ITSELF
President Bush “The United States reiterates its steadfast
Letter to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon commitment to Israel’s security, including
April 14, 2004 secure, defensible borders, and to preserve and
strengthen Israel’s capability to deter and defend
itself, by itself, against any threat or possible
combination of threats.”
14 THE U.S. COMMITMENT TO ISRAEL’S SECURITY
President Clinton “President Clinton reiterated the steadfast
Joint Statement with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak
July 19, 1999
commitment of the United States to Israel’s security,
to maintain its qualitative edge, and to strengthen
Israel’s ability to deter and defend itself, by itself,
against any threat or a possible combination
of threats.”
ISRAEL HAS THE RIGHT TO DEFEND ITS CITIZENS FROM TERRORISM
President Bush
Press Conference with German Chancellor Angela Merkel
July 13, 2006
“…Israel has a right to defend herself. Every
nation must defend herself against terrorist
attacks and the killing of innocent life. It’s a
necessary part of the 21st century.”
President Clinton
Remarks to the AIPAC Policy Conference
April 28, 1996
“The Katyusha rockets, the bloodshed in
Lebanon, the suicide bombings in Israel—we
grieve for the innocent victims…for the Lebanese
children in Qana who were caught between—make
no mistake about it—the deliberate tactics of
Hizballah in their positioning and firing, and the
tragic misfiring in Israel’s legitimate exercise of its
right to self-defense.”
ISRAEL’S SECURITY IS KEY TO PEACE WITH THE PALESTINIANS
President Bush “These negotiations must resolve difficult questions
Remarks on Israeli-Palestinian Issues and uphold clear principles. They must ensure that
July 16, 2007 Israel is secure.”
President Clinton “I would certainly never countenance an agree-
Interview with Israeli Television ment that I thought undermined Israel’s security.”
July 27, 2000
THE U.S. WILL AID ISRAEL IF IT IS ATTACKED
President Bush “Israel is a close friend and ally of the United
Press Conference with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert States, and in the event of any attack on Israel,
May 23, 2006 the United States will come to Israel’s aid.”
THE U.S. COMMITMENT TO ISRAEL’S SECURITY 15
Introduction
the israeli-palestinian peace process
While previous presidents have sought to help Israel and the
Arab world reach a peace settlement, the hallmark of the Clinton and Bush administrations’ efforts have been an extraordinary level of intimacy and coordination
toward the development of a common vision with Israel on the basic principles that
will be the key to a successful solution to the conflict.
Such close cooperation between the two allies and the strong backing of the
United States allowed Israel to take far-reaching risks for peace as part of the Oslo
process and made possible President Clinton’s unprecedented effort to help Israel
and the Palestinians reach a final peace settlement. The Palestinians’ rejection of
Israel’s overtures and the unleashing of the worst wave of terrorism in Israel’s
history helped move the United States and Israel to solidify their common vision
for peace: two states, living side-by-side in peace and security.
Amid the Palestinian violence, President Bush, building on the foundation
established under President Clinton, stated that America’s support for a Palestinian
state was conditional on it not being “created by terror.” In addition to this fundamental position, the United States established other key guiding principles during
the Clinton and Bush presidencies: Israel must remain a democratic, Jewish state;
Palestinian refugees will exercise the right of return, not to Israel, but to a
Palestinian state; Israel should retain major settlement blocks in the West Bank;
and Jerusalem will be recognized as the capital of Israel.
16 THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN PEACE PROCESS
“We will stand by your
side until Israelis
come to know that
peace with security…
is a reality.”
President Clinton
Remarks upon arrival in Israel
March 13, 1996
NEGOTIATIONS
A PERMANENT ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN SETTLEMENT MUST END THE CONFLICT
President Clinton
Speech to the Israel Policy Forum
January 7, 2001
“…any agreement will have to mark the decision
to end the conflict, for neither side can afford
to make these painful compromises, only to be
subjected to further demands.”
-
President Bush
Remarks on Israeli-Palestinian Issues
July 16, 2007
“Resolving these issues would help show Palestinians
a clear way forward. And ultimately, could lead to
a final peace in the Middle East, a permanent end
to the conflict and an agreement on all issues,
including refugees and Jerusalem.”
A FINAL SETTLEMENT TO THE CONFLICT CANNOT BE IMPOSED
President Clinton
Address to the Knesset
October 27, 1994
“That peace must be real, based on treaty commitments arrived at directly by the parties, not
imposed from outside.”
President Bush
News Conference
October 17, 2007
“The United States can’t impose peace.… In
order for there to be a Palestinian state, it’s going
to require the Israelis and the Palestinians coming
to an accord. We can facilitate that. But we can’t
force people to make hard decisions; they’re going
to have to do that themselves.”
ISRAEL MUST REMAIN A JEWISH STATE IN ANY PEACE SETTLEMENT
President Clinton “We’ve made clear to all that our commitment to
Remarks at the AIPAC Policy Conference the security and well-being of the Jewish state is
May 7, 1995 absolutely unwavering and will continue to be.”
President Bush “…the United States will keep its commitment to
Remarks at the Annapolis Conference the security of Israel as a Jewish state and
November 27, 2007 homeland for the Jewish people.”
18 THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN PEACE PROCESS
BORDERS
ISRAEL HAS THE RIGHT TO LIVE WITHIN SECURE AND DEFENSIBLE BORDERS
President Clinton
Speech to the Israel Policy Forum
January 7, 2001
President Bush
Letter from President Bush to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon
April 14, 2004
“Now, I still think the benefits of the agreement,
based on these parameters, far outweigh the
burdens. For the people of Israel, [the benefits] are…
secure and defensible borders…”
“The United States reiterates its steadfast
commitment to Israel’s security, including
secure, defensible borders.”
ISRAEL WILL NOT RETURN TO THE 1949 ARMISTICE LINE
President Clinton
Speech to the Israel Policy Forum
January 7, 2001
“I think there can be no genuine resolution to the
conflict without a sovereign, viable Palestinian
state that accommodates Israel’s security requirements and the demographic realities. That
suggests…the incorporation into Israel of settlement blocks, with the goal of maximizing the
number of settlers in Israel while minimizing the
land annex for Palestine to be viable must be a geographically contiguous state.”
President Bush
Press Conference with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon
April 11, 2005
“As I said last April, new realities on the ground
make it unrealistic to expect that the outcome of
final status negotiations will be a full and complete
return on the armistice lines of 1949. It is realistic
to expect that any final status agreement will be
achieved only on the basis of mutually agreed
changes that reflect these realities. That’s the
American view.”
THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN PEACE PROCESS 19
REFUGEES
PALESTINIAN REFUGEES SHOULD BE SETTLED IN A PALESTINIAN STATE
President Clinton “A solution will have to be found for the
Speech to the Israel Policy Forum Palestinian refugees who have suffered a great
January 7, 2001
deal—particularly some of them. A solution that
allows them to return to a Palestinian state that
will provide all Palestinians with a place they can
safely and proudly call home. All Palestinian
refugees who wish to live in this homeland should
have the right to do so. All others who want to find
new homes, whether in their current locations or in
third countries, should be able to do so, consistent
with those countries’ sovereign decisions. And that
includes Israel.”
President Bush “It seems clear that an agreed, just, fair, and real-
Letter to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon istic framework for a solution to the Palestinian
April 14, 2004
refugee issue as part of any final status agreement
will need to be found through the establishment of
a Palestinian state, and the settling of Palestinian
refugees there, rather than in Israel.”
THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN PEACE PROCESS 20
Left: President Bush outlined key
U.S. principles to guide Israeli-
Palestinian peace efforts in an
April 14, 2002, letter to Israeli
Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.
JERUSALEM
JERUSALEM SHOULD BE RECOGNIZED AS THE CAPITAL OF ISRAEL
President Clinton “... the benefits of the agreement ... far outweigh
Speech to the Israel Policy Forum the burdens. For the people of Israel, they…
January 7, 2001 [include] the incorporation of most of the settlers
into Israel, and the Jewish capital of Jerusalem
recognized by all, not just the United States,
by everybody in the world.”
JERUSALEM SHOULD REMAIN UNDIVIDED
President Clinton “Jerusalem should be an open and undivided
Speech to the Israel Policy Forum city, with assured freedom of access and worship
January 7, 2001 for all.”
THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN PEACE PROCESS 21
PALESTINIAN STATEHOOD
THE UNITED STATES SUPPORTS A TWO-STATE SOLUTION
President Clinton “I think there can be no genuine resolution to the
Speech to the Israel Policy Forum conflict without a sovereign, viable Palestinian
January 7, 2001 state that accommodates Israel’s security requirements and the demographic realities.”
President Bush “My vision is two states, living side by side, in
Speech on the Middle East peace and security.”
June 24, 2002
A PALESTINIAN STATE WILL NOT BE CREATED BY TERROR
President Bush “A Palestinian state will never be created by
Speech on the Middle East terror. It will be built through reform.”
June 24, 2002
PALESTINIANS MUST FIGHT CORRUPTION AND MAKE DEMOCRATIC REFORMS
Vice President Albert Gore, Jr.
Remarks at the AIPAC Policy Conference
May 23, 2000
“We have to work with the Palestinians to establish transparent, democratic institutions, to fight
corruption, and to build a society built on the rule
of law. When they pursue that path, we should be
prepared to help them.”
President Bush
Remarks at the National Defense University
March 8, 2005
“Palestinian leaders must fight corruption,
encourage free enterprise, rest true authority with
the people and actively confront terrorist groups.”
President Bush
Remarks at the Annapolis Conference
November 27, 2007
“For these negotiations to succeed, the Palestinians
must do their part. They must show the world
they understand that, while the borders of a
Palestinian state are important, the nature of a
Palestinian state is just as important.”
22 THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN PEACE PROCESS
Left: President Bush during a 2005
speech to the National Defense
University called on Palestinian
leaders to fight terrorism and
corruption. Below: Both presidents
made clear during their presidencies
that a future Palestinian state could
not be governed by those who
support terrorism, such as the
terrorist group Hamas, which won
Palestinian legislative elections in
January 2006.
A PALESTINIAN STATE SHOULD NOT BE MILITARIZED
President Clinton “There will be no peace, and no peace agreement,
Speech to the Israel Policy Forum unless the Israeli people have lasting security
January 7, 2001 guarantees.…So my parameters rely on…
a non-militarized Palestine…”
THE U.S. OPPOSES A UNILATERAL DECLARATION OF PALESTINIAN STATEHOOD
President Clinton “I think there should not be a unilateral declara-
Interview with Israeli Television tion. And if there is, our entire relationship will
July 27, 2000 be reviewed, not confined to that.”
THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN PEACE PROCESS 23
COMBATING TERRORISM
THE PALESTINIANS MUST FIGHT TERRORISM
Secretary of State Madeleine Albright
Speech at the National Press Club
August 6, 1997
President Bush
Press Conference with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon
April 14, 2004
“The Palestinian commitment to fight terror must
be constant and absolute.”
“The Palestinians have got to assume the
responsibility of fighting off terror. If they want a
state which provides a hopeful future for their
people, they must fight terror. They must be
resolute in the fighting of terror.”
THE PALESTINIANS MUST DISMANTLE TERRORIST INFRASTRUCTURE
Secretary of State Madeleine Albright
Press Conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
September 11, 1997
President Bush
Speech in Belgium
February 21, 2005
“I believe that it is very important for Chairman
Arafat to be realistic about dealing with the infrastructure of the terrorist organizations and not to try
to deal in ways that obfuscate rather than deal specifically with what is the problem here—which is the
infrastructure that exists of the terrorist organizations—and that he has to deal with that very clearly.”
“Palestinian leaders must confront and dismantle
terrorist groups, fight corruption, encourage free
enterprise, and rest true authority with the people.”
THE UNITED STATES WILL PURSUE THOSE WHO SUPPORT TERRORISTS
President Clinton
Remarks at The George Washington University
August 5, 1996
President Bush
Remarks to the American Legion
February 24, 2006
24 THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN PEACE PROCESS
“We will not rest in our efforts to track down,
prosecute and punish terrorists and to keep the
heat on those who support them, and we must not
rest in that effort.”
“I’ve set a clear doctrine: America makes no distinction between the terrorists and the countries that
harbor them. If you harbor a terrorist, you’re just
as guilty as the terrorists, and you’re an enemy of
the United States of America.”
COMBATING INCITEMENT
THE PALESTINIANS MUST END ANTI-ISRAEL INCITEMENT IN THEIR MEDIA
President Clinton “Every influential Palestinian, from teacher to
Remarks to the Palestinian National Council journalist, from politician to community leader,
December 14, 1998 must make this a mission: to banish from the
minds of children glorifying suicide bombers, to
end the practice of speaking peace in one place and
preaching hatred in another, to teach schoolchildren
the value of peace and the waste of war…”
President Bush “… all official Palestinian institutions must end
Letter to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon incitement against Israel.”
April 14, 2004
Both presidents called for
an end to Palestinian incitement.
A recent Hamas television show
featured a Mickey Mouse–like
character advocating violence
against Jews and glorifying
suicide bombers.
THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN PEACE PROCESS 25
ARAB STATES’ RESPONSIBILITIES
IMPROVE RELATIONS WITH ISRAEL, FIGHT TERROR AND SUPPORT MODERATES
President Clinton
Press Conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
February 13, 1997
President Bush
Letter to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon
April 14, 2004
President Bush
Remarks at the Annapolis Conference
November 27, 2007
“We agreed on the need for increased contact and
better ties between Arab states and Israel. This
will be a priority in my meetings with other Middle
East leaders over the next month. It’s time to reinvigorate talks that bring together Israelis, Arabs and
the international community to address regional
issues, such as water resources and environmental
protection, and to clear the way to more trade
between Israel and Arab nations. To make peace
meaningful, reconciliation must deepen, and Arabs
and Israelis must both harvest more of the fruits of
peace. The pursuit of peace and the practice of terror are incompatible. For negotiations to succeed,
there must be a climate of stability and tranquility.
For peace to endure, Arabs and Israelis must know
the calm of a normal life.”
“The United States believes that all states in the
region have special responsibilities: to support the
building of the institutions of a Palestinian state; to
fight terrorism, and cut off all forms of assistance
to individuals and groups engaged in terrorism; and
to begin now to move toward more normal relations with the State of Israel.”
“Arab states also have a vital role to play.
Re-launching the Arab League initiative and the
Arab League’s support for today’s conference are
positive steps. All Arab states should show their
strong support for the government of President
Abbas and provide needed assistance to the
Palestinian Authority. Arab states should also reach
out to Israel, work toward the normalization of
relations, and demonstrate in both word and deed
that they believe that Israel and its people have a
permanent home in the Middle East.”
26 THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN PEACE PROCESS
President Clinton and President
Bush urged Arab states to normalize relations with Israel, a step
King Hussein of Jordan took with
Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak
Rabin when the two leaders signed
a peace treaty in 1994.
THE ARAB BOYCOTT OF ISRAEL MUST END
President Clinton “Let me emphasize here that we’re committed to
Speech to B’nai B’rith bringing the Arab boycott of Israel to an end
August 24, 1994 now. The boycott harms American companies, and
it has no place in the peace process.”
President Bush “Arab nations should also take an active part in
Remarks on Israeli-Palestinian Issues promoting peace negotiations…by ending the
July 16, 2007 fiction that Israel does not exist.”
THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN PEACE PROCESS 27
Introduction
iran
Both President Clinton and President Bush made the threat
posed by Iran a key focus of their foreign policy agendas and of the bilateral
relationship with Israel. During the past 15 years, the United States and Israel have
worked closely together to combat the threat posed by the Islamic republic’s
support for terrorism, development of ballistic missiles and pursuit of nuclear
weapons.
Even before the full extent of Iran’s secret nuclear weapons program was
exposed, President Clinton took the dramatic step of banning virtually all U.S.
trade with Iran and investment in the country’s petroleum sector because of the
regime’s “sponsorship of international terrorism and its active pursuit of weapons
of mass destruction.” Once Iran’s clandestine nuclear pursuit was exposed,
President Bush and his administration worked to rally an often reticent international community to impose sanctions on Iran in order to prevent the regime from
acquiring a nuclear weapons capability.
Both administrations initiated offers to talk to Iran, but were repeatedly
rebuffed, indicating Iran’s unwillingness to halt its support for terrorism or to
comply with its nonproliferation obligations under international law.
28 IRAN
“Iran must not have a
nuclear weapon.”
President Bush
Media Availability with
Afghan President Hamid Karzai
March 1, 2006
IRAN MUST NOT BE PERMITTED TO HAVE NUCLEAR WEAPONS
President Bush
Press Conference with German Chancellor Schröder,
February 23, 2005
“…Iran must not have a nuclear weapon. For the
sake of security and peace, they must not have a
nuclear weapon.”
President Clinton
Remarks at the AIPAC Policy Conference
May 7, 1995
“The specter of an Iran armed with weapons of
mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them
haunts not only Israel but the entire Middle
East and ultimately all the rest of us as well.
The United States and, I believe, all the Western
nations have an overriding interest in containing
the threat posed by Iran.”
President Bush
State of the Union Address
January 31, 2006
“The Iranian government is defying the world
with its nuclear ambitions, and the nations of the
world must not permit the Iranian regime to gain
nuclear weapons. America will continue to rally the
world to confront these threats.”
THE UNITED STATES REJECTS IRAN’S DESTRUCTIVE POLICIES
President Bush
Remarks to the American Legion
August 31, 2006
President Clinton
Remarks to the World Jewish Congress
April 30, 1995
30 IRAN
“The Iranian regime is pursuing nuclear weapons
in open defiance of its international obligations.
We know the death and suffering that Iran’s sponsorship of terrorists has brought, and we can
imagine how much worse it would be if Iran were
allowed to acquire nuclear weapons.…It is time for
Iran to make a choice. We’ve made our choice. We
will continue to work closely with our allies to find
a diplomatic solution, but there must be consequences for Iran’s defiance, and we must not allow
Iran to develop a nuclear weapon.”
“My decision to impose this embargo should
make clear to Iran and to the whole world the
unrelenting determination of the United States to
do all we can to arrest the behavior and ambition
of that nation. It would be wrong to do nothing. It
would be wrong to do nothing as Iran continues its
pursuit of nuclear weapons. It would be wrong to
stand pat in the face of overwhelming evidence of
Tehran’s support for terrorism that would threaten
the dawn of peace.”
ALL OPTIONS TO PREVENT A NUCLEAR IRAN REMAIN ON THE TABLE
President Bush “…my position hasn’t changed and that is,
Media Availability with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert all options are on the table.”
June 19, 2007
President Clinton “I think that President Bush has done, so far, the
Remarks to the World Economic Forum right thing by not taking the military option off
January 27, 2005 the table, but not pushing it too much.”
IRAN MUST END ITS ENRICHMENT OF URANIUM
President Bush “Iran remains the world’s primary state sponsor
State of the Union Address of terror, pursuing nuclear weapons while depriv-
February 2, 2005
ing its people of the freedom they seek and deserve.
We are working with European allies to make clear
to the Iranian regime that it must give up its uranium enrichment program and any plutonium,
reprocessing and end its support for terror.”
President Clinton banned all trade
with Iran even before the full
extent of Iran’s nuclear weapons
program was known. President
Bush has rallied the international
community to sanction Iran for
its illicit nuclear work.
THERE SHOULD BE NO NUCLEAR COOPERATION WITH IRAN
President Clinton “And we just don’t believe that there should be
Press Conference any nuclear cooperation with a country who is
April 20, 1996
trying to develop a nuclear program. We don’t need
any more states with nuclear capacity in this world
to make weapons. We don’t need that.”
IRAN 31
Both Presidents Clinton and Bush condemned
Iran’s anti-Israel rhetoric and support for
terrorist groups such as Hamas.
THE UNITED STATES REJECTS IRAN’S ANTI-ISRAEL RHETORIC
President Bush “The fanaticism and the extremism of the Iranian
Remarks with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert government, and the fact that the leader of a
November 13, 2006 nation such as Iran can threaten the very existence
of another nation, as he does towards the state of
Israel, is not something that we can tolerate or
would ever tolerate, and certainly not when we
know that he is trying to possess nuclear weapons.”
Secretary of State Madeleine Albright “…Iran’s opposition to the Middle East peace
Remarks to the Asia Society process and to those willing to negotiate with
June 17, 1998 Israel has been vitriolic and violent. The Islamic
republic still refuses to recognize Israel, and its
leaders continue to denounce Israel in inflammatory
and unacceptable terms.”
32 IRAN
IRAN MUST END ITS SUPPORT FOR TERRORISM
President Bush “Iran must end its financial support and supply of
Weekly Radio Address weapons to terrorist groups such as Hizballah”
July 29, 2006
President Clinton “… as long as Iran supports and protects terror-
Address to the U.N. General Assembly ists… they should not become full members of
September 24, 1996 the family of nations.”
U.S. ALLIES SHOULD NOT DO BUSINESS WITH IRAN
President Clinton “You cannot do business with countries that practice
Remarks at The George Washington University commerce with you by day while funding or
August 5,1996 protecting the terrorists who kill you and your
innocent civilians by night. That is wrong. I hope,
and expect, that before long our allies will come
around to accepting this fundamental truth. This
morning I signed into law the Iran-Libya Sanctions
Act. It builds on what we’ve already done to isolate
those regimes by imposing tough penalties on foreign companies that go forward with new
investments in key sectors.”
IRAN 33
Introduction
syria and lebanon
Dramatic developments in both Syria and Lebanon shaped
the Clinton and Bush administrations’ policies toward this part of the region during
their two presidencies: unsuccessful Israeli-Syrian peace talks, Israel’s unilateral
withdrawal from southern Lebanon, the death of Syria’s long-time president, the
wave of political assassinations in Lebanon, and Syria’s military withdrawal from
its neighbor in the face of massive protests.
During the course of this tumultuous time, it became clear to both presidents
that Israeli-Syrian peace would have to encompass more than just a land-for-peace
deal. Syria’s relationship with Iran and its support for terrorism—especially its
backing of Hizballah in Lebanon and Hamas and other Palestinian terrorist groups
headquartered in Damascus—would also have to be addressed if the necessary conditions for peace were to be created.
To those ends, President Clinton in 1995 designated Hizballah, Syria’s key
proxy in Lebanon, as a terrorist organization while President Bush signed into law
the Syria Accountability Act in 2003 and imposed sanctions against Damascus.
Both presidents also voiced support for a democratic Lebanon free of Syrian and
Iranian control and interference.
34 SYRIA AND LEBANON
“The United States is strongly committed
to the independence, the sovereignty, the
territorial integrity of Lebanon.”
President Clinton
Remarks with Lebanese
Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri
October 18, 1996
THE UNITED STATES SUPPORTS A SOVEREIGN, DEMOCRATIC LEBANON
President Clinton “The United States is strongly committed to the
Remarks with Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri independence, the sovereignty, the territorial
October 18, 1996 integrity of Lebanon.”
President Bush “Support for a sovereign, democratic, and pros-
White House Statement perous Lebanon is a key element of U.S. policy in
November 1, 2006 the Middle East.”
THERE SHOULD BE NO FOREIGN INTERFERENCE IN LEBANON
President Clinton
Remarks with Lebanese President Elias Hrawi
April 24, 1996
“We don’t believe there should be any foreign troops
in Lebanon. I’d like to see Lebanon completely
sovereign and free and independent.”
President Bush
Press Conference with British Prime Minister Tony Blair
July 28, 2006
“Our goal is to achieve a lasting peace, which
requires that a free, democratic and independent
Lebanese government be empowered to exercise
full authority over its territory. We want a Lebanon
free of militias and foreign interference, and a
Lebanon that governs its own destiny, as is called
for by U.N. Security Council Resolutions 1559
and 1680.”
THE U.S. AFFIRMS ISRAEL’S FULL WITHDRAWAL FROM LEBANON
President Clinton
Speech to the Israel Policy Forum
January 7, 2001
U.S. Representative to the United Nations John Bolton
Statement to the U.N. Security Council
July 14, 2006
“Israel fulfilled its part of implementing U.N.
Security Council Resolution 425.”
“We underscore the importance of the Security
Council president’s statement of June 18, 2000,
and the [U.N.] secretary-general’s conclusion that
as of June 16, 2000, Israel had withdrawn all its
forces from Lebanon in accordance with UNSC
Resolution 425 and met the requirements defined
in the secretary-general’s May 22, 2000, report.”
36 SYRIA AND LEBANON
President Clinton in 1995 designated Hizballah as a terrorist
organization, while President Bush
signed several executive orders
targeting the terrorist group.
HIZBALLAH MUST BE DISARMED
President Bush “And you can’t have a free country if a group of
Interview with the Lebanese Broadcasting Corporation people are like an armed militia. In other words,
April 18, 2005 there needs to be police organized by the state, a
military organized by the state. But citizens groups
that are armed, trying to impose their will on a free
society, is just not the definition of a free society.”
SYRIA MUST END ITS SUPPORT FOR TERRORISM
President Clinton “…Syria is on the terrorist list; that remains an issue
Press Conference between our two countries. It is a serious issue.
October 21, 1994
It has been constantly discussed between us, and it
will continue to be. But I do not believe that we can
permit it to keep us from pursuing a comprehensive
peace—as long as nothing in our peace agreements
undermines our commitment to end terrorism.”
President Bush “Syria as well as Iran has a long history of
Remarks at the National Defense University supporting terrorist groups determined to sow
March 8, 2005
division and chaos in the Middle East. And there’s
every possibility they will try this strategy again.
The time has come for Syria and Iran to stop using
murder as a tool of policy and to end all support
for terrorism.”
SYRIAN BEHAVIOR IS UNACCEPTABLE
President Bush “My message is, the Syrian president has got the
Remarks in Tipp City, Ohio choice to make; the Syrian president must make the
April 19, 2007
choice that will stop isolating his regime. And the
United States will continue to make it clear to
Syria, and work with other nations to make it clear
to Syria, that their behavior is unacceptable if we
want peace in the Middle East.”
SYRIA AND LEBANON 37
Introduction
the united nations
While the United Nations played a crucial role in the
creation of the modern state of Israel in the aftermath of the Holocaust, its history
since then has largely been marked by persistent antagonism toward the Jewish
state. From the infamous “Zionism equals racism” resolution to today’s obsessive
focus on Israel by the U.N. Human Rights Council, Israel’s opponents have
used the world body as part of their efforts to ostracize and isolate Israel on the
international stage. In contrast, the United States has long stood by Israel at the
United Nations. The Clinton and Bush administrations have worked tirelessly not
only to uphold this policy, but to push for Israel’s wider acceptance among the
member nations.
The Clinton administration successfully championed Israel’s acceptance into
a U.N. regional working group for the first time in its history, giving a boost to
efforts to end Israel’s isolation at the world body, while the Bush administration
articulated a clear policy of vetoing any one-sided resolutions attacking Israel and
leveled harsh criticism—some delivered by the president himself—against the
U.N. Human Rights Council for its continuing bias against Israel.
38 THE UNITED NATIONS
“[The U.N. Human Rights Council] has
been silent on repression by [many]
regimes…while focusing its criticism
excessively on Israel.”
President Bush
Address to the U.N. General Assembly
September 25, 2007
THE U.S. WILL OPPOSE ANY ANTI-ISRAEL U.N. RESOLUTIONS
U.S. Representative to the United Nations
John Negroponte
Statement to the U.N. Security Council
September 23, 2002
“We will not support the adoption of a one-sided
text that fails to recognize that this conflict has
two sides, that fails to condemn the acts of terror
and the groups that perpetrate them, and that fails
to call for the dismantling of the networks that
threaten all people of the Middle East, Arab and
Israeli.”
U.S. Representative to the United Nations
Madeleine Albright
Remarks with Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin
May 2, 1995
“It is my determination to make sure that the
United Nations becomes Israel-friendly. We have
worked in the past in the General Assembly to
adjust some of the anti-Israeli resolutions. We will
continue that project and work on positive resolutions in the 50th General Assembly.”
THE U.S. BACKS FULL ISRAELI MEMBERSHIP IN A U.N. REGIONAL GROUP
Assistant Secretary of State for International
Organization Affairs David Welch
Hearing of the House International Relations Committee
July 14, 1999
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State
for International Organization Affairs Philo Dibble
Subcommittee Hearing of the House
International Relations Committee
April 20, 2005
“Israel has been effectively denied membership in a
regional group. This exclusion prevents Israel from
participating fully and effectively in the United
Nations. This administration, like many before it,
opposes this prejudice, and has worked hard to
reverse this injustice.”
“… the United States has continued efforts to
promote full and equal Israeli participation
throughout the U.N. system. In particular,
we have supported Israel’s membership in the
geographically based consultative groups that are
the organizing venues for action within the system....
Unfortunately, Israel’s WEOG [Western European
and Others Group] membership applies only to New
York. It does not have the same level of participation
in WEOG activities elsewhere.… We will continue
our efforts to correct these anomalies.”
40 THE UNITED NATIONS
U.S. REJECTS FOCUS ON ISRAEL AT THE U.N. HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL
President Bush “The American people are disappointed by
Address to the U.N. General Assembly the failures of the Human Rights Council.
September 25, 2007 This body has been silent on repression by regimes
from Havana to Caracas to Pyongyang and
Tehran—while focusing its criticism excessively on
Israel. To be credible on human rights in the
world, the United Nations must reform its own
Human Rights Council.”
Far Left: President Clinton’s third
ambassador to the United Nations,
Richard Holbrooke, worked for
Israel’s inclusion in a U.N. regional
group for the first time. Left:
President Bush’s first ambassador
to the United Nations, John
Negroponte, vetoed numerous U.N.
Security Council resolutions that
sought to condemn Israel’s response
to Palestinian terrorist attacks.
THE UNITED NATIONS 41
Appendix 1
major bilateral agreements
During the Clinton and Bush
presidencies, the United States and
Israel signed a host of important bilateral agreements to boost cooperation
in key areas such as defense, counterterrorism, agriculture, science energy
and trade. These agreements play a
vital role in fostering working-level
interaction and cooperation among
Americans and Israelis throughout
the government and private sector.
Security, Defense and Counterterrorism
Memorandum of Understanding on U.S. Foreign Aid
to Israel August 16, 2007
The United States and Israel signed a Memorandum
of Understanding to provide $30 billion in U.S. military aid to the Jewish state over the next decade.
The memorandum notes that foreign aid enhances
the “political, security and economic interests of
both countries” and that the two nations “intend to
continue their active dialogue on security and economic policy in existing bilateral committees.” The
new memorandum replaces a 10-year aid agreement
signed in 1997 that phased out economic aid while
gradually increasing the amount of military aid.
http://aipac.com/Publications/SourceMaterialsU.S.-Israel
Bi-lateral/MOUonForeignAid.pdf
Memorandum of Understanding on Homeland
Security Cooperation Between the United States
and Israel February 7, 2007
The United States and Israel signed a landmark joint
Memorandum of Understanding that lays the groundwork for enhanced cooperation between the allies
in the field of homeland security. The agreement
includes provisions for cooperation on airline security,
explosives detection, responding to terrorist and criminal activities and training. It also establishes a joint
Homeland Security Steering Committee that will meet
annually to ensure the implementation of the agreement.
http://aipac.com/Publications/SourceMaterialsU.S.-Israel
Bi-lateral/U.S.-IsraelMOUonHomelandSecurity.pdf
42 MAJOR BILATERAL AGREEMENTS
U.S.–Israel Security Memorandum of Agreement
October 31, 1998
The United States and Israel signed an agreement
affirming their commitment to establishing a strategic
and military partnership that enhances Israel’s defensive and deterrent capabilities. The agreement also
states that the United States views the threat to Israel
posed by ballistic missiles “with particular gravity”
and promises to lend Israel whatever support it can to
combat such dangers.
http://aipac.com/Publications/SourceMaterialsU.S.-Israel
Bi-lateral/U.S._Israel_Security_Memorandum.pdf
Counterterrorism Cooperation Accord Between the
United States and Israel April 30, 1996
The United States and Israel agreed to work together
“with a view to enhancing their capabilities to deter,
prevent, respond to and investigate international terrorist acts or threats of international terrorist acts
against Israel or the United States.” The agreement
establishes a Joint Counterterrorism Group to facilitate this objective by serving as a forum for regular
consultation and development of programming.
http://aipac.com/Publications/SourceMaterialsU.S.-Israel
Bi-lateral/Counterterrorism_Cooperation_Accord.pdf
Agriculture
Amendment to Free Trade Agreement Regarding
Agricultural Products July 27, 2004
The U.S.–Israel Free Trade Zone Agreement signed in
1985 marked the first Free Trade Agreement signed
between the United States and any nation. The 2004
amendments lowered or eliminated tariffs on certain
agricultural products.
http://aipac.com/Publications/SourceMaterialsU.S.-IsraelBi-lateral/
AgricultureAgreement.pdf
Memorandum of Cooperation April 5, 2005
The memorandum strengthened cooperation between
the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural
Research Service and the Israeli Ministry of
Agriculture. Both countries agreed to “explore and
coordinate research activities of mutual interest”
across a broad spectrum of topics including animal
science, plant science, soil science and agriculture.
http://aipac.com/Publications/SourceMaterialsU.S.-IsraelBi-lateral/
AgricultureCooperation.pdf
Economic, Trade and Commerce
Agreement Regarding Mutual Assistance in
Customs Matters May 16, 1996
The United States and Israel agreed to assist each
other to investigate, repress and prevent any offense
involving violations of customs laws.
http://aipac.com/Publications/SourceMaterialsU.S.-IsraelBi-lateral/
CustomsTreaty1996.pdf
Agreement Regarding the Application of Competition
Laws March 15, 1999
The agreement promoted cooperation and coordination between the competition authorities of the United
States and of Israel in order to avoid conflicts arising
from the application of the nations’ competition laws
and to minimize the impact of differences on their
respective important interests. The agreement also
called for periodic meetings of officials from both
competition authorities to exchange information and
discuss policy.
MAJOR BILATERAL AGREEMENTS 43
Science and Energy
Memorandum of Understanding Concerning
a U.S.–Israel Science and Technology Commission
January 18, 1994
Initiated by President Clinton and Prime Minister
Rabin, the memorandum established the U.S.–Israel
Science and Technology Commission. The commission
seeks to increase research and development cooperation between the high technology sectors in the United
States and Israel. The commission awards grants to
enable American and Israeli firms to work together
to develop long-term, high-risk technologies that can
contribute to the growth of civilian industries.
Agreement for Cooperation in the Peaceful Use
of Space October 2, 1996
The agreement signed between NASA and the Israel
Space Agency (ISA) states the two organizations will
work closely to develop cooperative programs of
mutual interest in the use of space for research and
practical applications. Cooperation advanced in 1999
when President Clinton and Prime Minister Barak
agreed to establish a committee made up of representatives of NASA and the ISA for the “development of
practical applications in the peaceful use of space.”
http://aipac.com/Publications/SourceMaterialsU.S.-IsraelBi-lateral/
SpaceAgreement.pdf
Agreement Concerning Energy Cooperation
February 22, 2000
The agreement facilitates scientific visits between the
United States and Israel and allows for joint research
projects to develop alternative energy technologies.
According to the text of the agreement, its objective is
“to establish a framework for collaboration between the
Parties in energy research and development activities.”
http://aipac.com/Publications/SourceMaterialsU.S.-IsraelBi-lateral/
EnergyCooperation.pdf
Agreement on Scientific and Technical Cooperation
September 9, 2004
Signed by U.S. Secretary of the Interior Gale Norton
and Israeli Ambassador Daniel Ayalon, the 10-year
Memorandum of Understanding authorizes joint
research activities, conferences and symposia and
exchanges of scientific and technical information
between the U.S. Department of the Interior and the
Israeli Ministry of National Infrastructures. The areas
of cooperation include earth science studies, geospatial data applications, biological investigations, water
resources development and historical and archaeological resource protection.
http://aipac.com/Publications/SourceMaterialsU.S.-IsraelBi-lateral/
sciencemou.pdf
Arrangement for the Exchange of Technical
Information and Cooperation in Nuclear Safety and
Research Matters, with Addenda April 7, 2005
The agreement signed by the Israel Atomic Energy
Commission and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission provides a basis for continuing cooperation on generic criteria of nuclear safety standards
and regulatory policies related to research reactors.
The agreement was a continuation of a previous
agreement reached in 1975.
http://aipac.com/Publications/SourceMaterialsU.S.-IsraelBi-lateral/
Nuclear_Safety.pdf
44 MAJOR BILATERAL AGREEMENTS
Appendix 2
major executive orders
Both presidents signed a series
of important executive orders aimed
at isolating terrorist groups and state
sponsors of terrorism, such as Iran
and Syria, which also have pursued
weapons of mass destruction programs.
Many of the measures, which have
the force of law, focus on freezing the
assets of individuals or entities involved
in such activities or those providing
support or materials to terrorist groups
or states.
Iran
Executive Order 13059: Prohibiting Certain
Transactions with Respect to Iran August 19, 1997
The order, signed by President Clinton, prevents
U.S. companies from knowingly exporting goods
to a third country for incorporation into products
destined for Iran.
http://www.treas.gov/offices/enforcement/ofac/legal/eo/13059.pdf
Executive Order 12959: Prohibiting Certain
Transactions With Respect to Iran May 6, 1995
President Clinton banned U.S. trade and investment
in Iran, including the trading of Iranian oil overseas
by U.S. companies. The order prohibits the importation of any goods or services of Iranian origin and
the re-exportation to Iran of U.S. goods and technology. The order was later eased to allow the export
of food and medicine and the importation of Iranian
nuts, dried fruits, carpets and caviar.
http://www.treas.gov/offices/enforcement/ofac/legal/eo/12959.pdf
Executive Order 12957: Prohibiting Certain
Transactions with Respect to the Development of
Iranian Petroleum Resources March 15, 1995
Issued by President Clinton, the order bans U.S companies from investing in Iran’s petroleum industry.
http://www.treas.gov/offices/enforcement/ofac/legal/eo/12957.pdf
Lebanon and Syria
Executive Order 13441: Blocking Property of Persons
Undermining the Sovereignty of Lebanon or Its
Democratic Processes and Institutions August 2, 2007
President Bush blocked the assets of individuals
undermining the sovereignty of the democratically
elected Lebanese government. The order states that
efforts to reassert Syrian control in Lebanon and
encourage political violence against the government
threaten the stability of the region and “constitute
an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national
security and foreign policy of the United States.”
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/08/20070802-1.html
MAJOR EXECUTIVE ORDERS 45
Executive Order 13399: Blocking Property of
Additional Persons in Connection with the National
Emergency with Respect to Syria April 25, 2006
President Bush blocked the assets of individuals who
were involved in the assassination of former Lebanese
Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri or any other bombing,
assassination, or assassination attempt in Lebanon
since October 1, 2004.
http://www.treas.gov/offices/enforcement/ofac/legal/eo/13399.pdf
Executive Order 13338: Blocking Property of Certain
Persons and Prohibiting the Export of Certain Goods
to Syria May 11, 2004
Issued by President Bush to implement the requirements
of the Syrian Accountability Act, the order banned the
exportation or re-exportation to Syria of any item on
the United States Munitions List and banned Syria air
carriers from operating in the United States. The order
also blocked the assets of individuals providing safe
haven or other support to Hamas, Hizballah and other
terrorist groups and individuals directing or significantly
contributing to Syria’s military or security presence
in Lebanon or its pursuit of chemical, biological or
nuclear weapons.
http://www.treas.gov/offices/enforcement/ofac/legal/eo/13338.pdf
Weapons Proliferation
Executive Order 13382: Blocking Property of
Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferators and
Their Supporters June 28, 2005
Building upon previous executive orders, President
Bush blocked the assets of individuals who have materially contributed to the proliferation of weapons of
mass destruction or their means of delivery. Eight entities were originally named, including the Atomic
Energy Organization of Iran.
http://www.treas.gov/offices/enforcement/ofac/legal/eo/whwmdeo.pdf
Executive Order 13094: Amending Executive Order
12938 to Combat WMD and Advance International
Cooperative Efforts Against WMD Financing
July 28, 1998
Signed by President Clinton, the order expanded
the president’s authority to ban U.S. trade with, aid
to, and procurement from foreign entities assisting
weapons of mass destruction programs in Iran
or elsewhere.
http://www.treas.gov/offices/enforcement/ofac/legal/eo/13094.pdf
Executive Order 12938: To Combat WMD and
Advance International Cooperative Efforts Against
WMD Financing November 14, 1994
Signed by President Clinton, the order declared a
national emergency with respect to the proliferation
of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and authorized sanctions on any entity involved in WMD or
missile proliferation.
http://www.treas.gov/offices/enforcement/ofac/legal/eo/12938.pdf
Terrorism
Executive Order 13224: Prohibiting Transactions with
Individuals Committing and Supporting Terrorism
September 23, 2001
Signed by President Bush in the aftermath of the 9/11
attacks, the order prohibits transactions with terrorist
groups and those who support them.
http://www.treas.gov/offices/enforcement/ofac/legal/eo/13224.pdf
Executive Order 12947: Prohibiting Transactions
With Terrorists Threatening to Disrupt the Middle
East Peace Process January 23, 1995
Signed by President Clinton, the order prohibits
transactions with Hamas, Hizballah, Islamic Jihad,
the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and
other terrorist groups who threaten to disrupt the
Middle East peace process.
http://www.treas.gov/offices/enforcement/ofac/legal/eo/12947.pdf
46 MAJOR EXECUTIVE ORDERS
Appendix 3
U.S. Vetoes of
U.N. Security Council Resolutions
The United States, under the
leadership of President Clinton and
President Bush, vetoed a dozen U.N.
Security Council resolutions that harshly
attacked Israel or sought to intervene
in the peace process while failing to
explicitly condemn Palestinian terrorism. Standing strongly with Israel,
the United States was the only member
of the U.N. Security Council to vote
against these resolutions.
November 2006
The United States vetoed a resolution condemning
Israeli military action in northern Gaza against a barrage of rocket attacks and calling for an international
presence in Gaza.
July 2006
The United States vetoed a resolution condemning
actions taken by Israel in Gaza in response to the kidnapping of an Israeli soldier.
October 2004
The United States vetoed a resolution that demanded
that Israel cease military operations in northern Gaza.
The resolution failed to condemn Palestinian attacks
on Israel.
March 2004
The United States vetoed a resolution that condemned
the killing of Hamas leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin
while failing to condemn a Hamas terrorist attack the
previous week that killed 10 Israelis.
October 2003
The United States vetoed a resolution that found
Israel’s security barrier to be illegal. The resolution
did not condemn terrorism in general or the wave of
suicide attacks carried out in Israel during the previous three years.
September 2003
During the worst wave of terrorism in Israel’s history,
the United States vetoed a resolution demanding that
Israel not take actions to threaten the safety of
Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat.
December 2002
The United States vetoed a resolution condemning
Israel for the accidental killing of three U.N. employees.
AMERICAN VETOES OF U.N. SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTIONS 47
December 2001
Saying the measure attempted to impose a settlement
instead of encouraging the sides to work together
toward an agreement, the United States vetoed a resolution which condemned all acts of terror, the use of
excessive force and destruction of properties as well as
encouraged establishment of a monitoring apparatus.
March 2001
Describing the resolution as “unbalanced and
unworkable, and hence unwise,” the United States
vetoed a measure calling for the deployment of a U.N.
observer force in the West Bank and Gaza to protect
Palestinians from Israeli military action.
March 1997
Rejecting attempts of the U.N. Security Council to
intervene in Israeli-Palestinian final status issues, the
United States vetoed two resolutions demanding Israel
stop settlement plans in east Jerusalem and cease all
other settlement activity.
May 1995
The United States vetoed a resolution declaring Israel’s
expropriation of land in east Jerusalem invalid and calling on Israel to rescind the orders. The United States
said the issue of Jerusalem must be addressed by Israel
and the Palestinians and not by the United Nations.
48 AMERICAN VETOES OF U.N. SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTIONS
Appendix 4
major legislation
Presidents Clinton and Bush
signed more than a dozen major pieces
of legislation dealing with the Middle
East and U.S.–Israel cooperative
defense and homeland security efforts.
Legislation to restrict funding to the
Palestinian Authority until it met certain requirements and a series of laws
aimed at preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapons capability
represent key goals of bills signed by
the two presidents.
Israeli–Palestinian Issues
Palestinian Anti-Terrorism Act of 2006
December 7, 2006
The law strengthens the ban on direct U.S. aid to the
Palestinians—unless the president certifies that the
Palestinian Authority is not controlled by a terrorist
organization—while permitting humanitarian
assistance through non-governmental organizations
(NGOs) to continue. It maintains the president’s
flexibility to provide other project assistance
through NGOs if he deems it is in the national
security interests of the United States and gains
congressional approval.
http://www.aipac.org/Publications/SourceMaterialsCongressional
Action/Text_of_Palestinian_Anti-Terrorism_Act.pdf
Middle East Peace Commitments Act of 2002
September 26, 2002
The law imposes specified sanctions on the PLO or the
Palestinian Authority if the president determines that
they do not comply with certain commitments made
with Israel.
Peace Through Negotiations Act of 2000
September 27, 2000
The law expresses the opposition of the United States
to the unilateral declaration of a Palestinian state,
arguing that such an action would violate the
underlying principles of the Oslo accords and the
Middle East peace process. It affirms that the United
States would withhold diplomatic recognition to
such a state and would urge all other nations to do
likewise. The law also spells out sanctions that the
United States would impose on the Palestinians
should they decide to declare a state unilaterally.
http://www.aipac.org/Publications/SourceMaterialsCongressional
Action/Peace_Through_Negotiations_Act_2000.pdf
MAJOR LEGISLATION
49
Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995 November 8, 1995
The law states that Jerusalem should remain undivided, that it should be recognized as the capital of
Israel, and that the U.S. embassy should be established
there no later than May 1999. Every six months after
the law’s enactment, however, the president of the
United States may institute a waiver of the requirement to move the embassy if he determines that it is
in America’s national security interests.
http://www.aipac.org/Publications/SourceMaterialsCongressional
Action/Jerusalem_Embassy_Act_of_1995.pdf
Middle East Peace Facilitation Act of 1993
October 12, 1993
Following the signing of the Declaration of Principles
on September 13, 1993, Congress passed the Middle
East Peace Facilitation Act, granting the president the
authority to waive sections of existing law that forbade contacts with the PLO and prohibited the PLO
from opening an office in the United States.
