The Iran Deal Puts Pro-Israel Democrats in a Bind

These Dems have to balance their loyalty to the president — and his desire to halt the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program — with their discomfort over a deal.

Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif shakes hands with Secretary of State John Kerry after a statement on a landmark deal with Iran halting parts of its nuclear program Nov. 24, 2013 in Geneva.
National Journal
Add to Briefcase
Josh Kraushaar
Nov. 22, 2013, 6:16 p.m.

It’s been a tough year for Is­rael’s most loy­al sup­port­ers in the U.S. It began with a messy con­firm­a­tion pro­cess for De­fense Sec­ret­ary Chuck Hagel, a nom­in­ee whom pro-Is­raeli groups viewed with con­cern. Over the sum­mer, Pres­id­ent Obama leaned on those groups, most not­ably the Amer­ic­an Is­rael Pub­lic Af­fairs Com­mit­tee, to lobby for his pro­pos­al au­thor­iz­ing mil­it­ary in­ter­ven­tion in Syr­ia, only to aban­don the push at the last minute. “And, most re­cently, pro-Is­rael or­gan­iz­a­tions have been highly crit­ic­al of a pos­sible dip­lo­mat­ic deal with Ir­an that would loosen sanc­tions against the Is­lam­ic re­gime — a deal that Is­raeli Prime Min­is­ter Ben­jamin Net­an­yahu deemed “ex­ceed­ingly bad.”

Sat­urday night, the White House an­nounced a deal reached in Geneva to lim­it and roll back Ir­an’s nuc­le­ar de­vel­op­ment.

Mean­while, re­la­tions between the White House and Is­rael are as chilly as they’ve been in dec­ades, with Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion of­fi­cials openly con­tra­dict­ing Net­an­yahu’s po­s­i­tions, and Net­an­yahu openly court­ing the French to fore­stall the U.S. dip­lo­mat­ic push with Ir­an.

All of this puts Demo­crats, who routinely win over­whelm­ing sup­port from Jew­ish Amer­ic­ans on Elec­tion Day, in an awk­ward po­s­i­tion. Do they stand with the pres­id­ent on polit­ic­ally sens­it­ive for­eign policy is­sues, or stake their own course? That dif­fi­cult dy­nam­ic is cur­rently play­ing out in Con­gress, where the Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion is res­ist­ing a Sen­ate push to main­tain tough sanc­tions against Ir­an. This week, Obama met with lead­ing sen­at­ors on the Bank­ing and For­eign Re­la­tions com­mit­tees to dis­suade them from their ef­forts while dip­lomacy is un­der­way.

“There’s a fun­da­ment­al dis­agree­ment between the vast ma­jor­ity of Con­gress and the pres­id­ent when it comes to in­creas­ing Ir­an sanc­tions right now,” said one Demo­crat­ic op­er­at­ive in­volved in the ad­vocacy ef­forts. “Pro-Is­rael groups, like AIPAC, try to do things in a bi­par­tis­an way; they don’t like open con­front­a­tion. But in this in­stance, it’s hard.”

That awk­ward­ness has been evid­ent in the luke­warm re­ac­tion from many of Obama’s Sen­ate Demo­crat­ic al­lies to the ad­min­is­tra­tion’s out­reach to Ir­an. Sen­ate For­eign Re­la­tions Com­mit­tee Chair­man Robert Men­en­dez of New Jer­sey said last week he was con­cerned that the ad­min­is­tra­tion seems “to want the deal al­most more than the Ir­a­ni­ans.” Nor­mally out­spoken Sen. Chuck Schu­mer of New York, a re­li­able ally of Is­rael, has been con­spicu­ously quiet about his views on the ne­go­ti­ations. In a CNN in­ter­view this month, Demo­crat­ic Rep. Debbie Wasser­man Schultz of Flor­ida, whose job as chair­wo­man of the Demo­crat­ic Na­tion­al Com­mit­tee is to de­fend the pres­id­ent, not­ably de­clined to en­dorse the ad­min­is­tra­tion’s ap­proach, fo­cus­ing in­stead on Obama’s past sup­port of sanc­tions. This, des­pite the full-court press from Sec­ret­ary of State John Kerry, a former con­gres­sion­al col­league.

On Tues­day, after meet­ing with Obama, Men­en­dez and Schu­mer signed a bi­par­tis­an let­ter to Kerry warn­ing the ad­min­is­tra­tion about ac­cept­ing a deal that would al­low Ir­an to con­tin­ue its nuc­le­ar pro­gram. The let­ter was also signed by Sens. John Mc­Cain, R-Ar­iz., Lind­sey Gra­ham, R-S.C., Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Robert Ca­sey, D-Pa.

Demo­crats, of course, real­ize that the pres­id­ent plays an out­sized role in the policy dir­ec­tion of his party. Just as George W. Bush moved the Re­pub­lic­an Party in a more hawk­ish dir­ec­tion dur­ing his war-riv­en pres­id­ency, Obama is nudging Demo­crats away from their tra­di­tion­ally in­stinct­ive sup­port for the Jew­ish state. “I can’t re­mem­ber the last time the dif­fer­ences [between the U.S. and Is­rael] were this stark,” said one former Demo­crat­ic White House of­fi­cial with ties to the Jew­ish com­munity. “There’s now a little more free­dom [for pro­gress­ive Demo­crats] to say what they want to say, without fear of get­ting their tuchus kicked by the or­gan­ized Jew­ish com­munity.”

A Gal­lup sur­vey con­duc­ted this year showed 55 per­cent of Demo­crats sym­path­iz­ing with the Is­rael­is over the Palestini­ans, com­pared with 78 per­cent of Re­pub­lic­ans and 63 per­cent of in­de­pend­ents who do so. A land­mark Pew poll of Amer­ic­an Jews, re­leased in Oc­to­ber, showed that 35 per­cent of Jew­ish Demo­crats said they had little or no at­tach­ment to Is­rael, more than double the 15 per­cent of Jew­ish Re­pub­lic­ans who answered sim­il­arly. At the 2012 Demo­crat­ic Na­tion­al Con­ven­tion, many del­eg­ates booed a plat­form pro­pos­al sup­port­ing the move of the U.S. Em­bassy in Is­rael from Tel Aviv to Jer­u­s­alem. In 2011, Demo­crats lost An­thony Wein­er’s heav­ily Jew­ish, solidly Demo­crat­ic Brook­lyn House seat be­cause enough Jew­ish voters wanted to re­buke the pres­id­ent’s per­ceived hos­til­ity to­ward Is­rael.

Pro-Is­rael ad­vocacy groups rely on the man­tra that sup­port for Is­rael car­ries over­whelm­ing bi­par­tis­an sup­port, a max­im that has held true for dec­ades in Con­gress. But most also re­luct­antly ac­know­ledge the grow­ing in­flu­ence of a fac­tion with­in the Demo­crat­ic Party that is more crit­ic­al of the two coun­tries’ close re­la­tion­ship. With­in the Jew­ish com­munity, that fac­tion is rep­res­en­ted by J Street, which po­s­i­tions it­self as the home for “pro-Is­rael, pro-peace Amer­ic­ans” and sup­ports the Ir­an ne­go­ti­ations. “Or­gan­iz­a­tions that claim to rep­res­ent the Amer­ic­an Jew­ish com­munity are un­der­min­ing [Obama’s] ap­proach by push­ing for new and harsh­er pen­al­ties against Ir­an,” the group wrote in an ac­tion alert to its mem­bers.

Some sup­port­ers of Is­rael view J Street with con­cern. “There’s a small cadre of people that comes from the pro­gress­ive side of the party that are in the busi­ness of blam­ing Is­rael first. There’s a chor­us of these guys,” said a former Clin­ton ad­min­is­tra­tion for­eign policy of­fi­cial. “But that doesn’t make them the dom­in­ant folks in the policy space of the party, or the Hill.”

Pro-Is­rael act­iv­ists worry that one of the iron­ies of Obama’s situ­ation is that as his poll num­bers sink, his in­terest in strik­ing a deal with Ir­an will grow be­cause he’ll be look­ing for any bit of pos­it­ive news that can draw at­ten­tion away from the health care law’s prob­lems. Thus far, Obama’s di­min­ished polit­ic­al for­tunes aren’t de­ter­ring Demo­crats from pro­tect­ing the ad­min­is­tra­tion’s prerog­at­ives. Con­gres­sion­al sources ex­pect the Sen­ate Bank­ing Com­mit­tee, chaired by South Dakota Demo­crat Tim John­son, to hold off on any sanc­tions le­gis­la­tion un­til there’s a res­ol­u­tion to the Ir­a­ni­an ne­go­ti­ations. 

But if Obama’s stand­ing con­tin­ues to drop, and if Is­rael doesn’t like the deal, don’t be sur­prised to see Demo­crats be­come less hes­it­ant about go­ing their own way.


Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.