Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Infuence Of Ethnic Lobbying On US Foreign Policy

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The Infuence Of Ethnic Lobbying On US Foreign Policy

    Eurasia Review
    Aug 5 2012


    The Infuence Of Ethnic Lobbying On US Foreign Policy

    By: JTW
    August 6, 2012
    By Rafiga Gurbanzade

    Lobbying is generally defined as the process of seeking to influence a
    government and its institutions to execute policies that serve
    interests of a group of individuals. The Woodstock Theological Center
    defines lobbying as a `deliberate attempt to influence political
    decision through various forms of advocacy directed at policymakers on
    behalf of another person, organization or group' (58). The earliest
    instances of lobbying date back to ancient Greece and Rome, where
    lobbyists sought to influence senators and plebs for or against
    specific issues (Zetter, 6). Special interests protected by lobbying
    may vary from businesses and politicians to foreign governments and
    ethnic groups. Ethnic lobbying may advocate interests of a distinct
    group in the host country or may seek to influence foreign policy of
    the host country towards the country of origin or third countries.

    In the United States, the roots of ethnicity-based competition for
    political influence date back to the early 20th century. By 1965, the
    elimination of criteria for domination of any one ethnic group in the
    U.S. immigration legislation paradoxically added political strength to
    ethnic advocacy groups (Jacobson, 66). Currently, ethnic interest
    groups spend millions of dollars annually to influence U.S. foreign
    policy and to `block the influence of rival ethnic lobbies' (Ambrosio,
    207). Driven by ethno-cultural differences, foreign conflicts and
    antagonistic interests of the rival parties, ethnic lobbies manage to
    mobilize strength of their constituent communities and to profoundly
    impact the U.S. legislative and executive decision-making processes.


    United States

    The ways of influencing U.S. foreign policy can be classified into two
    distinct, yet highly interconnected, categories. The first category
    involves, mobilization and maintenance of grassroots lobbying by way
    of diaspora, that is, the American citizens of a distinct ethnic
    descent. The second category is a direct foreign government
    intervention through registered lobbyists regulated by the Foreign
    Agents Registration Act (FARA) of 1938. According to Samuel
    Huntington, both categories equally promote `interests of people
    outside the United States.' Huntington also noted that serious
    problems could arise when `the cultural communities transform into
    diasporas and take control over at least one state' (Pachon, 4).
    Claiming certain liberties under the First Amendment of the U.S.
    Constitution, some concentrated grassroots organizations or lobbyists
    of a `vocal minority' manage to bypass the national interest and to
    distort legislation or policymaking on the scale of the national
    impact (Schultz, 437).

    One of the main objectives of ethnic lobbyists is to obtain U.S.
    support for the country of ethnicity's origin over their rivals,
    notwithstanding the lack of the U.S. national interests in the region.
    Currently, around one hundred foreign governments depend on lobbyists
    for promoting their policies in the U.S. (Newhouse). Moreover, the
    number of interest group communities significantly increased in recent
    years. As stated in the Encyclopedia of Associations, in 2010 there
    were 24,000 registered organizations in the U.S., constituting a 64
    per cent growth of lobbyist groups since 1980 (Smith, Roberts & Wielen
    Ryan, 352). According to the Foreign Affairs magazine among the
    strongest lobbies in the U.S. are those advocating the interests of
    Armenia, China, Greece, India, Ireland, Israel, Taiwan, and Ukraine.
    Moreover, one of the many downsides of the lobby penetration in the
    U.S. legislature is that `the subculture of law firms that [assist in
    these works] reflects a steady decline and privatization of diplomacy
    ` with an increasing impact on how the United States conducts its own
    foreign policy' (Newhouse).

    Ethnic lobbying is considered to be an effective way of influencing
    U.S. foreign aid and defense policy decisions. As ethics of ethnic
    lobbying has become a subject of public criticism and scholarly
    debates, majority of studies focused on the Jewish-American lobbying
    groups that pioneered ethnic lobbying. The consensus among scholars is
    generally divided into those who speak of the triumph of
    Jewish-American lobbying in formulating U.S. policy towards Israel and
    those who speak of the failure of Jewish lobbying due to the lack of
    control over the executive branch (Thomas, 230).

    Among the various Jewish-American lobbying groups, the most known one
    is the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). AIPAC's major
    achievement is the securing of a substantial U.S. economic and
    military assistance to Israel. For the past decade, Israel has been
    the largest per capita U.S. aid recipient (Ripley & Lindsay, 93-94).
    As stated in the Congressional Research Service, U.S. Foreign Aid to
    Israel, starting from 2007, the U.S. expanded the military aid by $150
    million each year (Sharp). According to the Amendment to H.R. 4310,
    section 12, it is in the U.S. interest and it is the sense of Congress
    that the U.S. `provides Israel such support as to increase development
    of joint missile defense systems that defend the urgent threat posed
    to Israel and United States forces in the region'.

