More on the IFPB Advocacy Institute in Washington DC
Will Youmans (google "Iron Sheik") also spoke at the Interfaith Peace Builders Advocacy Training held yesterday. Today most of those 200 folks are running around the halls of Congress using what they learned in support of a more balanced American approach to the Middle East.
Much of the conversation that day was about the mechanics and logic of lobbying Congress on issues related to Israel/Palestine. Youmans discussed the strange phenomenon of young just out of college kids becoming legislative assistants in charge of foreign policy for a given representative. These kids know far less than the citizens lobbying them in many cases. They are trained to search for talking points to deliver up the chain while making the constituents feel heard.
Politics being the "art of the possible" it makes no sense to deliver strong ideological statements or history lectures to a snot nosed kid who desperately wants to be employed somewhere else, where they might have shorter hours and higher pay. Productive conversation gets narrowed into 'asks' that are most often related to a a piece of official business - a resolution, pending appropriations bill, dear colleague letter, or committee business.
That being said, forming long term relationships with staffers and Congressfolks can help you move up the ladder in terms of importance. You and your organization might be asked for your opinion on issues, proactively. Your friend on the 'inside' can tell you others are saying, what issues are showing life, maybe even help you get a room someday for an event you host for staffers. It's all part of how Washington goes about its business.
The more than 200 people who met for a weekend of training in lobbying represent that part of the Palestine solidarity community that see Washington DC as the real battleground for influence. It's where AIPAC is still strong, but weaker under an Obama administration then it was under Bush. My sense is, that dealing with the real world of practical politics exerts a moderating influence on these very activists and the organizations they come from.
For example: Phyllis Bennis of the Institute of Policy Studies, and a a major figure in the world of 'realistic but radical' advocacy on Israel/Palestine, told a member of the audience what she thought of Israel's right to exist: Individuals have rights in a way that states don't. States just 'are' without fanfare or attention.
I agree. It makes sense to give Palestinians, as individuals and as a people, the right to self determination along with all the other rights that Jewish Israelis have. But it makes no sense argue that Israel itself is more or less legitimate than any other state, regardless of the circumstances of its founding and the ideology it was based on. It is no more or less legitimate than the future Palestinian state, or a future one state solution.
Those who strongly support Israel's existence might think - why can't Israel itself be viewed as a sacred value? But look at it from the other side: once states are normalized, all of them, and removed from the field of contention, we weaken the hate mongers still intent on delegitimizing some of them. States simply are; existence is not contested. A victory for those interested in a peaceful settlement, and a loss for the hard core, ideological haters of Israel.
COMMENTS (0)