Compiled by Donald H. Harrison
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Under intensive questioning by press corps members assigned to the U.S. State Department, spokeswoman Jen Psaki admitted on Wednesday, Feb. 18, that the United States has been withholding information from Israel about what is occurring in the P5+1 negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program.
Psaki reiterated a comment from the White House press secretary’s office that in the debate between Israel and the United States over sanctions against Iran, some information has been “cherry picked” by Israel for media consumption, giving an inaccurate impression of what has occurred. “I think it’s safe to say that not everything you’re hearing from the Israeli Government is an accurate reflection of the details of the talks.”
Following is a transcript:
QUESTION: Is it correct that the Administration is now withholding certain details of the negotiations with Iran from Israel out of concern that members of the Israeli Government have or will leak selective parts of that information in an effort to destroy the deal?
PSAKI: Well first let me say, but reiterate, that conversations continue with Israel on Iran nuclear negotiations. Under Secretary Sherman met with Israeli NSA Cohen and Minister for Intelligence Steinitz in Munich and will see NSA Cohen again this week, and Iran negotiations were obviously the main topic of discussion. Secretary Kerry, as all of you know, continues his conversations with Prime Minister Netanyahu about this issue. And as our NSC colleagues have noted, National Security Advisor Rice maintains regular contact with her counterpart.
So we are continuing frequent and routine contact. We continue to consult, as I mentioned, with our Israeli colleagues and we continue to get into specific issues in these consultations, but we have long been mindful not to negotiate in public and we take steps to ensure that classified negotiating details stay behind closed doors in these negotiations. That has long been the case.
QUESTION: Okay. So it is correct, then, that you – that classified negotiating details are not being shared with the Israelis?
PSAKI: I wouldn’t put that fine of a point on it. I think there are some details that obviously we have concern about being in public, to respect and protect the negotiations, and those are details that we take steps to ensure are not – don’t get into the public.
QUESTION: So is one of those steps not telling the Israelis about them?
PSAKI: Again, I think we share a great deal. Obviously, there are steps we take, including what we share and how we consult with our counterparts, including the Israelis.
QUESTION: I understand that you share a great deal, but you’re saying that you don’t share everything. Is that correct?
PSAKI: Correct.
QUESTION: Okay. So you are withholding some details.
PSAKI: Correct.
QUESTION: Okay. So can you say if this – is this a new thing? Has this been in place, this decision been around since the beginning?
PSAKI: We have long taken steps to ensure that these negotiations remain private.
QUESTION: And that would include – so it’s – we’re talking about not just the secret backchannel talks that were in Muscat and other places, but even after the Israelis were informed of the backchannel talks and then of the beginning of the new P5+ round —
PSAKI: Correct.
QUESTION: — since the very beginning you have been holding back some information from the Israelis about —
PSAKI: Well, I’m not going to put an exact date on it. Obviously, as time has progressed there are more details and more information, but it is not new.
QUESTION: Okay. Can you assure the Israelis that what is being withheld is not of critical interest to them and what they believe to be the existential threat that Iran poses to them?
PSAKI: We can assure the Israelis that their security interests, that the security of Israel remains a top priority of the United States, and we take every step in order to ensure that, including working on a deal to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.
QUESTION: Okay. Your colleague at the White House, when asked the same kind of questions that I’m asking right now, said that there was a – the Administration had a problem with people – he didn’t identify them – but cherry picking specific bits of information —
PSAKI: That’s correct.
QUESTION: — and releasing them. Can you say —
PSAKI: I think it’s safe to say that not everything you’re hearing from the Israeli Government is an accurate reflection of the details of the talks.
QUESTION: So you’re saying that the Israeli Government is lying about the talks. Is that correct? Or they’ve been misinformed because maybe you haven’t been telling them everything?
PSAKI: I think there’s a selective sharing of information, Matt.
QUESTION: Okay, but can you be more specific about what bits of information you believe have been cherry picked and selectively released to —
PSAKI: I’m not going to get into that level of detail. We obviously make decisions about how to protect the negotiations while also still balancing with how to be as cooperative and inclusive with our partners.
QUESTION: And last one: Is it correct to assume or presume that as the negotiations progressed and there became – and they got more detailed, more details were then being – are – were being withheld than say after the first meeting?
PSAKI: Well, as there are more details there’s more sensitive information.
QUESTION: So —
PSAKI: So I wouldn’t put it exactly like that, but obviously we work to protect sensitive information in the negotiations.
QUESTION: But so as the negotiations have progressed and gotten to the point where Israel – what Israel believes to be an existential threat to it is getting closer – a deal on – with a country that it believes to be an existential threat, they’re getting less information about what’s going on rather than —
PSAKI: I wouldn’t put it in those terms, Matt. We agree that Iran cannot acquire a nuclear weapon. We’re working hard on these negotiations. We’re not going to accept a bad deal. And we’re sharing information that we can share.
QUESTION: When did – can I follow up on that?
PSAKI: Mm-hmm.
QUESTION: When last did the Secretary speak to his Israeli counterpart or to Netanyahu?
PSAKI: He speaks with him pretty regularly. I’m fairly certain he spoke with him last week. He did, last Wednesday.
QUESTION: And when – has he ever raised with Netanyahu exactly this issue of concern, of cherry picking?
PSAKI: I think they regularly discuss the Iran negotiations and our efforts, but I’m not going to get into more specifics of their conversations.
QUESTION: During the last conversation was this raised?
PSAKI: I’m not going to get into more details of their conversations.
Go ahead.
QUESTION: Jen, can I check – I was just looking through, because I was trying to be organized, the —
PSAKI: I would just say one more thing. It’s not a new – this isn’t a new concern. It’s not a new issue, so I would just reiterate that.
Go ahead.
QUESTION: I was looking through the list of confirmed speakers at the AIPAC conference, which is actually next weekend —
PSAKI: Yes.
QUESTION: — not this weekend coming but the one after.
PSAKI: Correct. Early March, yes.
QUESTION: March, the first – yeah. And I – so far I didn’t see any indication that the Secretary may be addressing the conference. Is there any plan to? I know in the past he has, or a Secretary has.
PSAKI: He has in the past. I expect we certainly will have representation. I don’t think we’re at a point of announcing who that will be yet.
QUESTION: If the Secretary doesn’t actually take part, is this because of the circumstances surrounding Prime Minister Netanyahu’s visit to the United States, which, of course, have been really overtaken by the fact that he’s going to address Congress on March 3rd?
PSAKI: Well, we’ve already been clear that we don’t have to plan – we don’t have plans, I should say, to have a meeting. I think the more likely reason is that the Secretary is probably going to be out of town, which I don’t think surprises any of you, given his overseas travel schedule. We’re still working out the next couple of weeks.
QUESTION: Okay.
QUESTION: Wait, the Secretary is probably going to be out of town when?
PSAKI: I’m sure —
QUESTION: For the entire AIPAC conference?
PSAKI: It’s only a couple of days, Matt. We have a trip we’re working on for early-March, late-February. So —
QUESTION: That’s funny, because the Vice President also had some unspecified travel plans that would prevent him from being at Congress to hear the prime minister’s speech.
PSAKI: Well, given I think —
QUESTION: Is everyone fleeing —
PSAKI: — we have all spent days if not months on a plane, I don’t think it should surprise anyone that the chief diplomat might be overseas.
QUESTION: Well, right, but – yeah. But it just seems to be a little unusual that both the Secretary of State and the Vice President are – have determined right now that they’re going to be out of town or out of the country. (Laughter.)
PSAKI: I wouldn’t look at it in those terms. I believe the Vice President’s attending the inauguration for the new Government of Panama, I believe. I can’t remember the specifics, but it’s a set date. And again, we, as you know, always have a fluid schedule and as we have more information we’ll let you know. I expect we’ll be certainly represented there.
QUESTION: Okay.
QUESTION: So it wouldn’t be seen – it shouldn’t be seeing it as a snub because the prime minister will be addressing the same conference?
PSAKI: I think, again, the Secretary of State never speaks at this every single year. We’ll – I expect we’ll have a representation there. I would leave it at that.
QUESTION: I just remember being with the Secretary at the inauguration of the Panamanian prime minister a few months ago.
PSAKI: Perhaps that’s not the right information. I’m sure you can check the Vice President’s schedule on his website.
QUESTION: Might you invent a country that he could go to if there isn’t any – (laughter) —
PSAKI: I don’t think inaugurations for new leaders are invented, Matt.
*
______________________
The Jewish American Citizen
_______________________
U.S. Senate
IMMIGRATION — A district court judge’s ruling that President Obama overstepped his authority in issuing new enforcement regulations covering undocumented immigrants has brought a chorus of Democrats to blame Republicans.
U. S. Sen. Michael Bennet of Colorado said: “”Today’s ruling further demonstrates the need for Congress to fix our broken immigration system. The Senate passed a bipartisan bill with overwhelming support 20 months ago. Unfortunately, the House of
Representatives never acted. Instead of brinksmanship, temporary solutions, and unending litigation, Congress should come together and pass a bill that fixes the problem.”
U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-California) commented: “While the ruling by U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen to temporarily block the implementation of President Obama’s executive actions was not surprising given his record, it was nevertheless disruptive to our economy and devastating to the millions of families who want to fully contribute to the country they love and call home.” Boxer called on the Majority Leader to meet two urgent obligations of Congress by bringing up a clean Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funding bill and a bill to fix the nation’s broken immigration system. The Senator continued, “Ripping apart families and deporting hardworking students who have been in the U.S. since they were children is not protecting family values – it is wrong on every level. Our homeland security funding should be spent on making sure that our country is secure, not wasting $20-25 billion dollars deporting DREAMers and the parents of legal U.S. residents.”
U.S. Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Illinois) made the following remarks:
“I am disappointed by the ruling of Judge Andrew S. Hanen. It is ill-conceived and has the potential to delay assistance to millions of undocumented immigrants who will benefit from President Barack Obama’s executive actions. In fact, on Saturday, I was with Congressman Luis Gutiérrez for a workshop in Des Plaines, Illinois to educate families about what the President’s actions will mean for them. One-thousand people attended. They are ready to go – unfortunately, they will have to wait a little while longer. I am fully confident that President Obama’s actions are constitutional – a view widely held in the legal community. The President’s actions are also in line with those of previous Presidents, including Republican Presidents Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush. I expect the Obama Administration will succeed in appealing this decision. In the meantime, we should call this ruling what it is – another misguided step by Republicans to obstruct common-sense immigration reform. The following puts the ruling in context:
“For this lawsuit, Republicans went venue shopping and found a judge with anti-immigration views
“It is likely that this ruling will be overturned, but it seems the real goal of the ruling is to instill fear and confusion in the immigrant community
“If Republicans don’t like the President’s executive action, they can pass the comprehensive immigration reform that passed the Senate and would likely pass the House
“It seems Republicans are more afraid of DREAMers than they are of ISIL, as they are willing to shut down the Department of Homeland Security because they oppose the executive action
*
CHILDREN’S HEALTH — U.S. Senators Ben Cardin and Barbara A. Mikulski (both D-Maryland), have joined Senator Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) in introducing legislation to extend the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) through 2019. If Congress fails to act, federal funding for CHIP will end on September 30, 2015, leaving millions children and pregnant women nationwide without, health care coverage. No child in Maryland or in the nation should be without health care,” said Cardin. ”By extending the federal funding CHIP program through 2019, we are making sure that states and health departments will have the resources needed to reach out and make sure every child who is eligible for Medicaid or CHIP is enrolled. Thanks to CHIP, we now have the highest number in history of children who are insured with medical and dental insurance. I am particularly proud that we guarantee dental benefits for millions of children through CHIP. Good oral health is essential for our children to thrive.”
