by Susan Rosenbluth,
Editor, Jewish Voice and Opinion

September 2008

Democratic vice-presidential candidate, Sen. Joseph Biden (D-DE), has a pro-Israel reputation and, in a recent interview with Shalom television, even identified himself as "a Zionist," but it is open to question what the late Menachem Begin would have to say about that designation for the Delaware senator.

According to reports in the Jerusalem Post by Moshe Zak and another in Time magazine, Messrs Biden and Begin had a serious confrontation in the summer of 1982 in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on the issue of Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza.

According to Mr. Zak, a former editor of Ma’ariv who followed Mr. Begin’s career closely, during the committee meeting, which took place at the height of Israel’s first incursion into Lebanon, Mr. Biden attacked the Jewish settlements and threatened that if Israel did not immediately shut down the Jewish communities in the territories, the US would cut economic aid to Israel.

According to Mr. Zak, Mr. Biden raised his voice to Mr. Begin and angrily banged twice on the table with his fists in an attempt either to intimidate the Israeli Prime Minister or to convince him of the seriousness of the situation and its ramifications.

Mr. Zak made his comments in a piece entitled "Master Negotiator Menachem Begin," which was written in March 1992 as a tribute to Mr. Begin, who had just died. In that piece, Mr. Zak discussed the incident with Mr. Biden, which had occurred some ten years earlier.

The piece in Time magazine detailing the confrontation between Messrs Biden and Begin was published in July 1982.

Some pundits at the time wondered if Mr. Biden was emboldened by the American left-wing media’s campaign against the settlements and Mr. Begin himself, including the informational line emphasizing that "Begin rhymes with Fagin," the negative Jewish character in Charles Dickens’s Oliver Twist.

Mr. Biden may also have felt on safe ground because he was, in effect, echoing the position that had already been adopted by the former Democratic President, Jimmy Carter.

A few years earlier, when Mr. Carter tried to force Israel to abandon the settlements, Mr. Begin’s response was to allude to one of the larger settlements in the territories. "There will be many more Alonei Morehs," Mr. Begin told Mr. Carter.

Continuing, Mr. Begin said, "Why is it permitted for a Jew to settle and live in Bethel or Shilo in American towns named after places in Judea and Samaria, but forbidden to build his home in the original Shilo or Beth El?"

According to Mr. Zak, Mr. Begin informed Mr. Carter: "I will not lend my hand to discrimination against Jews in the Land of Israel."

In 1982, when the confrontation between Messrs Biden and Begin took place, Ronald Reagan was already in the White House. According to the Time magazine article, several members of the Reagan administration, especially then-Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger, disapproved of Israel’s actions in Lebanon and wanted an end to Jewish settlements in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza. According to Time, Mr. Weinberger and some top White House officials who agreed with him, tried to convince Mr. Reagan to "get tough" with Mr. Begin.

But one powerful member of the Reagan administration took Israel’s side. According to Time, then-Secretary of State Alexander Haig, who had appreciated the Israelis’ ability to destroy the Osirak nuclear reactor in Iraq one year earlier, argued vehemently against threatening Mr. Begin with sanctions.

According to Time, Mr. Reagan accepted Mr. Haig’s position, and the White House made no public criticism of Israel’s actions in Lebanon or in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza.

According to Time, the "acerbic reaction" against Mr. Begin came when he paid a courtesy visit to Congress.

According to Time, Mr. Biden "jabbed his finger at Begin and warned that US support for Israel was eroding."

According to Mr. Zak, Mr. Begin informed the irate Mr. Biden that the desk he had banged on was "designed for writing, not for fists."

"Don’t threaten us with slashing aid," Mr. Begin told Mr. Biden. "Do you think that because the US lends us money it is entitled to impose on us what we must do? We are grateful for the assistance we have received, but we are not to be threatened. I am a proud Jew. Three thousand years of culture are behind me, and you will not frighten me with threats. Take note: We do not want a single soldier of yours to die for us."

According to Mr. Zak, after the confrontation, the late Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan praised Mr. Begin for his cutting reply to Mr. Biden. Mr. Zak said Mr. Begin thanked Mr. Moynihan and, thus, "defined his stand against threats."

According to Time, the confrontation with Mr. Biden galvanized Mr. Begin, who, from that point on, "would not budge on anything."

Last month on the Internet, where Mr. Biden’s relationship with Israel was heavily scrutinized, it was reported that, while Mr. Biden has been to Israel several times and has consistently voted for US aid to the Jewish state, he often refused to lend his moral support to Israel, even when all he had to do was sign a bipartisan letter.

Just last June, he failed to join 77 of his Senate colleagues, Democrats and Republicans, who signed a letter co-sponsored by Sens Mary L. Landrieu (D-La) and Susan Collins (R-ME) supporting Israel’s "quest for peace."

In December 2005, he did not join 73 of his colleagues on a letter urging President George Bush to press Palestinian leaders to bar terrorist groups from participating in Palestinian legislative elections, and, in March 2004, he did not join 79 of his colleagues in signing a letter, co-sponsored by Sens Charles Schumer (D-NY), Orrin Hatch (R-UT), Hillary Clinton (D-NY) and Gordon Smith (R-OR), urging then-UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan to reverse the UN’s support for the International Court of Justice hearings on Israel’s security fence,

In November 2001, Mr. Biden did not join 89 of his colleagues on a letter urging Mr. Bush not to meet with the late PA leader Yasir Arafat until Palestinian violence stopped.

In March 1998, he did not join 82 of his colleagues on a pro-Israel letter that urged then-President Bill Clinton not to pressure Israel, and in May 1993, he refused to join 73 of his colleagues on a letter urging Mr. Clinton to pressure Syria to allow Syrian Jews to leave that country.

In general, Mr. Biden has demanded that Israel transfer the Golan Heights back to Syria, and he has harshly criticized the Bush Administration for not supporting negotiations between Jerusalem and Damascus.

Mr. Biden has downplayed or completely ignored the significance of Syria’s strategic alliance with Iran and Damascus’s sponsorship of terrorists in Iraq, Lebanon, and the Palestinian Authority.

"Biden has claimed repeatedly and without a shred of evidence that the Syrians really want to put all that behind them," said Caroline Glick, writing in the Jerusalem Post.

Mr. Biden’s critics say that his behavior towards Mr. Begin and his consistent opposition to a Jewish presence in Judea and Samaria are simply further indications of his left-wing proclivities. According to National Journal, a weekly political magazine aimed especially at Washington insiders, the Democratic candidate for President, Sen. Barack Obama, based on his voting record, is the single most liberal member of the Senate. The magazine ranked Mr. Biden as the third most liberal senator.

Some say this explains his voting record on the issue of the Iranians’ pursuit of nuclear power. Mr. Biden’s ties to pro-Tehran lobbying groups are no secret.

While Iranian officials claim the nuclear plants they plan to complete will be for civilian energy, it is almost universally accepted in the West that Iran is engaged in a secret atomic weapons program.

Nevertheless, according to The New Republic, one month after the September 11, 2001 attacks, in a meeting with staffers on his Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Mr. Biden suggested that Washington do something to show the Arab world that "the US was not bent on its destruction."

"Seems to me this would be a good time to send, no strings attached, a check for $200 million to Iran," he said, according to the report.

His staffers were not impressed. One said he thought the Iranians would simply send it back, while another suggested it would look like "a publicity stunt."

A third reminded Mr. Biden that an Iranian delegation was in Moscow to discuss a $300 million arms deal with Russian President Vladimir Putin that the US had already strongly condemned.

There is no indication in the report that anyone corrected Mr. Biden’s error in referring to Iran as part of the Arab world.

While the idea to send money to Iran was ultimately discarded, the pro-Israel IRIS blog, commenting on this story last month because Mr. Biden had just been selected as Mr. Obama’s running mate, noted that "far more serious than the bizarre ‘brainstorming’ idea is the paradigm it reveals: the universally held notion among Democrats that the proper response to the global jihad is gift offerings to Muslim countries to demonstrate goodwill."

"This is the definition of dhimmi behavior," said the blog, referring to non-Muslim second-class citizens in Muslim countries.

Kenneth Timmerman, a conservative journalist and political analyst who serves as executive director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran, believes the desire to send money to Tehran fits Mr. Biden’s record of support for the current Iranian regime. Mr. Timmerman noted that Messrs Obama and Biden "may have sparred during the primaries, but on one issue they are firmly united: the need to forge closer ties to the current government in Iran.

Mr. Obama has maintained that, as President, he would openly meet with Iranian leaders without any preconditions.

In contrast, Mr. Obama’s Republican opponent, Sen. John McCain, has called for an end to investments and an international divestment campaign from Iran and all countries doing business with Tehran. Mr. McCain has publicly announced that, as President, he would not allow "another Jewish Holocaust," which is what Iran has promised the Jewish state.

According to Israel’s Army radio, Mr. Biden, as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, told Israeli officials three years ago that, sooner or later, they would have to reconcile themselves to the reality of a nuclear-armed Iran.

According to the report, Mr. Biden reaffirmed to the Israelis his rejection of military action against Iran, but also admitted that diplomatic efforts to halt Tehran’s nuclear program had little chance of success. He told the Israelis that he had resigned himself to the idea of a nuclear-armed Iran, and that they would have to accept it as well.

Last month, when Mr. Obama selected Mr. Biden as his running mate, Israeli security officers expressed concern over the Delaware Democrat’s remarks, seeing them as further evidence that if Messrs. Obama and Biden win in November, Iran’s acquisition of nuclear weapons will be a foregone conclusion.

Israeli experts have warned that only the threat of force stands a chance of convincing the mullahs and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to relinquish their nuclear ambitions.

Asked about the Israeli report, Mr. Biden’s press secretary denied it, calling it "a lie peddled by partisan opponents of Senators Obama and Biden, and we will not tolerate anyone questioning Sen. Biden’s 35-year record of standing up for the security of Israel."

Nevertheless, the Israeli report seemed consistent with many of Mr. Biden’s statements and activities on behalf of Iran.

Mr. Timmerman said that despite Mr. Biden’s condemnation of human-rights abuses of the Iranian regime, his voting record on issues relating to the Islamic Republic has been problematic, raising doubts as to the level of concern Mr. Biden actually shares with Israel on the specter of a nuclear-armed Iran..

Suzanne Kurtz, a spokeswoman for the Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC) agreed. "Like Obama, Biden fundamentally misunderstands the threat posed by an Iran determined to obtain nuclear weapons," she said, pointing out that Mr. Biden "has voted against significant legislation that would pressure Iran to stop pursuing nuclear weapons."

For example, as early as 1998, Mr. Biden was one of only four senators to vote against the Iran Missile Proliferation Sanctions Act, a bill designed to punish foreign companies or other entities that send Iran sensitive missile technology or expertise.

In Nov 2007, he was one of only 16 senators to oppose the bipartisan Kyle-Lieberman Amendment that labeled the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization and placed it on the State Department’s list of such groups. The bill was prompted by the Revolutionary Guard’s involvement in murdering US troops in Iraq.

Many Democratic senators, including Mrs. Clinton (NY), Harry Reid (NV), Richard Durbin (IL), and Carl Levin (Mich), voted for the Amendment, that was proposed by Sens Jon Kyle (R-AZ) and Joseph Lieberman (I-CT). Neither Mr. Biden nor Mr. Obama supported the measure.

Mr. Biden’s official rationale for opposing the bill, which he said could allow the Bush administration to declare war on Iran, was: "I don’t trust this administration."

Mr. Obama, who was not present in the Senate when the vote was taken on Kyle-Lieberman, nevertheless called the bill "excessively provocative."

Trying for damage control at last month’s Democratic National Convention, some Jewish Democrats tried to maintain that the Kyle-Lieberman amendment was not "serious" and that Messrs Obama and Biden have a "better plan" to secure Israel from attack."

