Freeman Withdraws
Politico reports that Charles "Chas" Freeman, "'requested his selection to be Chairman of the National Intelligence Council not proceed,' [DNI Dennis] Blair's office said in a statement. 'Director Blair accepted Ambassador Freeman's decision with regret.'"
Amb. Freeman and his friends claim he was railroaded by the "Israel lobby" - which we think of as largely fictional. Politico reported that Nicholas Veliotes, a former U.S. Ambassador to Egypt said, "If they withdraw his appointment prior to the conclusion of [his formal vetting] that would be seen as abject caving in on people who are extreme partisans of Israel." Freeman himself said:
There is a powerful lobby determined to prevent any view other than its own from being aired, still less to factor in American understanding of trends and events in the Middle East. The tactics of the Israel Lobby plumb the depths of dishonor and indecency and include character assassination, selective misquotation, the willful distortion of the record, the fabrication of falsehoods, and an utter disregard for the truth. The aim of this Lobby is control of the policy process through the exercise of a veto over the appointment of people who dispute the wisdom of its views, the substitution of political correctness for analysis, and the exclusion of any and all options for decision by Americans and our government other than those that it favors.
As one of the few Jewish organizations that took a public position on the issue, we'd like to know if Amb. Freeman believes JINSA is part of a powerful and dishonorable lobby that distorted his record. We don't think so.
The directorship of the NIC is not a confirmable position. The vetting process was internal - no one but Director Blair and President Obama had to be satisfied with his credentials, and clearly Adm. Blair was satisfied. So why did he withdraw? Because once he aroused public and then Congressional interest and knew he would have to explain himself outside his cozy circle, he had neither the desire nor the ability to defend being paid by Saudi Arabia and sitting on the Board of a Chinese state oil company.
It would have been illuminating to watch him try.
Consider this - the Chinese state oil company, on whose board Freeman sits, pumps oil in Sudan. Two weeks ago, the International Criminal Court issued a warrant for Sudan's President Omar Bashir for crimes in Darfur. Bashir, in retaliation, ousted several of the nonprofit food and medical organizations that keep the people of Darfur alive even as they suffer the depredations of the militias supported by the Sudanese government. A few of the civilized countries, including the United States, tried to get a UN Security Council resolution condemning Bashir for tossing the food and medical people. China has a history of defending Sudan in the Security Council and in this instance threatened to exercise its veto on behalf of its state oil company.
Forget Israel. Try defending that in front of Congress.
JINSA is an unabashed supporter of the State of Israel - though not all the policies of all of its governments - and we believe the relationship between the United States and Israel is based on shared values and shared security requirements. Lots of people stand where we stand - we don't need a "lobby." [You want a good lobby? Try the tobacco lobby - there is a "willful distortion of the record, the fabrication of falsehoods, and an utter disregard for the truth" - and the stuff is still legal.]
In this case, however, we think Israel and any presumed "lobby" had far less effect on the outcome than the common-sensical belief that the person who is the gatekeeper of intelligence information for the President of the United States should be unencumbered by payments from foreign governments.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment