J U N E 1 3 , 2 0 1 4 • W W W . A I P A C . O R G / N E R

1

On June 2, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas implemented an agreement to form a

unity government backed by Hamas. Abbas’ decision to align with a radical Islamist organization

committed to Israel’s destruction is an unfortunate setback to the peace process.

Hamas, a Gaza-based terror group backed by Iran, is fundamentally opposed to demands mandated

by the Quartet (U.S., EU, Russia and the U.N.) to recognize Israel, renounce violence and adhere to

past agreements. The group now intends to help shape the Palestinian Authority’s policies as part of

a unity government.

Analysts have expressed deep concerns over an unreformed Hamas having undue influence in a

Palestinian governing body, noting that the group appears to be modeling itself after Hezbollah’s

“bullets plus ballots” strategy, which entails integrating into the political system while maintaining the

group’s terrorist force.

“This Palestinian unity government is a government of technocrats backed by terrorists, and should

be treated as such,” warned Israeli Ambassador to the United States Ron Dermer. “With suits in the

front office and terrorists in the back office, it should not be business as usual.”

Hamas Prime Minster Ismail Haniyeh reiterated Hamas’ continued commitment to destroying Israel

through violence.

“We think that the path of negotiations and peace talks has reached a dead end, and that the

resistance which liberated Gaza and defended Gaza can liberate the West Bank and the rest of the

Palestinian lands,” he told Al-Aqsa TV, the Hamas-run television network.

Unified Senate Sends Strong Letter to Obama

On June 11, 88 senators sent a bipartisan letter to President Obama decrying the PA-Hamas

reconciliation. The communique, spearheaded by Sens. Ben Cardin (D-MD) and Susan Collins (R-

ME), urged Obama to “continue to impress on President Abbas the need for him to cease any

alliance with terrorist organizations such as Hamas and to return to the negotiating table with Israel.”

2

The senators wrote that they “are gravely concerned" by the formation of this new government, and

that President Abbas’ move to unite with terrorists “will jeopardize direct negotiations with Israel to

achieve a two-state solution.”

“By its actions and inactions,” the letter continues, “Hamas has demonstrated it is not a partner for

peace. Hamas has openly called for Israel’s destruction, and last month Hamas leaders again

repeated their refusal to meet recognized international demands.”

The letter also echoed congressional calls to conduct a thorough review of Palestinian aid. “These

troubling developments, including the role played by Hamas in the formation of the government, have

undermined congressional support for U.S. assistance to the Palestinians,” the senators wrote. “Any

assistance should only be provided when we have full confidence that this new government is in full

compliance with the restrictions contained in current law.”

House Members Write to Kerry

In addition, Reps. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) and Ted Deutch (D-FL), the chairman and ranking

member of the House Subcommittee on the Middle East and North Africa, penned a similar letter to

Secretary of State John Kerry. “United States law,” the letter states, “clearly dictates that no U.S.

funding will go to ‘any entity effectively controlled by Hamas, any power-sharing government of which

Hamas is a member, or that results from an agreement with Hamas and over which Hamas exercises

undue influence.’”

Ros-Lehtinen and Deutch requested to hear from administration officials directly regarding the

decision to work with the unity government.

“The United States has provided billions of dollars to assist the Palestinian Authority in building the

institutions necessary for a viable state, including a significant portion to enhance security and

prevent terrorism,” read a statement by Rep. Deutch. “That decision is consistent with Congress’

prohibition of any U.S. aid being delivered to terrorists. However, Hamas leaders have made it clear

that even as they are fully supportive of the interim Palestinian government, they refuse to abide by

the Quartet principles. I look forward to hearing from the administration on these critical issues as

soon as possible.”

3

Congressional Leaders Express Deep Concern

Congressional leadership on both sides of the aisle strongly condemned the unity government,

voicing significant qualms about Hamas’ role and calling for an immediate review of U.S. funding.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) called the move “a gigantic step backward.” “I stand with

Israel and condemn the Palestinians’ decision to form this new government,” he said.

“I will be joining Democrats and Republicans in efforts to suspend all aid to the Palestinian Authority

as long as they continue this unity government or until Hamas recognizes the state of Israel and

rejects terrorism,” added Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) the ranking member on the Senate

Appropriations Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations and Related Programs.

