fbpx

November 8, 2011

ADL calls Sarkozy-Obama exchange ‘unpresidential’

The Anti-Defamation League called a reported exchange between French President Nicolas Sarkozy and President Obama disparaging Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu “decidedly unpresidential.”

According to reports of their conversation at the Nov. 3 G20 summit in Cannes, which was overheard by reporters via an open microphone, the French president said, “I cannot bear Netanyahu, he’s a liar.” Obama reportedly replied, “You’re fed up with him, but I have to deal with him every day.”

“President Obama’s response to Mr. Sarkozy implies that he agrees with the French leader,” ADL National Director Abraham Foxman said in a statement issued Tuesday. “In light of the revelations here, we hope that the Obama Administration will do everything it can to reassure Israel that the relationship remains on a sure footing and to reinvigorate the trust between President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu, which clearly is not what it should be.

“What is sad is that we now have to worry to what extent these private views inform foreign policy decisions of the U.S. and France—two singularly important players in the peace process,” he said.

The Arret sur Images website said Sarkozy was responding to Obama’s concern that the French leader had not warned him about France’s surprise vote in favor of Palestinian UNESCO membership. The website also reported that Obama asked Sarkozy to try to “convince” the Palestinians to slow down their bid for U.N. membership.

“You have to pass the message along to the Palestinians that they must stop this immediately,” Obama said of the membership bid, according to Reuters.

Sarkozy confirmed that France would not take any unilateral decisions during the forthcoming Security Council debate on the subject.

“I am with you on that,” Obama replied, according to Reuters.

AFP and Reuters both confirmed the initial Arret sur Images report, and AFP reported that it interviewed several journalists who said they heard the private conversation right before a joint news conference by the two leaders.

Several journalists overheard the exchange, which was captured by a live microphone unbeknownest to the two leaders, but it was not immediately reported.

According to Arret sur Images, Obama and Sarkozy were speaking in a room equipped with microphones normally used to facilitate translation during public speaking. An event organizer did not distribute the headphones typically used to connect to the translation boxes, but several journalists plugged in their own earphones and could hear some three minutes at the end of the conversation.

ADL calls Sarkozy-Obama exchange ‘unpresidential’ Read More »

Seth Rogen won’t do your bar mitzvah

Jewish Canadian actor Seth Rogen sat down recently with the South African Times and shared some personal facts about himself and what he has learned over the years.

Rogen reveals that he is a pretty dramatic person who doesn’t handle stress well. He also is pretty lazy and not a big fan of social networking. Sounds like a great person to be around.

He also talks about losing weight for his Green Hornet role (he had to lose 30 pounds) and how he would never lie to a girl for sex (he better not, he’s married).

And most important, if you were hoping he could be persuaded to perform for your son or daughter’s coming-of-age festivities, forget about it.

“I now only do things that are creatively interesting and worthwhile and feel natural. I’d rather be poor and happy,” he said. “I won’t do jokes for bar mitzvahs anymore!”

Seth Rogen won’t do your bar mitzvah Read More »

NYT discovers hipster Christians

Paging ” title=”how you spot them”>how you spot them. And ” title=”The New York Times”>The New York Times seems to find something fascinating about tattooed Christians who wear skinny jeans and find value in referencing Woody Allen in a sermon.

The focus is on Resurrection Presbyterian Church in Brooklyn and its pastor, Thomas Vito Aiuto:

Mr. Aiuto, 39, bristles when his church is singled out as particularly cool. “I don’t want this church to be special,” he said over chicken mole at a Williamsburg taqueria. “I don’t want us to be a church for artists. I want it to be a garden-variety church. What we have to offer people is God.” He paused for a moment. “And I think our music is really good.”

While only one-quarter of the so-called millennial generation, those born after 1980, attend weekly religious services (according to a study by the Pew Research Center), young pastors like Mr. Aiuto and Jay Bakker, the son of the televangelists Jim and Tammy Faye, as well as groups like the Buddhist-inspired Dharma Punx, are tailoring their messages to young worshipers.

In Mr. Aiuto’s case, this can involve a certain irreverence (he made a rude gesture while illustrating a point about the parable of the prodigal son during a theological question-and-answer session after one recent service) and a dash of self-deprecation.

Beyond feeling totally stale, this story is all milk and no meat. No detail does more than graze the surface. I’m not sure if much interesting is still happening with Christian hipsters, but, if so, you NYT discovers hipster Christians Read More »

Penn State football and the Catholic clergy sex abuse scandal

More and more disturbing news seems to be coming out of Happy Valley every day. First we heard this weekend that the Penn State athletic director had been ” title=”details of the alleged abuse”>details of the alleged abuse, as told to the grand jury, were released. In all of this, it’s been difficult not to think of the ” title=”E.D. Kain focuses”>E.D. Kain focuses on fact that “Penn State is not some extreme religious order”—there are a lot of similarities. ” title=”Church of Happy Valley”>Church of Happy Valley:

As anyone who has ever visited State College, Pa. knows, Penn State football is a cult, a pilgrimage site complete with shrines and devotees and rituals. You can find similar ones in other university towns, be the institution of higher learning public or private. Among the hierarchs, to be sure, few have ever reached the power and status of the Nittany Lions’ Joe Paterno—the closest thing to a permanent icon in American sports history.

The scandals that regularly arise in such cults tend to be about money—usually having to do with the recruitment and care of the athletes—with sex thrown in when the athletes misbehave. That this one involves protection of an important assistant coach who reportedly liked to rape boys is incidental. … [A]t bottom, it is the religious character of these institutions that, again and again, impels them so determinedly to cover up their sins.

Read the rest Penn State football and the Catholic clergy sex abuse scandal Read More »

Federation plan a blow to Jewish Agency for Israel

After a decades-long partnership that saw the Jewish Agency for Israel serve as the official, exclusive Zionist arm of North America’s Jewish community federations, the federation system is getting ready to date other partners.

But Jewish Agency officials say it feels more like the beginning of a divorce.

On Nov. 8, at the conclusion of its General Assembly in Denver, the Jewish Federations of North America (JFNA) board was expected to approve a plan that will dramatically transform the historic commitment of the federations to fund the agency. 

JFNA maintains that the change is part of a grand strategy to re-establish the collective power of the federations at a time when collective action by Diaspora Jewry is harder and harder to muster. Under the new model, representatives of North America’s 157 federations on a so-called Global Planning Table will make spending decisions for overseas allocations, deciding together how the money they raise will be doled out to various organizations and programs.

For decades, the federations’ overseas allocations had gone automatically to the Jewish Agency and the American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee (JDC) in a 75-25 percent split. Under the new arrangement, the Jewish Agency and JDC still will get a share, but they will have to compete for it with other groups. They also will have less discretion than they do now about how to spend their allocations; the federations will be dictating more of the spending program to them.

“We will set the meta priorities,” said Jerry Silverman, JFNA’s CEO. “The people who raise the money get to be part of the discussion of allocating the money.”

In recent years, federations increasingly have been opting out of the historic overseas funding arrangement, cutting funding to the Jewish Agency or giving directly to causes in Israel and elsewhere around the world. Backers of the plan hope that the new arrangement will keep federations doing things together by offering collective decision-making and more options for overseas spending.

“Our goal is to keep our federations a collective to continue to change Jewish history,” Silverman said. “We’re thinking about the community as a whole.”

From the perspective of the Jewish Agency, however, which gets approximately 50 percent of its $270 million annual budget from the federations and has no real fundraising apparatus of its own, the change is seen as the beginning of a shift that could deal a significant blow to the agency.

Some federation executives suggest that’s not such a bad thing.

“Have you ever heard an Israeli say, ‘Give more money to the Jewish Agency’?” asked Barry Shrage, president of the Boston federation, Combined Jewish Philanthropies. “They’re stuck in bureaucracies. We’re on the ground working with our local Israeli partners directly. If the Jewish Agency had something compelling, we’d invest in them, too.”

Officials at the Jewish Agency, whose mission is to settle immigrants in Israel and promote Zionism around the world, declined to comment for this story except to express concern about jeopardizing the collective commitment of Diaspora Jewry to the Zionist enterprise.

“There is maybe a problem of divorce from the collective, and you can’t guarantee the future of the Jewish people without a collective,” Natan Sharansky, chairman of the Jewish Agency, said. “There is a danger people will choose to opt out of the collective, and then to restore it will be impossible.”

Federation officials say the reality is that’s already happening; federations like the one in Boston already are doing overseas allocations on their own. The Global Planning Table represents an effort to revive collective action, they say. By empowering the federations to make spending decisions without the encumbrances of exclusive partnerships with the JDC and the Jewish Agency, JFNA officials say they believe overseas giving ultimately will rise.

“It’s really about engaging more Jews, creating a new, dynamic venue to elevate the profile of and get new support for global Jewish needs,” said Joe Berkofsky, a spokesman for JFNA.

For its part, the JDC welcomes the change. Unlike the Jewish Agency, whose governing board is controlled in large part by the federations, the JDC has an independent board, a robust fundraising apparatus and a strong reputation in the federation world. The JDC, which has a $300 million annual budget, has not been happy with its 25 percent share of the federation system’s overseas dollars, and JDC officials think they can do better with the open field that the Global Planning Table represents.

“Competition isn’t evil; it’s healthy,” said Steven Schwager, CEO of the JDC. “The JDC doesn’t mind competing for designated dollars. The JDC delivers high-quality, important programs that benefit the Jewish people. I believe that when I get to make that case, we will at least maintain, if not increase, the level of funding.”

A few separate factors are converging to drive this major change in the federations’ philanthropy.

One is the economic downturn, which has hurt federation campaigns and overseas giving.

Another is dismay with operations at the Jewish Agency. In recent years, the agency has reshuffled its priorities away from immigration to Israel, which it still handles, and toward Zionist education in the Diaspora. Some critics question why the federations should send money to Israel just so the Jewish Agency can use it to ship Zionist emissaries back to Diaspora Jewish communities.

Jewish Agency officials counter that they have not abandoned aliyah at all and are merely more focused on making Israel central to the vast majority of Diaspora Jews who do not plan on making aliyah.

Another factor is the growing influence of foundations in the Jewish philanthropic landscape. Birthright Israel, the big Jewish idea of the last decade, came from the foundation world, not from the federations. Under the new Global Planning Table, there could be closer collaborations between federation and philanthropic foundations, and by absolving itself of its exclusive commitments to the Jewish Agency and the JDC, the federation system will have more discretion to funnel money to the right ideas.

“It’s an opportunity for us to partner with foundations in ways we haven’t previously,” said Joanne Moore, senior vice president of global planning at JFNA.

“Any effort to try to make individual federations more empowered and more engaged to follow needs is good in principle,” said Andres Spokoiny, president of the Jewish Funders Network. “Whether the Global Planning Table does that or not I don’t know.”

The process by which the Global Planning Table will go about making allocation decisions involves new commissions and committees — lots of them.

First, committees composed of representatives of the federations, the Jewish Agency, the JDC and others will discuss priorities for the federation system. Then the Global Planning Table’s executive steering committee, which will include federations but not the Jewish Agency or JDC, will decide on those priorities.

Commissions then will research how best to achieve those priorities, including consultations with outside experts, and goals for overseas spending will be set by the executive steering committee. Once that committee makes its allocations recommendations, JFNA’s board of trustees will make the final determinations about allocations; the JDC and Jewish Agency will not have a vote.

It remains to be seen whether this process will result in smarter allocations and collective action, or whether the Global Planning Table’s giving will reflect the personal and institutional relationships and predilections of federation leaders.

“It will be those who sit closest to the trough who eat first,” said one opponent of the plan who spoke on condition of anonymity.

What is almost certain is that the Global Planning Table will add a layer of complexity, work and deliberation to federations’ overseas giving. Moore acknowledges the process probably will require the hiring of new staff to help manage it. But ultimately, according to JFNA, it will be worth it.

“Imagine a world where the greatest challenges and most exciting opportunities to strengthen and build the Jewish people are discussed, studied, and understood,” says a white paper by the organization outlining the Global Planning Table. “The mission of the GPT is to inspire the Jewish Federations’ collective global work and drive collective solutions to important issues within the global Jewish community.”

Federation plan a blow to Jewish Agency for Israel Read More »

Canadian gov’t funding Jewish veterans memorial

Canada’s government said it will help fund a memorial honoring Jewish war veterans.

A grant of up to $28,700 will go toward the construction of the monument on the central Sherman campus of the United Jewish Appeal Federation in Toronto, the country’s minister of veterans affairs said at an event Monday announcing the funding.

“It is gratifying to know that younger generations have a special place like the Jewish War Veterans of Canada Memorial to reflect on our country’s proud military history,” Steven Blaney said.

The total cost of the monument is about $70,000.

The black polished granite memorial, surrounded by a 20-foot-diameter pad of interlocking brick, commemorates and honors Jews who served and perished in the Canadian forces during World War I and II, the Korean War, Afghanistan and all peacekeeping missions.

One side is etched with the names of 570 Jewish members of the Canadian armed forces who died in World War I and II and in Korea. The other side carries the names of 470 Jewish servicemen and servicewomen who survived those conflicts.

The monument will be dedicated on Remembrance Day, Nov. 11, which also is Veterans Day in the United States.

Canadian gov’t funding Jewish veterans memorial Read More »

Will Israel attack Iran?

When it comes to attacking enemy nuclear installations, Israel has an excellent record for springing surprises and getting the job done. Just ask the Iraqis and Syrians.  So why is everyone from the prime minister on down talking so much these days about paying a visit to Iran?

Media in Israel and around the world have been filled with stories of how Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak want to hit the Iranian nuclear facilities and are trying to convince the rest of the cabinet, over the objections of the military and intelligence leadership, to go along.

The timing is interesting.  There is no smoking gun, no revelation that the ayatollahs are on the verge of a breakthrough that would signal some urgency.  So why now?

The International Atomic Energy Agency is about to expose the falsehood of Iranian claims that its nuclear program is solely for peaceful purposes.

Leaks have been dribbling out for the past week and the full report is to be made public in coming days.  Among the revelations expected is that Iran has the knowledge, technology and resources to build and test a bomb within months, not years.

Netanyahu’s campaign for cabinet backing doesn’t mean an attack is imminent but a chit to be used when and if he decides.

President Shimon Peres has said he sees an Israeli attack as “more and more likely.” The nation is about evenly divided over whether to attack, although 80 percent expect it will provoke retaliation by Iran and its proxies Hizbollah and Hamas.

But the opposition is the strongest where it is needed most:  in Washington.

Netanyahu’s real stop-me-before-I-begin-bombing strategy appears to be aimed at convincing the international community to dramatically tighten the political and economic squeeze on Tehran to scrap its weapons program.

So far Russia and China have been running interference for the Iranians, and Israel hopes its war talk plus the IAEA report will convince them to cross over from the dark side.

It seems hardly coincidental that in the past week Israel has test fired a ballistic missile that can carry a nuclear warhead to any target in Iran, conducted joint exercises with the Italian air force on long range missions and aerial refueling and held a large scale civil defense exercise simulating a missile attack on central Israel. At the same time, the US and Israel announced plans for their “largest” and “most significant” ever joint military exercises, including simulating Israel’s ballistic missile defense.

Israeli leaders have long been frustrated that most countries do not take the Iranian threat as seriously as they do, even those like the Gulf Arabs, who have the most to lose if Iran gets the bomb.

With Iranian facilities widely disbursed and often hidden deep underground, it is hard to find anyone who believes an attack – Israeli or American – could do more than set back the Iranian nuclear program by a few years, but advocates say that will buy time for more pressure to force a policy change or, best, regime change.

In reality, an attack is more likely to provoke wider conflict and economic disruptions that could have global repercussions.  If Israel attacks, with or without American backing or even knowledge, Washington will still be seen as either complicit or too weak to control its ally.

Iranian officials have made credible warnings that if attacked they would not confine their retaliation to Israel but will go after the Great Satan and its Arab friends as well.

That includes closing the Straits of Hormuz though which pass ships bearing more than a third of the world’s supply of oil and gas, targeting the US Fifth fleet and hitting American military and commercial facilities in the Gulf.

An American military official called Iran “the biggest threat to the United States and to our interests and to our friends in the region.”

Tens of thousands of Americans, military and civilian, are in the area, in Iraq on Iran’s western border and Afghanistan on its eastern and in countries throughout the Gulf.

Iran could be expected to attack Israel with its long-range Shahab-3 missiles as well as its network of allies, particularly Hizbollah in Lebanon, which has an estimated 50,000-plus missiles supplied by Iran and Syria, plus Palestinian terror groups in Gaza.  Syria could join in as a diversion from its uprising at home.

If an Israeli attack sparks a third major Mideast war, retaliation can be expected against American interests and friends, potentially causing more damage to US-Israel relations than to Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

You can forget what GOP presidential wannabes Rick Perry, Rick Santorum and some jingoists on the right have been saying about backing an Israeli attack on Iran.  The American people are fed up with the two Middle East wars we already have and don’t want another one. They are likely to be unforgiving, even if they sympathize with Israel’s motivation.

Israeli analyst Barry Rubin points out, “An attack would not stop Iran’s program but only delay it while guaranteeing that Tehran would be in a state of war with Israel and far more likely to use nuclear weapons.”

The Atlantic’s Jeffery Goldberg said, “An attack could legitimize the very program Israel is hoping to wipe out.”

Israel’s fears are legitimate, as is its frustration with the failure of other countries to take strong enough action and particularly with enablers like Russia and China, which are aiding and abetting the Iranian program.

But brinkmanship can be a very dangerous game and whipping up a war frenzy can prove difficult to contain, especially if the enemy doesn’t think you’re bluffing and decides to act first. Egypt learned that the hard way in 1967.

Will Israel attack Iran? Read More »

Occupy Wall Street and Jews, Onion Edition

Even the fake news about Occupy Wall Street appears to have taken notice of the preponderance of Jews involved in the protests.

On Nov. 7, The Onion, “America’s Finest News Source,” published an article under the headline, “Bank Executives on 15th Floor Gambling on Which Occupy Wall Street Protester Will Be Arrested Next.”

The article reported that bankers were placing bets on whether the next to be handcuffed by police would be the protester in a Guy Fawkes’ Mask, a “feisty” girl passing out leaflets, or “some scrawny hippie with a braided beard.”

The photograph accompanying the article showed the bankers—all male—pointing at a whiteboard with a list of protesters written on it. While some of the options at the top of the board are clearly visible—“Guy Banging Loud on Doors,” “Girl in Camo Pants,” “V For Vendetta mask Guy”—others are partially or completely obscured by the pinstriped arms of the bankers’ suits.

But tell me, near the bottom of the board—so low down that the blue lettering actually got cropped out of the version of the photo on the website—does it not say “Rabbis”? Right there, peeking out from beneath that fistful of twenties, in the screenshot from yesterday’s email?

A call to the Onion’s media representative has not yet been returned.

Occupy Wall Street and Jews, Onion Edition Read More »

UN: Iran worked on nuclear bomb design

Iran appears to have worked on designing an atomic bomb and may still be conducting relevant research, the U.N. nuclear watchdog said in a hard-hitting report on Tehran’s nuclear program likely to raise tensions in the Middle East.

Citing what it called “credible” information from member states and elsewhere, the agency listed a series of activities applicable to developing nuclear weapons, such as high explosives testing and development of an atomic bomb trigger.

The hotly anticipated International Atomic Energy Agency report, which was preceded by Israeli media speculation of pre-emptive air strikes on Iranian nuclear sites by Tehran’s arch-foe, detailed new evidence apparently showing concerted, covert efforts to acquire the capability to produce atomic bombs.

Some of the cited research and development activities by Iran have both civilian and military applications, but “others are specific to nuclear weapons,” said the report, obtained by Reuters Tuesday ahead of an IAEA board of governors meeting.

Tehran, which has denied ever seeking nuclear firepower, immediately condemned the report. “(It) is unbalanced, unprofessional and politically motivated,” said Ali Asghar Soltanieh, Iran’s ambassador to the IAEA.

The United States and its allies are expected to seize on the document to press for more punitive sanctions on the major oil producer over its record of hiding sensitive nuclear activity and lack of full cooperation with U.N. inspectors.

“I think the facts lay out a pretty overwhelming case that this was a pretty sophisticated nuclear weapons effort aimed at miniaturizing a warhead for a ballistic missile,” said prominent U.S. proliferation expert David Albright.

“It’s overwhelming in the amount of details, it is a pretty convincing case,” he told Reuters from Washington.

Russia criticized the report, saying it would dim hopes for dialogue with Tehran on its nuclear strivings and suggesting it was meant to scuttle chances for a diplomatic solution.

“We have serious doubts about the justification for steps to reveal contents of the report to a broad public, primarily because it is precisely now that certain chances for the renewal of dialogue between the ‘sextet’ of international mediators and Tehran have begun to appear,” the Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

It said time was needed to study the report and determine whether it contained new evidence of a military element in Iran’s nuclear program or was nothing but “the intentional—and counterproductive—whipping up of emotions.”

Tehran has for years dismissed allegations of atomic bomb research, based largely on Western intelligence funneled to the IAEA, as fabricated and baseless, and more recently sought to discredit IAEA chief Yukiya Amano as a tool of Washington.

The IAEA said it had carefully assessed intelligence passed on from member states and found it consistent in terms of technical content, individuals and organizations cited and time frames. It said it had gathered its own supportive details.

“The agency has serious concerns regarding possible military dimensions to Iran’s nuclear program,” the IAEA said in the report, which included an unusual 13-page annex with technical descriptions of research with explosives and computer simulations applicable to nuclear detonations.

The Vienna-based agency said the data “indicates that Iran has carried out activities relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device.”

It added: “The information also indicates that prior to the end of 2003, these activities took place under a structured program, and that some activities may still be ongoing.”

U.S. spy services estimated in 2007 that Iran had halted outright “weaponisation” research four years previously, but also that the Islamic Republic was continuing efforts to master technology usable in nuclear explosives.

The IAEA report included information from both before and after 2003. It voiced “particular concern” about information given by two member states that Iran had carried out computer modeling studies relevant to nuclear weapons in 2008-09.

“The application of such studies to anything other than a nuclear explosive is unclear to the agency,” the IAEA said.

The information also indicated that Iran had built a large explosives vessel at the Parchin military complex southeast of Tehran in which to conduct hydrodynamic experiments, which are “strong indicators of possible weapon development.”

Israeli officials had no immediate comment on the IAEA report, which was big news in a Jewish state that feels uniquely threatened by Iran, although Israel is widely believed to harbor the Middle East’s only nuclear arsenal.

Udi Segal, diplomatic correspondent for Israel’s top-rated Channel Two television news, said the report would dampen speculation that an attack on Iran was in the offing.

“First off, the prime minister has instructed the ministers to keep mum – that’s a refreshing innovation. He is letting the game move over to the international community. Israel is saying, in essence, ‘We told you so’,” said Segal.

“They are rolling the ball to the world, so it will pass crippling sanctions, in hope this will work. De facto, it defers talk of military option for at least a few months.”

A U.S. official said after the report’s release that Washington might slap more sanctions on Iran, possibly on commercial banks or front companies, but is unlikely to target its lifeblood oil and gas sector or its central bank for now.

“I think you will see bilateral sanctions increasing,” the official, speaking on condition of anonymity, told Reuters.

“From our side, we are really looking to close loopholes wherever they may exist,” he said.

For several years the IAEA has been investigating Western intelligence reports indicating that Iran has coordinated efforts to process uranium, test high explosives and revamp a ballistic missile cone to accommodate a nuclear warhead.

Iran, the world’s No. 5 oil exporter, insists that its program to enrich uranium is for a future network of nuclear power stations to provide electricity for a rapidly growing population, so that it can export more of its oil and gas.

But Tehran’s history of hiding sensitive nuclear activity from the IAEA, continued restrictions on IAEA access and its refusal to suspend enrichment, which can yield fuel for atom bombs, have drawn four rounds of U.N. sanctions and separate punitive steps by the United States and European Union.

IAEA officials have often complained that Iran has refused, for at least three years, to seriously answer the agency’s questions about accusations of illicit nuclear activity.

Additional reporting by Dan Williams in Jerusalem, Arshad Mohammed in Washington, Steve Gutterman in Moscow and Tehran bureau; Editing by Mark Heinrich

UN: Iran worked on nuclear bomb design Read More »

Ros-Lehtinen releases security funds, holds humanitarian money

U.S. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen released a hold on nearly $200 million in security funds for the Palestinians but is keeping back a similar amount in humanitarian aid.

A spokesman for Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), the chairwoman of the U.S. House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee, on Monday confirmed to JTA that Ros-Lehtinen had informed the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development that she would release $197 million in assistance designated for the Palestinian Authority’s security apparatus, including $50 million to pay salaries and $147 million in non-lethal assistance.

The spokesman, Brad Goehner, noted that Ros-Lehtinen decided to release the funds only after receiving a “wide range of specific assurances” and more a thousand pages of documents from the Obama administration.

Among the reassurances Ros-Lehtinen sought were President Obama’s certification that releasing the money was in the national security interest of the United States; that Israel had no objection to releasing the funds; and that Salam Fayyad, the PA prime minister who is trusted by Western leaders, would retain control of the funds.

Goehner said that Ros-Lehtinen, who imposed the hold in the wake of PA unity negotiations with Hamas and the Palestinian bid to seek statehood recognition in the United Nations in the absence of negotiations with Israel, is keeping her hold on $192 million in humanitarian and infrastructure aid for nongovernmental groups.

All funds held by Ros-Lehtinen were part of the 2011 budget.

On Tuesday, 44 Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives signed a letter urging House appropriators not to cut funding to the Palestinians in the 2012 budget.

The letter, co-authored by Reps. David Price (D-N.C.) and Peter Welch (D-Vt.), cited Israeli security officials who have said that cutting such funds would pose a risk to Israel. The liberal Israel advocacy group J Street lobbied for the letter.

“We believe that a suspension or termination of assistance would be a serious mistake that would put near-term diplomatic disputes ahead of our long-term interests in the region, as well as the interests of our ally Israel,” the letter said.

Ros-Lehtinen releases security funds, holds humanitarian money Read More »