Rep Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) told a group of Jews from Colorado last month that Mr. Obama planned to sponsor legislation that would facilitate sanctions against Iran until it proves it is not developing nuclear weapons.

"This is not some fluffy sense-of-Congress resolution," she said, referring to the Kyl-Lieberman amendment, which was non-binding. "This is a resolution with real teeth."

She told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency that Mr. Obama "backs up his words with action."

"Non-binding resolutions are great, but they don’t empower," she said.

Mr. Obama’s sanctions-enabling act is still stuck in the Senate.

Rather than sanctioning Iran, Mr. Biden and generally anti-Israel Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE) have argued that the US should offer Tehran a greater role in Iraq’s domestic affairs.

"I believe than an improved relationship with Iran is in the naked self-interest of the US," Mr. Biden said at a March 2002 conference in Washington, DC, sponsored by the American-Iranian Council (AIC).

In 2005, he told the Boston Globe that the US should address Iran’s "emotional needs" and negotiate a "nonaggression pack" with the regime in Tehran.

Boston Globe columnist H.D.S. Greenway wrote that Mr. Biden argued "that even if Iran were a full democracy, like India, it would want nuclear capability."

At the same AIC meeting that Mr. Biden addressed, Zalmay Khalilzad, now the Bush Administration’s permanent ambassador to the UN, made it clear the President had no intention of following the senator from Delaware’s advice.

"We had hoped that after the 11 September attacks, the Iranian regime would end its support for terrorists. But Iran did not stop its support for terror. Indeed the hard-line elements of the Iranian regime facilitated the movement of the Al-Qaeda terrorists escaping from Afghanistan and sheltered them in Iran," said Mr. Khalilzad.

According to Mr. Timmerman, the AIC has lobbied consistently for the US to lift trade sanctions against Iran.

Two years later, in June 2004, Mr. Biden refused to lend his name to the 66 other Republican and Democratic Senators and Congressmen who urged Mr. Bush to highlight Iran’s nuclear program at the G-8 Summit.

Although, to date, no one from Iran has ever opted to accept his invitation, Mr. Biden has offered to sponsor a meeting of Iranian and American parliamentarians in Washington, or anywhere else, if ever an Iranian experienced problems traveling to the US.

From some of his statements, Mr. Biden has appeared more concerned about a US pre-emptive attack against Iran than he is about terrorism or a nuclear strike emanating from the Islamic Republic. He has threatened Mr. Bush with impeachment proceedings if the administration moves against Iran militarily, making it clear that, "even if it is the end of his final term, action will be taken against Bush to ensure his legacy will be marred for all time."

"Making the destruction of Bush’s presidency a priority over national security makes Joe Biden Tehran’s favorite senator," said Michael Rubin, a resident scholar in foreign and defense policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute.

Kaveh Mohseni, a spokesman for the pro-Western Student Movement Coordination Committee for Democracy in Iran, agreed, calling Mr. Biden "a great friend of the mullahs."

According to Mr. Mohseni, Mr. Biden’s election campaigns "have, in part, been financed by Islamic charities of the Iranian regime based in California and by the Silicon Iran network." He explained that the network consists of a loosely-knit group of wealthy Iranian-American businessmen who seek to end the US trade embargo on Iran.

Mr. Timmerman pointed out that Mr. Biden has viewed wealthy Iranian-Americans with known sympathies for the Tehran regime as a source of contributions to his election campaigns.

According to Mr. Timmerman, Mr. Biden’s statements and his decision to address the AIC and other pro-Tehran groups have angered many Iranian-Americans who oppose the dictatorial, terror-supporting regime in their home country.

"Biden has been too cozy with the supporters of the Iranian regime, which is anti-American, anti-Iranian, and has a horrendous human rights record," Sardar Haddad, an Iranian pro-democracy activist based in Texas, told Mr. Timmerman.