House leaders likewise denounced the Palestinian coalition government. In a statement, Majority

Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) noted, “President Abbas argues that the new government is composed of

ministers without political affiliation, but this new government appears dependent on Hamas, and

Hamas continues to support terrorism in its quest to destroy the state of Israel.”

Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer (D-MD) added his own reservations. “Until Hamas renounces violence,

recognizes the Jewish state of Israel, and accepts previous agreements between Israel and the

Palestinian Authority, it should not be permitted a role in governing,” he said.

Additionally, both leaders from the House Appropriations Subcommittee on State and Foreign

Operations, which oversees all funding to the PA, were forthcoming in affirming that all aid to the

Palestinian government would be thoroughly reviewed.

“Funding for the Palestinians is off the table until it is clear that the unity government is committed to

peace and security,” said Chairman Kay Granger (R-TX).

Ranking Member Nita Lowey (D-NY) added, “As long as Hamas rejects the Quartet principles and the

existence of the state of Israel, United States funding for this unity government is in jeopardy.”

4

On June 8, newly elected Egyptian President Abdel-Fattah al-Sisi was sworn into office, vowing to

“correct the mistakes of the past” and uphold his country’s peace treaty with Israel.

In the first conversation between Israeli and Egyptian leaders since the ousting of President Hosni

Mubarak in 2011, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called Sisi to congratulate him on the

victory. Sisi told Netanyahu and President Shimon Peres that the Egypt-Israel peace accord “is an

important commitment that can be relied and built upon in order to serve both countries’ interests.”

As the new Egyptian head of state embarks on the earliest stages of his presidency, Sisi already

benefits from substantial popular support, the backing of Egypt’s key power centers, and a country

weary of the political rollercoaster of the past three years of revolution.

His sole campaign promise was to eradicate his primary rival for power, the Muslim Brotherhood

(MB), from Egyptian society and politics. But the challenges facing Egypt are daunting, and after

securing 96.7 percent of the vote in the election, it seems clear that Sisi becoming president of Egypt

was merely the easy part.

The former military general has come a long way since deposing Brotherhood-backed President

Mohammad Morsi in July 2013.

The once-triumphant Brotherhood is now a gutted, decapitated organization, with hundreds of its

supporters killed and thousands more in jail. Many hundreds more face death sentences.

Sisi’s biggest challenges now will be to address the economy and to prevent Egyptian Salafi jihadists

from mounting a full-fledged insurgency.

Over the past year, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the UAE have earmarked $20 billion for Egypt in an

attempt to buttress the failing economy. If the Gulf coffers dry up, Cairo will likely have to seek

assistance from the IMF, the U.S. and the EU, and Sisi is not yet discussing the difficult austerity

measures that securing such aid will entail.

However, Egypt’s fourth head of state since the Tahrir Revolution of January 2011 does have some

advantages that will likely help him stay in power longer than his immediate predecessors.

5

The now-jailed, former President Mohammad Morsi so mismanaged Egypt that most citizens are

content, for the time being, to be ruled by the more familiar figure of an ex-general.

Sisi has the support of Egypt’s key state institutions—the military, the Interior Ministry and the

Judiciary. The new constitution passed in January strengthens these bases of power, which will likely

not risk jeopardizing a new order that they have worked so hard to construct.

Even with these advantages, however, President Sisi brings little to the table in the way of real

governmental experience. He boasts of no great insights on healing the economy, and has failed to

offer any defining vision for Egypt’s future.

Sisi’s popularity is populist, rooted in his only clear achievement to date: saving Egypt from

“enslavement” by the Muslim Brotherhood.

Egypt’s public has proven fickle, however. The same masses that ousted Hosni Mubarak and

rejected military rule by electing the Brotherhood only a year later, marched in even greater numbers

to endorse a military overthrow of those same elected leaders.

Though Sisi has maintained popular support despite his violent crackdown on Brotherhood

supporters that left hundreds dead, many tests remain for Egypt’s newest president.

A Rising Security Challenge

Jihadists in the Sinai Peninsula have mobilized over the past eighteen months into a well-organized,

al-Qaeda-inspired movement, with the leading group, Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis (AMB—Guardians of the

Holy Temple, also known as Ansar Jerusalem), committing hundreds of terrorist attacks across

Egypt.

The military’s response has been a heavy-handed, and often indiscriminate, scorched-earth policy of

retaliation.

Such brutality, coupled with Israel’s completion of the southern border fence and its superior

defenses, has turned jihadist’s attention away from the Jewish state and toward Cairo and the Nile

Valley.

6

In 2014 alone, ABM has carried out almost a dozen suicide car bombings against security

installations and personnel in Cairo, the Nile Delta, and along the Suez Canal. The violent group even

appears to have penetrated Egyptian military and security forces, enabling it to assassinate the

deputy interior minister, a brigadier general, and other senior officials.

The violence spreading across Egypt could metastasize into a major urban insurgency that would

threaten Sisi’s ability to promote stability and repair the economy. Moreover, Cairo’s inept counter-

insurgency strategy bodes ill for future stability.

The army has sealed off the Sinai, shelling whole villages suspected of harboring terrorists and

rendering hundreds homeless, but simultaneously leaving known jihadist strongholds unaddressed.

Tactics such as rocketing suspected hideouts from Apache helicopters or pummeling them with

artillery are alienating the broader population, creating sympathy for the insurgents, and contributing

to tensions with Washington regarding ongoing aid (which resulted in a temporary halt to U.S. funding

last October).

Economic Headache

Perhaps even more dangerous for long-term stability is Egypt’s perilous economy. The country’s

mere 2 percent annual growth since 2011 has barely topped the 1.7 percent yearly population

increase. Furthermore, declining dollar receipts from tourism and foreign investment have halved

Egypt’s foreign currency reserves to $17 billion, enough for only about four months of necessary

imports.

Moreover, a quarter of the population lives under the poverty line of $2 per day, and unemployment is

increasing. Enormous food, fuel, health and education subsidies eat up 23 percent of the national

budget.

Sisi has made much of publicly thanking Saudi Arabia for its ongoing support. The new president

clearly hopes such largesse will continue, but this is in no way guaranteed. Importantly, such aid has

in the past allowed the government to merely avoid tough choices, and has done little to alleviate the

struggle of ordinary Egyptians.

7

Can Jerusalem and Washington Help?

The Egyptian military currently works closely with its Israeli counterparts. In return, Israel permits the

presence of Egyptian military units in Sinai that go well beyond the limits set by the Egyptian-Israeli

peace treaty.

In this context, Cairo correctly sees Hamas as the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brothers; Egypt’s

cutting off of the illicit tunnel traffic into Gaza has made it more difficult for Islamist groups there to

import rocket components.

The Israeli military is reportedly content with its relationship with its Egyptian counterparts, but

because of the domestic Egyptian political sensitivity to all interactions with Israel, Jerusalem can do

little more than maintain good cooperation along the border and indirectly help Egypt police the Sinai.

As such, Washington’s ability to influence events in Egypt stems primarily from $1.3 billion in annual

military assistance and $200 million in economic and political support, as well as Cairo’s willingness

to openly work with the United States. Sisi has publicly asked for U.S. aid and equipment to battle

terrorism, while Washington is well-positioned to help Cairo develop a more effective

counterinsurgency strategy.

With the election of Sisi to president, Egypt will next move to parliamentary elections. The Muslim

Brotherhood will not be able to run as a unified political party, but may reemerge as a shadow political

force.

It remains to be seen if Egypt’s new president can achieve a level of political stability that provides an

opportunity to create a functioning government without resorting to repression and violence.

8

The recent European Parliament elections have elicited tremendous concern across Europe and the

international community, as numerous extremist political parties achieved victory and have become

increasingly outspoken. Of the 751 parliamentary seats, 24 were gained by the right wing Front

National of France and 3 were won by the violent and anti-Semitic Greek Golden Dawn Party, while 3

others were taken by the anti-Semitic Hungarian Jobbik Party and 1 was won by a neo-Nazi party

from Germany.