http://aipac.com/Publications/SourceMaterialsCongressionalAction/
Middle_East_Peace_Facilitation_Act_of_1993.pdf
Iran
Iran Freedom Support Act of 2006 September 30, 2006
The law extends for five years existing sanctions on
foreign companies investing more than $20 million
per year in Iran’s petroleum sector. IFSA also codifies
executive orders barring U.S. firms from doing business in and with Iran, strengthens U.S. authority to
sanction entities aiding Iran’s nuclear pursuit, urges the
administration to probe investments in Iran’s petroleum sector and discourages the signing of nuclear
cooperation pacts with countries assisting Iran’s atomic
program. The law also expresses support for Iranians
seeking to promote democracy in their country.
http://www.aipac.org/Publications/SourceMaterialsCongressional
Action/Text_of_IFSA_2006.pdf
Iran Nonproliferation Amendments Act of 2005
November 22, 2005
The law strengthens and expands the Iran
Nonproliferation Act of 2000 by authorizing
sanctions on any entity that aids a potential Syrian
nuclear weapons program and on any weapons of
mass destruction-related technology and equipment
exported from Iran or Syria.
http://aipac.com/Publications/SourceMaterialsCongressionalAction/
Text_of_Iran_Nonproliferation_Amendment_Act_2005.pdf
ILSA Extension Act of 2001 August 3, 2001
The law authorizes the 5-year renewal of the Iran
and Libya Sanctions Act (ILSA), which mandates the
imposition of U.S. sanctions on companies that invest
significantly in Iran or Libya’s petroleum sectors.
Congress passed ILSA in 1996.
http://www.aipac.org/Publications/SourceMaterialsCongressional
Action/Text_of_ILSA_Extension_2001.pdf
Iran Nonproliferation Act of 2000 March 14, 2000
The law requires the president to report and sanction
foreign companies that have transferred missile technology to Iran. It also requires the president to certify
that the Russian government opposes the proliferation
of weapons of mass destruction before America provides additional money to the Russian Space Agency
for the International Space Station.
http://www.aipac.org/Publications/SourceMaterialsCongressional
Action/Iran_Nonproliferation_Act_of_2000.pdf
Iran Missile Proliferation Sanctions Act of 1998
May 22, 1998
The law requires the president to report and sanction
foreign companies that have transferred missile technology to Iran.
http://www.aipac.org/Publications/SourceMaterialsCongressional
Action/Iran_Missile_Proliferation_Sanctions_Act_of_1997.pdf
Iran and Libya Sanctions Act of 1996
August 5, 1996
The law mandates that the United States impose sanctions on companies that invest more than $20 million
per year in Iran or Libya’s petroleum sectors.
http://www.aipac.org/Publications/SourceMaterialsCongressional
Action/ilsa1996.pdf
50
MAJOR LEGISLATION
Iran-Iraq Non-Proliferation Act of 1992
October 23, 1992
The law requires the president to impose sanctions
against nations that knowingly supply Iran or Iraq
with technology that could contribute to its acquisition of nuclear, biological or chemical weapons.
Lebanon and Syria
Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty
Restoration Act of 2003 December 12, 2003
The law imposes economic and diplomatic sanctions
on Syria for its support of terrorist groups, its
occupation of Lebanon and violations of Lebanese
sovereignty, and its sponsorship of insurgent groups
in Iraq. Sanctions include prohibiting the export of
American products to Syria and barring American
businesses from investing or operating in Syria.
http://www.aipac.org/Publications/SourceMaterialsCongressional
Action/Syria_Accountability_Act.pdf
Foreign Aid, Defense, Homeland Security
and Energy
Annual Foreign Aid Bills
The annual foreign aid bills included key U.S.
assistance to Israel during the Clinton and Bush
administrations. Under a 10-year agreement reached
by President Clinton and Prime Minister Barak, the
United States gradually began shifting its economic
assistance to military assistance in 1998. In 2007,
President Bush and Prime Minister Olmert
announced a new 10-year agreement beginning in
2008 to provide $30 billion in military aid to Israel
over the next 10 years to help the Jewish state face
increasing regional threats.
Annual Defense Appropriations Bills
Defense appropriations bills throughout the Clinton
and Bush administrations provided important financing for joint U.S.–Israel defense projects. The close
partnership between the United States and Israel has
yielded leading military technologies such as the
Arrow missile defense system, the centerpiece of the
U.S.–Israel cooperative defense relationship. Since
1990, the Israeli Ministry of Defense and the U.S.
Ballistic Missile Defense Organization have cooperated to develop missile defense technology to counter
the threat of long-range missiles from countries such
as Iran. In 2000, the Arrow became the first operational theater missile defense system in the world to
be deployed.
Provisions on U.S.–Israel Homeland Security
Cooperation in the Improving America’s Security Act
of 2007 July 27, 2007
The House and Senate passed legislation that
includes provisions aimed at strengthening U.S.–Israel
homeland security cooperation. The bill, which
implements the recommendations of the 9/11
Commission, includes a provision that creates an
Office of International Cooperation within the
Department of Homeland Security, which will be
responsible for matching U.S. entities with non–U.S.
entities for partnering in homeland security research
activities. Israel is one of five countries recognized as
potential partners in this endeavor.
http://www.aipac.org/Publications/SourceMaterialsCongressional
Action/HR_1_—_Title_XIII.pdf
U.S.-Israel Energy Cooperation Act
December 19, 2007
The law establishes a grant program for joint cooperative ventures between American and Israeli business
entities, government agencies, academic institutions
and non-profit entities aimed at developing alternative
sources of energy. Noting that reducing dependency
on foreign oil remains a long-term national security
interest, the legislation authorizes a grant program
through the year 2014.
http://www.aipac.org/Publications/SourceMaterialsCongressional
Action/Sec917.pdf
MAJOR LEGISLATION
51
ABOUT AIPAC
The American Israel Public Affairs Committee is the only American organization whose principal mission is to lobby the U.S. government about legislation
that strengthens the relationship between the United States and Israel.
Every day, the professional staff and members of AIPAC are hard at work
helping to educate members of Congress, candidates for public office, policy-
makers, media professionals and student leaders on college campuses about
the importance of the U.S.-Israel friendship. Headquartered in Washington,
D.C., the organization has 10 regional offices focused on bringing our mes
sage to legislators throughout the country.
Today, AIPAC is broadening and deepening the U.S.-Israel bond by working
to secure vital aid for Israel to help ensure Israel remains strong and secure.
AIPAC is working to promote strategic cooperation between the two nations,
to develop sound U.S. anti-terrorist policies and to stop rogue nations such as
Iran from acquiring weapons of mass destruction.
AIPAC is registered as a domestic lobby and supported financially by private
donations. The organization receives no financial assistance from Israel, any
national organization or any foreign group. AIPAC is not a political action
committee. It does not rate, endorse or contribute to candidates.
