Muslim- and Arab-Americans Seek a Presidential Peacemaker to Support in 2004

By Delinda C. Hanley

AFTER 9/11, growing numbers of Muslim Americans turned to the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) to safeguard their civil rights and to keep abreast of political issues. These days CAIR, established to promote a positive image of Islam and Muslims in America, finds its work more essential than ever. In addition to its Washington, DC headquarters, CAIR now has 23 chapters across the country, and its membership has tripled since the 2001 terrorist attacks.

Once a year the Muslim community and its friends gather together in the national capital to celebrate and show support for CAIR. Each chapter has its own grassroots fund-raisers, but the Washington, DC banquet usually draws a good crowd. Even so, organizers were stunned by the enormous success of their ninth annual banquet on Nov. 30.

"Before 9/11, I never would have attended a dinner like this," Dr. Naheed Morrill told the Washington Report. "But now I feel so isolated and marginalized in this country. I need to feel a part of the Muslim community."

More than 1,000 supporters packed the sold-out, standing-room-only ballroom at the Sheraton Hotel in Tyson's Corner, VA. CAIR broke all records for an American Muslim fund-raising event, topping its Ramadan fund-raising goal of $1 million. Well-educated and successful doctors, lawyers, computer specialists, business people and entrepreneurs filled the room and reached deep into their pockets to show their confidence and pride in CAIR's work.

The pumped-up, well-heeled audience also came to hear from the 2004 presidential candidates. Only one showed up, however: U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH). The others missed a terrific opportunity to introduce themselves to a vital American voting community.

According to Census Bureau figures released Dec. 3, the population of Americans who indicated Arab ancestry has nearly doubled in the past 20 years. The approximately 1.25 million Arab Americans--a low estimate, according to Zogby International--and an additional six million Muslim Americans form a substantial voting bloc. Less than 20 years ago, candidates rejected endorsements and contributions from Arab Americans. They no longer make that mistake

There is much debate in the Muslim- and Arab-American community over which candidate to support with their swing voting bloc. Many in this group are issue voters, not wedded to a particular party. Nearly 70 percent of Arab- and Muslim-Americans live in eight states, seven of them key electoral states: Michigan, Florida, California, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Texas. More than 60 percent actually turn out to vote, a higher percentage than many other groups can boast.

President George W. Bush won the election in 2000 with the help of this vital, under-reported bloc. Muslim- and Arab-American voters now feel the president has not delivered on the campaign promises he made to their community. In pre-election debates, Bush blasted racial profiling and the use of secret evidence. After 9/11, however, his administration multiplied those abuses. John Ashcroft's Justice Department has targeted U.S. citizens and residents of Arab or Muslim origin, trampling on their civil liberties.

Bush's foreign policy and his new policy of "pre-emptive" war have squandered the sympathy of Middle Eastern friends who supported the U.S. after the 9/11 attacks. It's also cost him votes from a growing number of Americans, regardless of their religion or ethnic origin. Add to that Bush's uncritical support for Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's war on Palestinians, and it's unlikely he can make amends to Muslim- and Arab- Americans. This is a motivated, educated, powerful and wealthy voting bloc looking for a candidate.

Guests at the CAIR fund-raiser were disappointed that only Rep. Nick J. Rahall (D-WV)--who, sadly, is not running for president--and Kucinich attended, and that Gen. Wesley Clark only sent a statement that was duly read.

Executive director Nihad Awad said he doesn't blame the other Democratic candidates for not showing up."The banquet raises funds, not political assets," Awad said. "We'd never asked for politicians to speak at a banquet before. We usually invite award recipients and members of our community to speak."

Awad is certain that all candidates will make it a point to attend CAIR's Leadership Conference in the spring of 2004, however. That will be a purely political event, focusing on civil rights and the elections. Candidates will have other chances to present their views to Muslims as the American Muslim Political Coordinating Council, an umbrella group that represents the political views of Muslim Americans, and other groups hold forums.

Candidates did seize the moment to address an audience of 300 at the Arab American Institute's National Leadership Conference, "Vote 2004: An Agenda for Peace and Justice," held in Dearborn, Michigan Oct. 17 to 19. Four Democrats seeking the nomination attended: former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, former House Majority Leader Richard Gephardt (MO), U.S. Sen. Joseph Lieberman (CT), and former Sen. Carol Mosely Braun (IL). Sens. John Kerry (MA) and John Edwards (NC), and Representative Kucinich, detained in Washington, DC by congressional floor votes, addressed the conference via satellite. Gen. Wesley Clark was scheduled to attend, but canceled due to illness at the last minute. Surprisingly, the Rev. Al Sharpton did not respond to AAI's invitation.

Speaking on behalf of the Bush administration were Montana Gov. Marc Racicot, chairman of Bush's reelection campaign, and Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham, himself an Arab American. Transcripts of all their speeches, as well as the candidates' responses to a questionnaire, are available on AAI's Web site: (http://www.aaiusa.org).

Most of the Democratic candidates hold similar views regarding the protection of civil liberties and constitutional rights. Their views on the war in Iraq are a matter of public record and widely discussed in the daily news. Pressed to define their positions on the Arab-Israeli conflict and Israel's construction of a "security" wall, however, the candidates sidestepped the issue. Lieberman's support for the wall at the AAI Conference drew jeers from the audience.

Perhaps candidates seeking the presidency in 2004 actually believe they can only win a U.S. election by pledging unequivocal support for Israel. But American Jews are losing patience for hard-line American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) views and are looking for a peacemaker instead. Far larger numbers of Arab-and Muslim-American voters also are ready to support a candidate who is ready to play a consistent even-handed role in the Middle East. The candidate who promises to work sincerely for a just peace agreement will be looking out for the best interests of every American--not to mention Israelis and Palestinians desperate for peace.

Candidates' Hard-to Find Views on Israel and Palestine

Gen. Wesley Clark, after declaring his candidacy, stated in a September 2003 interview with Rolling Stone, "I totally support Israel's effort to go after these terrorists." When asked his views of the Palestinian refugee issue, Clark blamed the Arab states for their plight, noting refugees were "not given the opportunity to be assimilated."

A summary statement from the Clark campaign to AAI regarding the Middle East states that "General Clark is strongly committed to playing a sustained and pro-active role toward reaching peace in the Middle East that includes a more focused effort to engage neighboring states and allies to end violence between Israelis and Palestinians--and to work with Israel to forge a clear path toward Palestinian statehood....

"At the same time, General Clark believes that Israel is the key U.S. ally in the region and has the right to defend itself, including going after terrorists who threaten Israelis--because violence and terrorist actions will not work and must end."

Carol Moseley Braun, during her time in the U.S. Senate, had a consistent one-sided pro-Israel voting record. In response to a question at AAI's National Leadership Conference, however, Braun stated: "I think the most important thing to do is to...engage the international community to work toward peace, and that will require a recognition of the...legitimate right of Israel to exist within safe and secure borders, of the legitimate right of Palestine to exist within safe and secure borders, and to bring everybody to the table so that they can begin to try to work through issues of resolving the settlements, resolving this fence business, and coming together so that the kind of killing that's going on...can come to an end."

Howard Dean's Web site describes him as "committed to achieving a negotiated, comprehensive, and just peace between Palestinians and Israelis and remains optimistic about the chances for peace." He believes in the "full engagement of the United States at the highest level" in the peace process.

Dean has said, "The role of the U.S. president must be to be a fair and honest broker, a credible catalyst for talks leading to a two-state solution."

In September 2003 Dean stated that an "enormous number" of Israeli settlements would have to be removed in the peace process and that "it's not our [the United States'] place to take sides" in the conflict. In response to criticism from fellow candidates Joe Lieberman and John Kerry for these statements, Dean stated, "Israel has always been a longtime ally with a special relationship with the United States, but if we are going to bargain by being in the middle of the negotiations then we are going to have to take an even-handed role."

Dean has been very critical of the Bush administration for its lack of engagement prior to the road map. The Vermont governor supports a two-state solution, "a Jewish state of Israel living side by side in peace and security with an independent, demilitarized Palestinian state." He goes on to say, however, "to get there, the Palestinian Authority will have to fight terrorism and violence on a consistent basis to create the conditions necessary for a viable peace process. The Israeli government will have to work to improve the living conditions of the Palestinian people and ultimately will have to remove a number of existing settlements."

John Edwards has been strongly critical of the Bush administration's efforts to create peace between Israelis and Palestinians. He has stated that, while he thinks the road map to peace is a good thing, he believes the president "waited too long to enter the Middle East peace process," and that the "United States must also do far more to promote peace between Israel and the Palestinians." Edwards' first overseas trip as a senator was to Israel, which he classifies as our "vital ally." When addressing AAI's National Leadership Conference, Edwards stated that this "very difficult situation" will "require serious long-term, sustained engagement by the United States at the highest possible level," and that it will involve "a multi-step process."

Dick Gephardt's campaign Web site states that the "United States has a special relationship with Israel and the Jewish people." As president, he "will continue to work tirelessly to foster that relationship and maintain military and economic aid to Israel." He'll also work to move the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, and "re-engage the U.S. in the Middle East peace process, which will enhance the long-term security of Israel while combating the intolerable acts of terror that have disrupted diplomacy in the region."

According to his Web site, "when introduced at the AIPAC conference in 1999, Gephardt was praised as 'a trusted friend and ally of the pro-Israel community.'" Gephardt also was "intimately involved in the negotiations and passage of legislation to create U.S.-Israel economic cooperation through the United States-Israel Free Trade Act," and has "traveled to Israel several times to demonstrate solidarity with its people, consult directly with its leaders, and witness their determined struggle against terrorism."

John Kerry, in a January 2003 speech at Georgetown University, stated that "Israel's security will be best assured over the long term if real and lasting peace can be brought to the Middle East...the majority of the Israeli people understand and expect that one day there will be a Palestinian state. Their frustration is that they do not see a committed partner in peace on the Palestinian side. Palestinians must stop the violence--this is the fundamental building block of the peace process."

Kerry also declared that "Israel is our ally...and we know that Israel as a partner is fundamental to our security... America has always been committed to Israel's independence and survival--we will never waver." Kerry told USA Today in April 2002 that if the U.S. "has a right to respond in Afghanistan to suicide bombers in New York City, and we do, then Israel has a right to respond to suicide bombers in the West Bank."

Dennis Kucinich responded to House Resolution 392 "expressing solidarity with Israel" with a forthright floor statement in the House of Representatives: "I declare my support for the State of Israel and for the security of the Israeli people. I also declare my support for a Palestinian state and for the security of the Palestinian people...This resolution equates Israel's dilemma, which is the outcome of the Palestinians' struggle for self-determination, with the United States' campaign against the criminal organization al-Qaeda. The same humanity that requires us to acknowledge with profound concerns the pain and suffering of the people of Israel requires a similar expression for the pain and suffering of the Palestinians. When our brothers and sisters are fighting to the death, instead of declaring solidarity with one against the other, should we not declare solidarity with both for peace, so that both may live in security and freedom?...

"If we seek to require the Palestinians, who do not have their own state, to adhere to a higher standard of conduct, should we not also ask Israel, with over a half-century experience with statehood, to adhere to the basic standard of conduct, including meeting the requirements of international law?"

In response to AAI's Questionnaire, Kucinich states, "We must use our considerable influence with Israel to ask Israel to stop building walls, ask Israel to tear down the walls, ask Israel to not participate in the building of any new settlements, because we have to recognize that in order to achieve peace we must stop anything that smacks of isolation, or of creating conditions which will make it that much more difficult to achieve a peaceful agreement."

Joseph Lieberman told AAI Conference attendees: "We cannot force the parties to settle their differences or dictate the terms of a final agreement, but at our best we have an unrivaled opportunity to help move both sides forward with a steady hand, to help separate the aspirations of the Palestinian people from the terrorism that takes innocent lives, and poisons the legitimate cause of Palestinian statehood."

Lieberman's Web site states that "America and Israel share a unique bond built on our shared values, shared commitment to freedom and democracy, and shared interests in defeating terrorism and promoting security and stability in the region," and that supporting Israel "is integral to U.S. national security interests."

Lieberman says that "for more than a decade" he has led efforts to pressure the Palestinians "to stop terrorism, to recognize the right of a Jewish state of Israel to exist in security, and to build a democratic Palestinian state." Lieberman has also "consistently supported increased foreign aid to our ally, including Israel's recent request for $12 billion in new aid, and opposed efforts to cut this wise investment in security."

Rev. Al Sharpton, in an April 2002 interview with finalcall.com, stated that the "solutions [to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict] have to take on a balanced approach. The United States and others cannot go in without dealing with the balanced approach. I must say, Secretary [of State Colin] Powell has begun talking more balanced of late, but clearly that was not the case before. You cannot ignore that even people in Israel are saying you have to deal with the right of Palestinians to a state. When I was in Israel, Foreign Minister Shimon Peres was one of those who encouraged me to talk to Arafat, that he considered Arafat someone he could talk to. Arafat called Peres when I met with him, his partner in peace. They both won a Nobel Peace Prize together. I think there are those, particularly in this country, that are inciting a lot more of a situation that is detrimental than inspiring a level playing field that could lead to a peaceful resolution to this."

(These quotations and more are available on AAI's Web site.)

Delinda C. Hanley is news editor of the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs.