Doing the Jones, or in which I get a little too deep into the weeds

James Jones, the White House national security adviser, may one day lend his name to a Middle Eastern confessional version of the "full Ginsburg," named for the Monica Lewinsky lawyer who scored all five Sunday talk shows, the same Sunday.

The "full Jones" (okay, yes, it sounds a little icky) would involve speaking to two Arab American and two Jewish American groups in a single month. James Jones has delivered what I imagine to be pretty much the same speech — in general outlines — this month to AIPAC, J Street, the American Task Force on Palestine and now the Arab American Institute.

I’m familiar with all but the speech he gave AIPAC’s National Summit, in San Diego — the AAI folks just sent over the speech he delivered to their Leadership Summit on Monday.

The speeches are tweaked to the news of the day — the J Street and AAI speeches this week include references to efforts to persuade Iran to give up its low enriched uranium for further enrichment to medical research levels. And, naturally, J Streeters get more of the Israeli-Palestinian equation, and of the close U.S.-Israel relationship, while Arab Americans — predominantly Lebanese — hear a commitment to Lebanon’s independence.

And there are other differences — in passages that otherwise transfer word for word from one audience to another, but so slight they might be meaningless. But I can’t resist digging for the possible parse.

There are at least two between his J Street and AAI speeches:

–In reaffirming to the AAI group the president’s expectations of the Israelis and the Palestinians, he leaves out "incitement," which he included among the Palestinian obligations in his J Street speech. Here’s the passage from the AAI speech (the full text is below):

For Israel, these steps have included stopping settlement growth, dismantling outposts, and improving access and movement in the West Bank.  For the Palestinians, it has meant continuing efforts on security and reforming the institutions of governance.  And for the Arab states, it has meant reaching out to Israel to demonstrate the benefits of the Arab Peace Initiative, as Israel takes steps towards peace.

Same thing in his speech to ATFP:

For Israel, these steps have included stopping settlement growth, dismantling outposts and improving access and movement in the West Bank. For the Palestinians, it has meant continuing efforts on security and reforming the institutions of governance. And for the Arab states, it has meant reaching out to Israel to demonstrate the benefits of the Arab Peace Initiative as Israel takes steps towards peace.

But this is what he tells J Street:

For the Palestinians this means continuing efforts on security combatting incitement and refining their instruments of governance. For the Arab states it means reaching out to Israel to show that they are prepared to live in peace and demonstrate the benefits of the Arab Peace Initiative. And for Israel these steps have included stopping settlement growth, dismantling outposts and improving access to the movement and reviving economic conditions in the West Bank.

I don’t have a link, but here’s the J Street video:

–The other difference: In both speeches, to AAI and J Street, Jones cites efforts to contain Iran. No surprise: This as much an issue for Arabs as it is for Jews, and particluarly for Christian Lebanese (most Arab Americans are of Christian Lebanese origin) who, one might imagine, shudder at the prospect of a Hezbollah emboldened by an Iran with the bomb.

At J Street, though, he said "Nothing is off the table," code for the prospect of military action should all else fail to dissuade the regime from suspending its suspected nuclear program. Not at AAI. (He does not mention Iran in his ATFP speech.)

Why? Well, possibly because Palestinians and their backers perceive demands to stop "incitement" the same way Israelis see Palestinian demands for a "total" settlement freeze — as an absolutist and disingenuous demand; towns, villages and cities can never truly "freeze" and government-paid imams and broadcasters will never truly be muzzled. Both sides would likely welcome good faith leaps, and not absolutes — but both sides insist that the other side is sticking to absolutes. So the demands become irritants.

And, when it comes to Iran, Arab nations (and presumably, their diasporas) are known to long for containment — but, even more, to fear another war and its repercussions.

More mysterious — and deserving of examination, unless, like I said, I’m getting obsessive — is why Jones would include these chestnuts of traditional pro-Israel appeals to J Street? I’m not saying J Street isn’t pro-Israel, but the folks in that hall were not, I’d guess, too exercised by Palestinian incitement, nor do they tend to favor sabre-rattling toward Iran.

Was he pitching to the AIPAC and Israeli government observers he knew to be in the room? Or — and I’m getting a little meta here — was he telling J Street, you know, maybe these are issues you ought to care about?

Full AAI speech below the jump.

[[READMORE]]

Thank you for that warm introduction, Jim [Zogby].  Before I begin, I’d also like to take a moment to salute you, the founder of this organization, for your leadership in the Arab American community and for your work as a committed advocate for Middle East peace.  I would also like to recognize Mr. George Salem (SAH-lem), chair of the Arab American Institute’s board, and the members of the diplomatic corps that are with us today.  

The membership of this group demonstrates the extraordinary contributions that Arab Americans make to the United States. From promoting economic growth to excellence in athletics; from serving in our military to enriching our culture – Arab Americans are a fundamental part of what makes this country great.

In particular, the activism that is advanced by groups like AAI demonstrates the growing voice that Arab Americans have in our public discourse. I know that many of your concerns are focused on the day to day issues that Arab Americans face across the United States. But I also know that you are focused on events beyond our borders – and that you can be an important bridge to Arabs beyond our borders.

Back in June, President Obama gave an historic speech in Cairo that articulated a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world, based on mutual respect, and defined by the pursuit of partnerships in areas of common interest.  The overarching objective for this effort is to develop relationships that advance opportunity, prosperity, and security in Muslim-majority countries and Muslim communities worldwide, by addressing issues that matter most in people’s day-to-day lives, including job creation, entrepreneurship, economic development, education, and health.

Since June, we have seen an overwhelming response to the President’s speech from within the U.S. government, NGOs, foreign governments, foundations, and international institutions. We intend to focus on initiatives that can have a transformational impact in these regions.  For example, the White House announced the creation of a Global Technology and Innovation Fund to support technological development in Muslim-majority countries.  We’ve also made strides in our efforts to eradicate polio through our partnership with the Organization of the Islamic Conference.   More importantly, every part of the government has embraced the principle that we must all do our part to pursue this new beginning among people of different faiths and races and religions; one based on mutual interest and mutual respect.

In his Cairo speech, the President also made clear his commitment to achieving two states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security.  He is committed to this goal because he believes that peace is in America’s interest, just as it is in the interest of the Palestinian and Israeli peoples.  

Over the past several months, our policy has been clear, unambiguous, and consistent.  We have called on all parties to meet their responsibilities, and to take steps to create an environment in which negotiations can succeed.  These steps were never meant as an end in themselves, but as a way to re-launch talks between the parties on the core issues of this conflict – security for both Israelis and Palestinians, borders, refugees, and Jerusalem.

For Israel, these steps have included stopping settlement growth, dismantling outposts, and improving access and movement in the West Bank.  For the Palestinians, it has meant continuing efforts on security and reforming the institutions of governance.  And for the Arab states, it has meant reaching out to Israel to demonstrate the benefits of the Arab Peace Initiative, as Israel takes steps towards peace.

But our approach has not focused only on resolving the political issues that separate Israelis and Palestinians.  It is also based on building an infrastructure for peace through bottom-up efforts to help the Palestinian Authority, under the leadership of President Abbas and Prime Minister Fayyad, to ensure security, improve governance, and provide economic opportunity for the Palestinian people.  

As the President said in New York, we have made some progress towards the goals we set out early this year, both on these bottom-up efforts and on getting the parties back to the negotiating table.  But we must do much, much more.  The time has come to re-launch negotiations, without preconditions, to reach a final-status agreement on two states – a secure Jewish state of Israel and a viable, independent, and contiguous Palestine that ends the occupation that began in 1967, and unleashes the full potential of the Palestinian people.

Senator Mitchell has worked hard with the parties over the past few weeks to find the right formula through which to begin these talks.  He will travel again to the region this week to continue those efforts.  The President and Secretary Clinton will also remain personally engaged.    

As we move to re-launch negotiations, we cannot forget the people of Gaza and southern Israel. Just as we will defend Israel’s right to self defense, we cannot accept the humanitarian situation in Gaza, because progress in the daily lives of the Palestinian people must be part of the road to peace. And we continue to call for the immediate release of Gilad Shalit.

This Administration is also committed to the sovereignty and independence of Lebanon.  The United States continues to support Lebanon’s legitimate state institutions, including providing the Lebanese Armed Forces with the training and equipment they need to protect the country and its citizens.  We firmly support the UN Security Council’s effort to promote peace and stability in Lebanon through the implementation of Resolutions 1559 and 1701.   We do this because we believe that this is the best way to ensure the security and stability of the Lebanese people. On Friday, the anniversary of the Marine Barracks bombing in Beirut, we remembered the 241 servicemen who tragically lost their lives while endeavoring to bring peace to Lebanon.  We also expressed hope that Prime Minister-designate Hariri [HA-REE-REE], working with President Sleiman [SLEIGH-MAN], would be able to form a government soon.

Turning to Lebanon’s neighbor, our engagement with Syria is a clear example of the President’s commitment to addressing our concerns through dialogue.  It is undeniable that Syria plays an important role in the Middle East.  The President also believes that Syria has a responsibility to promote stability in the region, which includes ending its support for terrorist organizations like Hizballah and Hamas.  Let me be clear:  the United States will not sacrifice Lebanon’s sovereignty, liberty, or independence for better relations with any of Lebanon’s neighbors.   

Another issue critical to stability in the region is the future of Iraq.  As we saw in the tragic events yesterday in Baghdad, there are those who continue to threaten the Iraqi people and undermine the great progress Iraq has made. We strongly condemn these outrageous attacks, and send our deepest condolences to those who have lost loved ones.  Last week during their meeting, the President made clear to Prime Minister Maliki that the U.S. remains deeply committed to the future of Iraq, and to a strong relationship with the Iraqi people based upon mutual respect.  As Iraqis assume responsibility for their own security, we want to act together to advance our common interest.  

In spite of the burdens they have borne for many years the Iraqi people have demonstrated their courage and their capacity, and they have a remarkable opportunity to build a future that is more prosperous and secure – a future that will benefit the broader region as well as Iraq and the United States.  The U.S.-Iraq Business and Investment Conference is an example of how we can seize this opportunity.  It demonstrates America’s commitment – under the Strategic Framework Agreement – to support economic development within Iraq, and to promote the investment and innovation that can create jobs and opportunity for the Iraqi people.  The United States will continue to stand with Iraq’s people and government as a close friend and partner as Iraqis prepare for elections early next year.

Lastly, let me say a few words about our effort to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapons capability.  As you know, early this month our senior diplomat Under Secretary of State Bill Burns and his counterparts in the P5-plus-1 — which is the permanent members of the Security Council plus Germany — met with the Iranian representatives in Geneva.  As the President said, it was a constructive beginning.  But we have a long, long way to go.  Iran now needs to follow through on its commitments.  In fact, our team met with the Iranians in Vienna last week to try to finalize the implementation of the agreement reached on the Tehran research reactor.  

Iran’s agreement to export low-enriched uranium to third parties for further enrichment and fuel fabrication would be a good first step towards reducing Iran’s ability to build a nuclear weapon.  If implemented, this arrangement would set back the clock on Iran’s breakout capability by reducing Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium far below the amount needed for a weapon.  But let me be clear:  suspension of Iran’s enrichment program remains our goal, as called for in the five U.N. Security Council resolutions.

Ladies and gentlemen, the task ahead, to help the people of the Middle East realize the hopeful future they deserve, will be difficult.  There will be setbacks and challenges and false starts.  But as the President has reminded us, what’s at stake is nothing less than the dignity and the security of all human beings.  And that is what drives us forward.  The United States will continue to stand for peace, security, and prosperity across the Middle East, and will work steadfastly with our partners to achieve it.