*
U.S. Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawai‘i) praised President Obama’s announcement that he intends to designate the Honouliuli Internment Camp as a National Historic Monument. This designation will put Honouliuli under the management of the National Park Service (NPS) and help preserve the history of the site where hundreds of Japanese-Americans were wrongly interned during World War II. “Honouliuli represents a dark period in our history when thousands of Japanese-Americans in Hawai‘i and across the country were forced into internment camps during World War II,” said Schatz. “This historic site will memorialize the strength and bravery of the many Japanese-Americans who faced discrimination and serve as a reminder to ourselves and future generations that we cannot repeat the mistakes of the past. Our deep gratitude goes to the Japanese Cultural Center of Hawai‘i, the Japanese American Citizens League and others who worked tirelessly for this achievement. It is meaningful and right that Honouliuli has finally received the historic recognition it deserves.”
Interest Groups
NETANYAHU’S SPEECH — Americans for Peace Now lampooned Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and House Speaker John Boehner in an inaugural political cartoon titled “Messiah complex.” It may be seen to the right.
EXTREMISM–In advance of Wednesday’s White House summit on combating extremism, the Anti-Defamation League posted a release saying its representatives would be participating. It said, in part:
ADL will join community leaders from the United States and abroad to share its perspectives and expertise on the growth of violent extremism and innovative approaches to combat today’s extremist threats. Oren Segal, Director of ADL’s Center on Extremism, was selected to be on an international panel to provide insight into the nature of violent extremist movements in the U.S., as well as how Americans of all religions, races, and backgrounds are being reached and recruited by international terrorist organizations online. Mr. Segal will also discuss the various partners ADL collaborates with to combat these threats, including close partnerships with law enforcement, the tech industry and various community groups. “An all hands on deck holistic approach is required to confront the sophisticated recruitment efforts employed by ISIS and other terror groups,” Mr. Segal said in advance of today’s panel. “We must make every effort to grasp how such terror networks utilize social media platforms in order to find creative and authentic approaches to help mitigate the threat.” The Summit will also showcase the piloting in three cities of collaborative networks of government and non-governmental stakeholders. ADL is a partner in the Boston area pilot program, which developed a framework for prevention and intervention strategies in the wake of the 2013 Boston Marathon bombing. Under the leadership of Carmen Ortiz, United States Attorney for Massachusetts, the collaborative has been meeting since the fall of 2014, and will present its findings at the Summit. “Anti-Semitism remains at the core of extremist ideology making the Jewish community here and abroad an ongoing target,” said Robert Trestan, ADL New England Regional Director, who is among those representing the League at the Summit. “The Framework developed by the Boston collaborative takes a multi-disciplinary and community wide approach to addressing the threat posed by violent extremists.” In advance of the White House Summit, ADL issued an online report titled “Homegrown Islamic Extremism in 2014: The Rise of ISIS & Sustained Online Recruitment,” which includes the League’s research and detailed analysis on homegrown violent extremism motivated by radical interpretations of Islam in 2014 and the influence of ISIS and its use of social media for recruitment purposes.
Political Parties
CONGRESSIONAL RACES — The National Republican Campaign Committee has issued its list of Democratic members of Congress whom they believe are vulnerable to defeat. One Jewish congressman — Steve Israel of New York — is among those being targeted for defeat. Others, by state, include: Arizona: Ann Kirkpatrick and Kyrsten Sinema; California: John Garamendi, Ami Bera, Julia Brownley, Pete Augilar, Raul Ruiz and Scott Peters; Connecticut: Elizabeth Esty; Florida Gwen Graham, Patrick Murphy; Illinois Cheri Bustos; Minnesota: Collin Peterson, Rick Nolan; Nebraska; Brad Ashford; New Hampshire: Annie Kuster; New Mexico: Ben Ray Luan; New York: Sean Patrick Maloney.