These alarming results, coupled with increasing anti-Semitism and last month’s deadly attack that

killed three people at the Jewish Museum in Brussels, have led many to caution the direction Europe

is taking.

To address these concerns and gauge the status of Europe’s relationship with the United States and

Israel, Near East Report interviewed Elinadav Heymann, executive director of the European Friends

of Israel (EFI).

Born and raised in Israel, Heymann has served as a staffer in the Israeli Knesset for three different

parties, as well as in the European Parliament in Brussels as a policy advisor on foreign affairs.

Heymann’s organization aims to improve the overall relationship between the European Union and

Israel.

NEAR EAST REPORT: Your group, the Brussels-based European Friends of Israel, has often

been cited as an organization that does AIPAC-like advocacy in Europe. You have focused on

building political relationships in the European Parliament, and increasingly in individual

member states. As you step back for a moment, what are some of the bigger trends facing

your organization and the pro-Israel movement in Europe today?

ELINADAV HEYMANN: On a more macro scale we face several trends that could be a cause of

concern in the future.

First, the European Union is seemingly linking its punitive and incentive-based policies towards Israel

9

to the success or failure of the Middle East peace process. As a result, Israel has often faced the

possibility of punitive measures based on the European understanding of the peace negotiations, and

the reasons for their success or failure.

Linked to this, the European Parliament, like any parliament, has a tendency to swing back and forth

in its policies, ideology and understanding of the Middle East. We have witnessed a swing toward a

willingness to accept a Palestinian narrative above an Israeli one, and that has created a challenge—

but one that we expect to overcome in the future.

Second, we are seeing a growing movement to try to focus the whole Israeli-Palestinian conflict on

the one issue of settlements, while ignoring the wider context and challenges operating in the region.

This move has not been wholly successful, and has presented an opportunity for European Friends of

Israel (EFI) to provide timely and relevant briefings and information on the Middle East.

NER: The European Parliament held elections last month, which as you recently suggested in

a Times of Israel op-ed, “sent alarm bells ringing across the EU.” In your mind, what

contributed to the rising number of voters casting their ballots for very left- and-right-wing

candidates, including some from fascist and neo-Nazi backgrounds?

EH: The success of the extreme right wing in Europe can be attributed to widespread economic

dissatisfaction and disenfranchisement, which have led to high unemployment rates and a growing

popular opinion that European leadership has failed the people. These conditions have created rife

grounds for far-right activism and recruitment.

This has been seen in Greece, where the economic depression gave way to the rise of the Golden

Dawn [an extremist party], while in Hungary, Jobbik [a radical nationalist party] drew support by

stating that its minority communities are at fault for ruining the integrity and strength of the country.

Additionally, these difficulties have been compounded by a widely held view that the European

Parliament has failed to create strong incentives to support its unified governing structure.

This has been rightly viewed as a warning sign for many across Europe and in Israel, and we are all

well aware of the direct danger that these groups pose.

However, we are confident that such extreme groups will not manage to dictate this parliament. Our

10

team is optimistic that the far right will not successfully unify to form a collectively strong front, or act

in unison as they are portraying.

For example, the U.K. Independence Party, led by Nigel Farage, has already promised not to enter

into a coalition with the French National Front due to the latter’s historical extremism, anti-Semitism

and racism. This means that the 24 seats that UKIP and the National Front each won in last month’s

elections will remain split in strength.

Furthermore, the coalition that Marie Le Pen is forming under the banner of the ‘European Alliance for

Freedom’ has so far gained some 40 seats (with a potential for a few more) out of the possible 751,

making the group a force to watch, but by no means strong enough to influence legislation.

Finally, it is worth noting that the most extreme and violent of these groups, including Jobbik, Golden

Dawn and the Germany’s neo-Nazi Udo Voigt, constitute just 8 seats out of the 751. While this

number doesn’t eliminate the threat, it does diminish these groups’ ability to influence policy on a

transnational level.

NER: You were often quoted in Israeli media after the election suggesting that the results

“have acted as a warning sign, while also giving some reason for optimism.” Given your

concerns about Europe’s political trends, what elements make you optimistic?

EH: The reasons outlined above, and the disunity that we are seeing in the extreme right give us

reasons to remain optimistic. The fact that the violent and racially motivated parties such as Jobbik

and Golden Dawn will be isolated and weakened, along with the clear divisions between the French

National Front and U.K. Independent Party, gives us some hope that the far right is not as strong as

projected.

Second, we are optimistic because key friends of Israel who have worked hard to deepen and further

the relationship between the EU and Israel have been re-elected to their seats, and EFI has

developed strong working relationships with these decision makers. Moreover, several individuals

across the political spectrum who have been vocal in opposing Israel and the EU-Israel relationship

have lost their seats. This gives us a welcomed sense of balance and optimism.

Finally, we have seen some among the leadership of the European Union act positively toward the

11

EU-Israel relationship in such areas as security cooperation, transport and economic ties.

NER: European anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism have become increasingly prevalent in recent

years, highlighted by the recent murders at the Jewish Museum in Brussels. Do you believe

these trends will become even more pronounced in the coming months and years?

EH: The answer to this is complicated. What we witnessed in the Brussels shooting was shocking

and saddening.

We, alongside EU security experts, are concerned about the prospect of further attacks and growing

anti-Semitism from individuals who have travelled to and been radicalized in Syria during the conflict,

as Mehdi Nemmouche [the perpetrator of the Jewish Museum attack] proved was possible. We

continue to work to address the challenge of how to handle fighters returning from the civil war.

Importantly, the Brussels shooting is being viewed as a moment of European awakening to the

widespread threat that Islamist terror poses.

Following the attack, we are witnessing a substantive internal policy debate as to what concrete steps

should be taken next to prevent this and other threats to Europe.

I hope we are only witnessing a warning sign, and not a permanent trend or state of affairs.

NER: What can the United States and Israel do to combat growing hostility from Europe?

EH: I think we need to slightly refute the premise of the question. I don’t fully believe we are

witnessing a growing hostility from Europe. We are certainly witnessing the most hostile of groups

and individuals receiving the most coverage and being the most vocal. However, Europe speaks with

many voices—many of which have and will work hard to deepen the EU-Israel relationship.

There is certainly a need for the EU, U.S. and Israel to enter into a growing trilateral dialogue and

cooperation on many levels. We need to see closer security ties, shared trade, and diplomatic

exchanges between all three.

To this end, EFI was very pleased to play a role in the United States-Europe-Israel National Security

12

Forum, an initiative led by AIPAC that brings together senior political and policy officials from the

three regions. This tri-lateral summit is highly effective because of the unique security issues shared

between all three partners.

We need to make sure that groups seeking to hinder this alliance cannot succeed, and that we

continue working to ensure that the EU-U.S.-Israeli strategic alliance is stronger than ever.

NER: You have been very involved with AIPAC over the years. The European Friends of Israel

consistently hosts the largest delegation of international elected officials and VIPs to the

annual AIPAC Policy Conference. How has your organization’s relationship with AIPAC helped

your European pro-Israel advocacy work?

EH: We have been very fortunate to have worked so closely with AIPAC over the years, and have

gained a lot from this cooperation.

Practically, our relationship has been useful for the parliamentarians who work with us to understand

and see that they are not alone, and that they have friends and colleagues from across national and

political borders who share their support for Israel.

It has been great to be able to share best practices, strategies and information with AIPAC. In doing

so, we have improved our efficiency and understanding of the challenges and opportunities that we

face as a pro-Israel advocacy force in Europe.

House and Senate Hold Hearings on Iran Negotiations

The Senate Foreign Relations and House Foreign Affairs Committees both held hearings this week in

what will be a series of discussions on the ongoing nuclear talks with Iran.

During the Senate hearing on June 12, Chairman Robert Menendez (D-NJ) said that any deal should

include the dismantlement of thousands of centrifuges, the elimination of a majority of Iran's low-

13

enriched uranium, a closure of its heavy-water plutonium reactor in Arak, and a termination of Iran's

vast nuclear research and development program. Menendez added that a strict agreement with

constant inspections should last for more than twenty years, “at least as long as Iran has been lying

to the world about its program.”

