AIPAC’s Policy on the Mideast

Michael Lerner’s April 12 Column Left mischaracterizes both the American Israel Public Affairs Committee policy and the position taken by more than 80% of the Senate. The letter 81 senators--including members of the Democratic leadership--sent to President Clinton urged him to “continue our critical role as facilitator” of direct negotiations between the parties and cautioned against public pressure on Israel, because pressure would be “counterproductive” to furthering peace.

Nor was the possibility of such pressure invented by the senators or by AIPAC. It was reported openly in the Washington Post and elsewhere that the administration was considering changing “from its traditional role as facilitator . . . to using public pressure against Israel.” The senators recognized that historically progress has been achieved only when direct negotiations between the parties take place and when the Palestinians know they cannot expect the U.S to “deliver” Israel.

Contrary to Lerner’s erroneous suggestions, AIPAC does not take a position on how final boundaries should be drawn. Because existential issues are at stake, Israel itself must negotiate those issues with the Palestinians. Further, Lerner’s claim that actions of AIPAC and Congress “make terrorism more likely” is preposterous and outrageous. On the contrary, it is terrorism that has imposed constraint on how much land can be turned over to total Palestinian control without undue risk because of the possibility that such land may become a launching pad for further terrorist activities. Lerner ignores the fact that based on the land area Israel has already turned over to the Palestinian Authority 98% of the Palestinians already live under P.A. civil administration.

MELVIN DOW

President, AIPAC

Washington