Taking shots at Israel may earn political points in the Arab world, but Iraq’s prime minister is learning that in Washington you may well hit your own foot. Nouri al-Maliki’s sharply critical remarks about Israel’s military actions in Lebanon, a salvo he delivered last week to his Shi’ite constituency, bounced back on him this week, threatening to cloud what was to have been a triumphant address to both houses of Congress on Wednesday.
Democrats in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives demanded Tuesday that Maliki apologize for condemning Israeli retaliation against Hezbollah as “aggression.” Otherwise, they said, he didn’t deserve the rare honor of appearing before a joint session of Congress, a distinction most recently enjoyed by Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert.
“With evidence mounting that the Iraqi leadership’s goals are not in the best interests of the United States — nor the Middle East — Prime Minister Maliki’s address is inappropriate,” at least 20 House Democrats wrote in a letter to House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.).
The letter urged Hastert to cancel the address unless Maliki apologized.
“We are unaware of any prior instance where a world leader who worked against the interests of the United States was afforded such an honor,” they wrote.
Senate Democrats wrote a similar letter. House and Senate Democrats timed separate press conferences for 11:30 a.m. Tuesday, just as Maliki and President Bush were speaking at the White House. That guaranteed a shift in media focus from the progress of democracy in Iraq to Maliki’s views on Israel.
Bush clearly was unhappy with the new focus.
“The prime minister and I spent time talking about Lebanon, and we had a frank exchange of views on this situation,” Bush said. In diplomatese, a “frank exchange” usually translates into, “What were you thinking?”
What Maliki was thinking probably had to do with the fractious, Shi’ite-dominated Iraqi Parliament he must control if Iraq, still battered by violence, is ever to stabilize. Iraq’s Shi’ites have declared their allegiance to their co-religionists in Lebanon, from whom the Shi’ite terrorist group Hezbollah draws its support.
On July 16, the Parliament found rare agreement in issuing a statement calling Israeli action in Lebanon an act of “criminal aggression.” That came after the speaker of the Iraqi Parliament leveled absurd accusations that Jews were fueling the Iraqi insurgency.
“Some people say, ‘We saw you beheading, kidnapping and killing,’ ” said Mahmoud al-Mashhadani. “I am sure that he who does this is a Jew and the son of a Jew. I can tell you about these Jewish, Israelis and Zionists who are using Iraqi money and oil to frustrate the Islamic movement in Iraq.”
Three days later, less than a week before the long-scheduled Washington visit, Maliki condemned Israel and called on the world to stop the “aggression.”
“The Israeli attacks and airstrikes are completely destroying Lebanon’s infrastructure,” Maliki said in remarks reported by the New York Times. “I condemn these aggressions and call on the Arab League foreign ministers’ meeting in Cairo to take quick action to stop these aggressions. We call on the world to take quick stands to stop the Israeli aggression.”
In contrast to Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and other Arab countries, Maliki declined to criticize Hezbollah. That placed Maliki’s U.S.-backed government in the discomfiting company of Algeria and Syria, rejectionist radicals in the Arab world.
“His comments condemning Israel were wrong but predictable, but his refusal to condemn Hezbollah is painful,” said Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.). “Prime Minister Maliki owes his office to those American lives and those American dollars. Where is he on the war on terror?”
Republicans accused Democrats of political gamesmanship to make up for discomfort after Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), the minority leader, refused to co-sponsor a resolution last week supporting Israel in Lebanon. Pelosi, who otherwise supported the resolution and who ordered her whip to enforce its passage, said she could not attach her name to a resolution that did not call on all sides to guard against civilian casualties.
Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.), the Jewish chairman of the Democrats’ congressional election campaign, helped initiate the letter. And it was clear Republicans were feeling the sting: Ron Bonjean, Hastert’s press secretary, told JTA that the House speaker would raise the issue of Maliki’s comments in their meeting.
Maliki didn’t appear overly concerned by the fallout. During his White House appearance Tuesday, he dismissed a question about whether he would condemn Hezbollah.
“The important thing here is what we are trying to do is to stop the killing and the destruction,” making way for diplomatic efforts, he said through an interpreter.
He added, “There has to be superior decisions coming from above” — a reference to the international community and the United States — to protect fledgling Arab democracies in Lebanon and Egypt.
Pelosi hinted that Democrats could boycott Maliki’s congressional session Wednesday.
“Unless Mr. Maliki disavows his critical comments of Israel and condemns terrorism, it is inappropriate to honor him with a joint meeting of Congress,” she said.
“The Bush administration, who conceived this tragic war, believed that regime change in Iraq would result in a number of benefits for the region,” said Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.). “The Bush administration was flat wrong.”
She added, “Extremists throughout the Middle East, including Hezbollah and Hamas, have been empowered” by the administration’s push for democracy in the Arab world. “Moderate voices in the region are not being heard. And the Israeli-Palestinian peace process is under attack.”
As they waited for Tuesday’s press conference, Schakowsky and Rep. William Delahunt (D-Mass.) reviewed a placard listing anti-Israel and anti-Semitic comments made by members of the Iraqi government.
“Does that give you a warm and comfortable feeling about what’s transpiring in Iraq?” Delahunt asked. Schakowsky shook her head in bewilderment.
The Archive of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency includes articles published from 1923 to 2008. Archive stories reflect the journalistic standards and practices of the time they were published.