At the House hearing on June 10, committee members and witnesses emphasized that any final

agreement must contain strong verification procedures to ensure Iranian compliance. “Given Iran's

record of clandestine activity and intransigence, clear consequences for violating transparency and

cooperation requirements must be spelled out, with zero tolerance for cheating,” said Committee

Chairman Ed Royce (R-CA).

John Lauder the former director of the Nonproliferation Center within the U.S. intelligence community

noted, “The monitoring provisions to be included in the agreement will be the main determinant of the

agreement's success and establish the essential foundation for all of the other provisions.”

Lawmaker Questions Administration on Palestinian Unity Government

Rep. Juan Vargas (D-CA) on June 10 asked an Obama administration official testifying before a

House panel to explain U.S. policy toward the newly formed Palestinian unity government backed by

Hamas.

Speaking at a hearing of the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and

Trade, Vargas called the new government “unfortunate,” and stressed that any Palestinian

government must “reject violence, recognize Israel and abide by the previous agreements with

Israel.”

“The State Department and the U.S. government,” responded Ambassador-at-Large and Coordinator

for Counterterrorism Tina Kaidanow, “have agreed for the time being to continue to deal with the

government that was put in place by President Abbas.”

She added, however, that American leaders “do not deal with Hamas. We have not met with

members of Hamas. And we will not provide any assistance to Hamas.”

14

Kaidanow will be traveling to Israel next week to formally consult with the Israeli government

regarding security concerns that have emerged since the formation of the unity government.

Obama Congratulates Rivlin on Election as Israel's President

The White House issued a statement on June 10 congratulating Reuven Rivlin on his election as the

next president of the State of Israel.

In the statement, President Obama praised Rivlin’s “long and dedicated record of public service.”

Obama also touted America’s “unique relationship [with Israel] based on shared democratic values,

our unshakeable commitment to Israel’s security, and our partnership in scientific research and

innovative technology.”

Rivlin became Israel’s 10th president after winning the votes of 63 out of 120 Knesset members in a

runoff election. The president-elect is a member of the Likud party and a former Speaker of the

Knesset, and has a long history in Israeli public life.

Rivlin will be sworn in on July 24 and will replace outgoing president Shimon Peres, who will receive

the Congressional Gold Medal in Washington later this month.

U.S. Reaches Settlement with Sanctions Violator

The Treasury Department announced on June 5 that a $21 million settlement has been reached with

Dutch company Fokker Services B.V. for violating sanctions on Iran and Sudan.

From 2005 to 2010, Fokker accrued a total of 1,153 violations by exporting U.S.-origin spare aircraft

parts to Iranian and Sudanese customers.

“By illegally exporting aircraft spare parts to designated countries, FSBV flagrantly violated U.S.

sanctions laws and this illicit activity will not be tolerated,” said Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets

Control Director Adam Szubin. “Treasury is committed to holding accountable anyone who

undermines those efforts and to deterring others from undertaking similar conduct.”

15

House Mandates Report on Syria’s Chemical Weapons

The House passed legislation that requires the director of national intelligence to submit a report to

Congress on Syria’s chemical weapons program.

The measure passed as part of the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 2014 and 2015,

which authorizes funding for clandestine and special operations activities around the world that

support U.S. national security.

In September 2013, Syria agreed to give up its chemical weapons after the threat of military force by

the United States.

According to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, Syria has now removed more

than 90 percent of its chemical weapons stockpile.

Lawmakers Commemorate Jerusalem Day on Capitol Hill

Members of Congress met with several Israeli Knesset members on May 29 to celebrate the annual

Jerusalem Day, which marks the 47th anniversary of Jerusalem’s reunification during the 1967 Six

Day War.

The event on Capitol Hill was jointly organized by the Congressional Israel Allies Caucus, which is

comprised of 35 House members, and the Israel Allies Foundation.

Speaker of the Knesset Yuli Edelstein attended the Hill event. “Our strong and bipartisan relationship

with the U.S. Congress,” he said, “is more important than ever during this time of increasing volatility

in the region.”

Edelstein continued, “The friendship of the American people, and their representatives, to the State of

Israel is engraved in our hearts, and we are honored that a delegation from Israel’s parliament is

being hosted on Capitol Hill by the Congressional Israel Allies Caucus on Jerusalem Day.”