At least once, in Feb 2002, Iranian-American pro-democracy activists discovered that Mr. Biden was scheduled to address a fundraiser on his behalf by the Iranian Muslim Association of North America (IMAN), a pro-Iranian California-based charity.

According to some pro-democracy activists, hundreds of thousands of dollars raised by IMAN, purportedly for disaster relief in Iran, never was sent to victims.

Concerned about the legitimacy Mr. Biden’s appearance would lend to IMAN, several pro-Western activists allegedly phoned Mr. Biden’s Senate office to warn him about the charity’s pro-Tehran sympathies.

According to Mr. Timmerman, Mr. Biden "swept aside their concerns" and attended the event, which netted him an estimated $30,000 for his US Senate re-election campaign.

The fundraiser was held in the home of Dr. Sadegh Namazi-Khah, a dentist who founded IMAN and serves as its president. According to Dr. Namazi-Khah, the idea of holding the fundraiser came from Mr. Biden, who apparently learned about the group after attending the AIC conference. Dr. Namazi-Khah is an AIC board member.

"Several people who attended the fundraiser said that Biden delivered a sweeping condemnation of President Bush’s State of the Union speech which had identified the Iranian regime as part of the ‘axis of evil,’" said Mr. Timmerman.

After the event, Dr. Namazi-Khah told Mr. Timmerman that Mr. Biden "really impressed us by his grasp of world affairs."

"Biden also impressed many of those present at the fundraiser with his friendly attitude toward Iran," said Mr. Timmerman.

Housang Dadgostar, a prominent attorney who attended the event and wrote Mr. Biden’s campaign a check for $1,000, told Mr. Timmerman that Mr. Biden had insisted that "Iran always wanted to be an ally of the United States and to have good relations with the US."

Another attendee of the event, Mohsen Movaghar, a Los Angeles businessman who also donated $1,000 to Mr. Biden, told Mr. Timmerman, "As Iranian-Americans, we don’t want anything to happen to the Iranian government or to the Iranian people as a result of this war on terrorism."

Like Dr. Namazi-Khah, Mr. Movaghar is a member of the boards of IMAN and AIC.

One of their colleagues, Japeh Youssefi, traveled from Scottsdale, AZ, with his wife to attend the fundraiser in California. According to the AIC, Mr. Youssefi "has earned the reputation of being a vocal supporter of Iran-US rapprochement and détente" and is the founder of FAIRPAC, a political advocacy council whose initials are an acronym, for the Foundation for American-Iranian Rapprochement.

Between them, Mr. and Mrs. Youssefi gave Mr. Biden $4,000 at the fundraiser.

According to Mr. Timmerman, another key contributor to Mr. Biden’s campaign was Hassan Nemazee, a New York money-manager who chaired Mrs. Clinton’s finance committee, personally raising more than $500,000 for her campaign.

Mr. Timmerman said that Mr. Nemazee has also served on the IAC board and, more recently, in conjunction with a group of "Silicon Valley billionaires" who have close ties to the Iranian regime, established the Iranian-American Political Action Committee (IAPAC).

The PAC’s website maintains that it "has no relationship with the Islamic Republic of Iran…and is not focused on US policy toward Iran, establishing ties with or legitimizing the government of Iran."

According to Mr. Timmerman, this "bald disclaimer" was posted on the website "because of the controversy Nemazee and IAPAC members have generated within the Iranian-American community."

According to Iranian-American political analyst Hassan Daioleslam, Mr. Biden’s activities, coupled with his vice-presidential candidacy, "highlight the need to really investigate the web of Iranian influence in the US."

"What you have here is a group of people who have been working together through different groups and organizations for the past ten years to promote the interests of the Iranian regime," he said.

He called it "deeply troubling" that the Democratic vice-presidential candidate has been raising funds "from people whose ties to the Iranian regime raise such serious questions."

Mr. Timmerman stressed that Mr. Biden’s ties to the pro-Iranian lobby "are not a haphazard affair, but a matter of conviction." Mr. Rubin said those ties have helped Iran come closer to developing weapons of mass destruction.