    The two other powerful ethnic lobbies in the U.S. are those of Greek-
    and Armenian-Americans. Both groups seek to influence U.S. foreign
    policy in support of Greece and Armenia, respectively, and are united
    by their antagonistic agenda against the rival Turkey. Just over the
    last year, the two lobbies managed to introduce 10 Congressional
    resolutions critical of Turkey in one way or another. During the 2011
    hearings on House Resolution 306 that accused Turkey of religious
    discrimination, Representative Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) expressed his
    frustration that, while Turkey had a better record of religious
    tolerance than most majority-Muslim countries, his fellow lawmakers
    were exercising a `terrible double standard' by singling out Turkey to
    please constituents of Greek and Armenian heritage (AFP).

    Greek-Americans established their first lobbying group, American
    Hellenic Institute (AHI), in 1974. The formation of AHI and the
    mobilization of Greek-Americans, who currently number an estimated 1.5
    million nationwide, were inspired by the Greek-Turkish standoff over
    Cyprus (Cameron, 90). Driven by the anti-Turkish policy agenda, AHI
    successfully convinced Congress to place an arms embargo against
    Turkey from 1975 to 1978, in violation of the Foreign Military Sales
    Act. In addition, being actively involved in congressional committees
    and obtaining support from grassroots groups, AHI successfully secured
    military aid to Greece by 70 per cent higher than to Turkey, and
    cancelled economic aid to Turkey in 1995, thus impeding the
    U.S.`Turkish trade in the northern sector of Cyprus (Cameron, 90;
    McCormick). By 2001, the number of AHI members accumulated up to
    25,000 with 20,000 additional members functioning in an auxiliary
    organization (Cameron, 90). Greek-American lobby also supports
    Greece's ongoing obstruction to Macedonia's NATO admission over the
    naming dispute. The obstruction is despite the fact that Macedonia
    provided critical support and has been a key staging ground to U.S.
    and NATO operations in former Yugoslavia.

    Armenian-American lobby in the U.S. builds upon a sizeable community
    that numbers over half a million in California alone. The largest
    grassroots organization, Armenian National Committee of America
    (ANCA), is a U. S. affiliate of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation
    (ARF), a left-wing nationalist party that dominated Armenian politics
    since 1890 (CREW). The other Armenian-American lobbying group is the
    Armenian Assembly of America (AAA). Like the Jewish-American special
    interest, ANCA and AAA secured U.S. economic assistance to Armenia,
    making it the second largest per capita recipient of U.S. aid after
    Israel (Mainville). The total amount of U.S. assistance to Armenia
    since 1992 topped $2 billion (Nichol).

    Apart from aid issues, both ANCA and AAA focus efforts around a strong
    anti-Turkish and anti-Azerbaijani agenda, such as the blocking of U.S.
    financial and military aid to Turkey and Azerbaijan, pressing
    resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict between Armenia and
    Azerbaijan in favor of the former, and seeking legislative recognition
    of the alleged Armenian genocide (Cameron, 91). In 2010-11, under
    pressure from ANCA and facing reelection, Senators Barbara Boxer
    (D-CA) and Robert Menendez (D-NJ) effectively blocked the nomination
    of Matthew Bryza, a career U.S. diplomat, as the Ambassador to
    Azerbaijan. ANCA representatives did not hide their concern over the
    ethnic Turkish background of Bryza's wife (De Waal). Even after the
    recess appointment by President Obama and a year of service, Bryza's
    confirmation met obstruction from Senator Menendez, effectively ending
    the diplomat's career.

    ANCA advocates were also successful in securing full U.S. economic and
    political support for Armenia amidst its ongoing occupation of
    Nagorno-Karabakh and surrounding seven regions of Azerbaijan since the
    early 1990s (CIA). While the United Nations Security Council adopted 4
    resolutions calling for immediate and unconditional withdrawal of
    Armenian forces in 1993, Senator John Kerry (D-Mass.) authored Section
    907 of Freedom Support Act, which prohibited any U.S. aid to
    Azerbaijani government until it `ceases the illegal blockades of
    Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh' (Ambrosio, 156).

    One of the factors by which the Armenian-American lobby's agenda
    contradicts U.S. strategic interests is that, while Turkey is a NATO
    member and Azerbaijan is a more attractive economic and strategic
    partner (Ambrosio, 207), Armenia hosts the only remaining Russian
    military base in the South Caucasus and maintains close cooperation
    with Iran (Lucas). According to Wikileaks, in 2008 Armenian government
    supplied Iran with rockets and machine guns that were later used to
    kill at least one U.S. serviceman in Iraq (Lake).

    The strength of the Armenian and Greek interest groups is the result
    of the weakness of the Turkish and Azerbaijani lobbies in the past
    (Ambrosio, 153). As noted in the Turkey at the Crossroads: Ottoman
    Legacies and Great Middle East, `Turkey has historically met the joint
    opposition of the powerful Armenian- and Greek- American lobbies, and
    suffered from the absence of an effective pro-Turkish lobby'(Jung &
    Piccoli, 169). In recent years, Turkey and Turkish-Americans, who
    number over half a million, have intensified efforts to counter the
    two opposing lobbies using similar techniques. As stated in the
    Turkish Coalition of America (TCA) reports, in 2012, the Congressional
    Turkish Caucus has grown to more than 150 lawmakers, already
    surpassing the Armenian Caucus. Additionally, according to the Turk of
    America Magazine, Turkish-Americans have joined the top contributors
    to political causes on the Hill over the last years.