"Biden’s unyielding pursuit of ‘engagement’ with Iran for more than a decade has made it easier for Tehran to pursue its nuclear program," said Mr. Rubin.

While Israel has not commented directly on Mr. Biden’s activities, the danger posed to the Jewish state by a nuclear-armed Iran is recognized by the entire political spectrum in Jerusalem.

Mr. Ahmadinejad has made several threats concerning the destruction of Israel, and Tehran is recognized as the chief supporter of the terrorist groups—Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and Hezbollah—that are sworn to Israel’s annihilation.

According to a report in the London-based Arabic daily Al-Quds al-Arabi, Iran is currently mobilizing Islamic Jihad in Gaza in an effort to sabotage the ceasefire between Hamas and Israel.

At the end of August, the Israeli daily Ma’ariv reported that the Jewish state’s plans for a unilateral strike against Iran are already in "high gear."

The paper’s veteran political analyst Ben Caspit reported that a government committee is preparing a contingency plan to attack Iran if diplomatic efforts to derail Iran’s suspected nuclear weapons program fail.

"If the ayatollahs’ regime does not fall in the next year, if the Americans do not strike militarily, and if the international sanctions do not break the Iranian nuclear plan, Israel will have to act forcefully," Mr. Caspit reported.

In an eight-point document sent to both Messrs Obama and McCain, Dr. Ephraim Sneh, a former Israeli deputy defense minister who recently relinquished his Labor Party seat in order to form a new political party, said, "There is no government in Jerusalem that would ever reconcile itself to a nuclear Iran. When it is clear Iran is on the verge of acquiring nuclear weapons, an Israeli military strike to prevent this will be seriously considered."

Dr. Sneh proposed a total international embargo on spare parts for Iran’s oil industry and a complete international boycott of Iran’s banks. These measures, he said, "will topple, within a short time, the regime which is already pressured by a sloping economy and would be toppled by the Iranian people if they would have outside assistance.

He said the window of opportunity for these non-military options to stop Iran from going nuclear is 18-24 months.

Last month, Dr. Sneh visited Switzerland and Austria to lobby against those countries’ announced plans for massive long-term investments in Iranian gas and oil fields over the next decade.

"Talk of the Jewish Holocaust and Israel’s security doesn’t impress these guys," Dr. Sneh told Israeli journalists upon his return.

What did impress them was Dr. Sneh’s comment, made after he listened to the details of their plans. "What a shame," he told his hosts, "because Ido will set it all on fire."

His reference was to Israeli Maj-Gen Ido Nehushtan, the recently appointed commander of the Israeli Air Force. Gen Nehushtan would presumably orchestrate Israel’s attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities, if it became necessary.

"Investing in Iran in 2008 is like investing in Germany’s Krups plant in 1938. It’s a high-risk investment," Dr. Sneh told the Austrians.

According to Dr. Sneh, his Austrian hosts "turned pale."

In the US, a new bipartisan poll conducted by Public Opinion Strategies and commissioned by The Israel Project, an international non-profit organization devoted to "educating the press and the public about Israel while promoting security, freedom and peace," found the American public in heavy disagreement with the policies suggested by Messrs Obama and Biden regarding Iran.

The poll showed that 90 percent of American voters believe if Iran acquired nuclear weapons, it would share the technology and/or materials with terrorist organizations, and 87 percent of American voters believe a nuclear-armed Iran would pose a threat to the US. A full 96 percent of American voters said a nuclear-armed Iran would pose a threat to Israel.

Eighty percent of those polled said Iran would be likely to use nuclear weapons if it acquired them, and 55 percent of American voters said they would approve of the US and its allies conducted targeted strikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities. Sixty-three percent said that if economic and diplomatic measures did not stop Iran’s pursuit of nuclear technology, they would approve of Israel taking targeted military action against Iranian nuclear sites.

The survey found that American support for Israel vis-à-vis the Palestinians is at an all-time high with 69 percent supporting Israel and only six percent supporting the Palestinians. Americans said they feel close to Israel, ranking it only behind Canada and the UK.