    Historically, the U.S. has been rich in variety of ethnic groups,
    cultures, religions and backgrounds. The challenge to the U.S. is not
    caused by the abounding and diverse fabric of its nation, but by the
    individual interest groups that serve political causes other than
    those of in the interests of America. As stated by the former
    Secretary of Defense, James Schlesinger in 2001, `the United States
    has less of a foreign policy in a traditional sense of a great power
    than we have the stapling together of a series of goals put forth by
    domestic constituency groups' (Albert, 41). Consequently, as result of
    ethnic lobbying, U.S. foreign policy loses its cohesiveness, weakening
    America's position as a global leader.

    Rafiga Gurbanzade is a student at the Department of Criminology, Law &
    Society University of California, Irvine

    References

    Ambrosio, Thomas. Ethnic Identity Groups and U.S. Foreign Policy.
    Westport, CT: Praeger, 2002. Print.

    Ambrosio, Thomas. Irredentism: Ethnic Conflict and International
    Politics. Westport, CT: Praeger, 2001. Print.

    `Azerbaijan.' The Central Intelligence Agency. 10 Jul. 2012. Web. 18
    Jul. 2012. .

    `Congressional Caucus on U.S.-Turkey Relation and Turkish Americans
    Reaches 150 Members.' Turk of America. 28 Jun. 2012. Web. 18 Jul.
    2012. .

    De Waal, Thomas. `Insejm in the Senate.' The National Interest. 19
    Oct. 2012. Web. 18 Jul. 2012. .

    `CREW Files Complaint Against Armenian National Committee of America `
    Western Region.' Citizenship for Responsibility and Ethics in
    Washington. 18 Feb. 2009. Web. 23 Jul. 2012. .

    Jacobson, David. Rights across Borders: Immigration and the Decline of
    Citizenship. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1996. Print.

    Jung, Dietrich, and Wolfango Piccoli. Turkey at the Crossroads:
    Ottoman Legacies and a Greater Middle East. London: Zed, 2001. Print.

    Lake, Eli. `WikiLeaks: Armenia sent Iran arms used to kill U.S. troops.' The
    Washington Times. 29 Nov. 2010. Web. 18 Jul. 2012. .

    Lucas, Edward. The New Cold War: Putin's Russia and the Threat to the
    West. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009. Print.

    Mainville, Michael. `Second-Largest Recipients of U.S. Aid, Armenians
    Fight To Get Ahead.' The Sun. 9 Aug. 2005. Web. 18 Jul. 2012. .

    Nichol, Jim. `Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia: Political Developments and
    Implications for U.S. Interests.' Congressional Research Service. 15
    Jun. 2012. Web. 18 Jul. 2012. .

    `Organizing in Politics.' Turkish Coalition of America. Web. 18 Jul. 2012.
    .

    Pachon, Harry. Latinos and U.S. Foreign Policy: Representing the
    `homeland'? Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2000. Print.

    Ripley, Randall B., and James M. Lindsay. Congress Resurgent: Foreign
    and Defense Policy on Capitol Hill. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan,
    1993. Print.

    Sharp, Jeremy M. `U.S. Foreign Aid to Israel.' Congressional Research
    Service. 12 Mar. 2012. Web. 18 Jul. 2012. .

    Smith, Steven S., Jason M. Roberts, and Wielen Ryan J. Vander. The
    American Congress. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2006. Print.

    Schultz, David A. Encyclopedia of the United States Constitution. New
    York, NY: Facts On File, 2009. Print.

    The Ethics of Lobbying: Organized Interests, Political Power, and the
    Common Good. The Woodstock Theological Center. Washington, D.C.:
    Georgetown UP, 2002. Print. Web. Jul. 18. 2012.

    The Role of American Political Culture in the Development of the
    U.S.-Israel `Special Relationship' and the Lost Opportunities for
    Achieving Middle East Peace. Austin: University of Texas, 2007. Print.

    Thomas, Clive S. Research Guide to U.S. and International Interest
    Groups. Westport, CT: Praeger, 2004. Print.

    `Turkish and Turkic American Grassroots Organizations¨Express Concern
    on Racist Regime of Legislation.' Assembly of Turkish American
    Association. 25 Jun. 2012. Web. 18 Jul. 2012. .

    United States. Cong. Senate. 112th Congress, 1st Session. S. 608, To
    eliminate automatic pay adjustments for Members of Congress, and for
    other purpose [introduced in the U.S. Senate; 25 January 2011]. 112th
    Cong., 1st sess. Congressional Bills, GPO Access. Web. 18 July 2012. .

    `US panel presses Turkey on religious rights.' Association of
    Fundraising Professionals. 20 Jun. 2012. Web. 18 Jul. 2012.

    Zetter, Lionel. Lobbying: The Art of Political Persuasion.
    Petersfield, Hampshire: Harriman House, 2008. Print.

    http://www.eurasiareview.com/06082012-the-infuence-of-ethnic-lobbying-on-us-foreign-policy/

Working...
X