FDD fdn def democ

=<div>oops see main
<div><div></div><div>
</div><div><a href="https://www.commondreams.org/views/2015/07/10/multimillion-dollar-ad-campaigns-aim-influence-congressional-votes">https://www.commondreams.org/views/2015/07/10/multimillion-dollar-ad-campaigns-aim-influence-congressional-votes</a></div><div>
</div><div>7/15</div><div>
</div><div><div class="field field--name-body field--type-text-with-summary field--label-hidden" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><div class="fielditems" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><div class="fielditem even" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><div itemprop="articleBody" style="box-sizing: inherit;">A nuclear deal with Iran could be a game changer for US foreign policy and for the Middle East. The P5+1 (the U.S., China, Russia, France and the United Kingdom, plus Germany) and Iran have been developing a comprehensive agreement that would freeze Iran’s ability to create a nuclear weapon and start the process of sanctions relief.  If it succeeds, this deal would dramatically decrease the probability of another costly war in the Middle East and could usher in an historic rapprochement between the US and Iran after 34 years of hostilities. US-Iranian collaboration against extremist groups from ISIL to Al Qaeda could help damp down the fires raging across the Middle East.   Key US allies, Israel and Saudi Arabia, oppose the deal. Both nations harbor long-standing hostilities toward Iran and both want to preserve their preferential relationship with the US.  But the American people, frustrated by over a decade of US involvement in Middle East wars, support the initiative. A recent Washington Post/ABC News poll shows that 6 in 10 Americans support a plan to lift international economic sanctions against Iran in exchange for limits on its nuclear program.   Democrats back the agreement by an overwhelming majority of five to one, but even a plurality of Republican voters support the Iran nuclear deal. Why, then, will there be such a tough battle in Congress to approve a deal that the Obama administration has worked so hard to achieve and is supported by most Americans?   Some Republicans have a knee-jerk reaction to anything the Obama administration puts forth. And certain Republican and Democrat Congress members fundamentally distrust Iran, believe it is sponsoring militant groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, and think a deal will strengthen Iran to the detriment of Israel.   But the most compelling reason that so many elected officials will oppose the deal is the power of lobby groups and think tanks, backed by hawkish billionaires who are determined to quash a deal they see as bad for Israel.   Little known to the public, here are some of the groups:   <a href="http://www.unitedagainstnucleariran.com/" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-image: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">United Against Nuclear Iran</a>: Founded in 2008, UANI boasts a bipartisan powerhouse advisory board of former politicians, intelligence officials and policy experts. Cofounders Richard Holbrooke and Dennis Ross, and its president Gary Samore, have all worked in Obama’s White House.    In June, UANI announced a multimillion-dollar TV, print, radio, and digital campaign with the message that “America Can’t Trust Iran, Concessions have gone too far.” Mark Wallace, UANI’s chairman and George Bush’s US ambassador to the UN, said, “We have a multi-million-dollar budget and we are in it for the long haul. Money continues to pour in.”    <a href="http://www.secureamericanow.org/" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-image: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">Secure America Now</a>: Founded in 2011 by pollsters John McLaughlin and Pat Cadell, it is linked to right-wing pro-Israel factions in the US and abroad. The Advisory Board includes Col. Richard Kemp, who denounces the “global conspiracy of propaganda aimed at the total de-legitimization of the state of Israel” and former UN Ambassador John Bolton, who insists that “the biggest threat to our national security is sitting in the White House.”    The group labels Iran “the world’s largest sponsor of terrorism” and recently launched its own $1 million ad campaign against the nuclear deal. One ad features an American woman saying her father was killed by an IED in Iraq, followed by a menacing voice claiming “Iran has single-handedly supplied thousands of IEDs that have killed or maimed America’s troops overseas. Today, negotiators are pushing for a nuclear deal with Iran that would give them access to nuclear weapons.” It tells Americans to call their Senators and “speak out against a bad deal.”   <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundation_for_Defense_of_Democracies" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-image: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">Foundation for the Defense of Democracies</a>: Founded just after the 9/11 attacks, this neoconservative think tank pushes for an aggressive military response in the Middle East and also follows a hawkish pro-Israel line. It advocates for crippling sanctions on Iran, including medicines, as a way to cause domestic hardship and internal turmoil and its experts are leading advocates for a US military strike on Iran.   <div class="clearfix" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><a href="http://american-security.co/" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-image: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">American Security Initiative</a>: This is a new group, also bipartisan, formed in 2015 by three former senators: Norm Coleman, Evan Bayh and Saxby Chambliss. In 2014 Norm Coleman, a Republican from Minnesota, became a registered lobbyist for the repressive Saudi regime, providing the Saudis with legal services on issues including “policy developments involving Iran.”   Its first campaign was a successful effort to pass the Corker-Menendez bill, which forces President Obama to submit the agreement to Congress before signing it. In March, the group launched a $1.4 million ad campaign aimed at Senator Schumer and other key senators with the message that the deal (which had not even been released) is “great for Iran, and dangerous for us.” One over-the-top, fear-mongering ad showed a suicide-bombing truck driver in an American city detonating a nuclear bomb, apparently on behalf of Iran. The message, albeit a crazy one, is that if Iran is allowed to get a nuclear weapon, it will attack the US.   <a href="http://action.aipac.org/start/1210?gclid=CjwKEAjwq-OsBRDd95aryprR9wQSJACQnU3GSepBqwtx9C5S4NEq8Q4wFfgS0z4FaCXYPsYnwqe2RRoC8ljw_wcBhttp://action.aipac.org/start/1210?gclid=CjwKEAjwq-OsBRDd95aryprR9wQSJACQnU3GSepBqwtx9C5S4NEq8Q4wFfgS0z4FaCXYPsYnwqe2RRoC8ljw_wcB" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-image: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">AIPAC</a>: The American Israel Public Affairs Committee is the largest pro-Israel lobby group. AIPAC, too, has been pushing sanctions and opposing the nuclear deal. It claims that Iran is the world’s leading state sponsor of terror and is racing toward a nuclear weapons capability. AIPAC spends millions of dollars lobbying but its real financial clout lies with the pro-Israel Political Action Committees (PACs) it is tied to.   In addition to lobbying against a deal in Washington, over the past several years AIPAC has also been promoting state-level bills mandating divestment of public funds from foreign companies doing business with Iran.   Dozens of states have <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/04/13/us-iran-nuclear-states-idUSKBN0N40CX20150413" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-image: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">passed such bills</a>, and many are likely to stay in place even after a nuclear deal, complicating the federal sanctions relief that is a key element of the negotiations.   What is the source of the millions of dollars now being poured into the effort to squash the nuclear deal? Most comes from a handful of super-wealthy individuals. Home Depot founder Bernard Marcus gave over $10 million to the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies. Other multimillion donors are hedge fund billionaire and Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs board member Paul Singer, and Charles Bronfman of the Seagram liquor empire and board chair of Koor Industries, one of Israel’s largest investment holding companies.   The largest donor is Sheldon Adelson, a casino and business magnate who contributed almost $100 million to conservative candidates in the 2012 presidential campaign, outspending any other individual or organization. He publicly advocated for the Obama administration to bomb Iran. Peter Beinart, a contributing editor at The Atlantic, <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/04/where-are-the-anti-war-democrats-on-iran/390108/" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-image: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">said</a> “Every Republican politician knows that Adelson conditions his checks on their Iran vote.”   Congress has 30 days from the day the deal is introduced to vote in support or opposition (or 60 days if the negotiations are delayed). To block the deal, Congress needs a veto-proof majority, which is precisely what these groups and individuals are attempting to buy.   “I’ve been around this town for about 30 years now and I’ve never seen foreign policy debate that is being so profoundly affected by the movement of hundreds of millions of dollars in the American political system,” said former six-term Congressman Jim Slattery. Congresspeople face a dilemma: they fear a backlash by the billionaires if they vote for the deal, but most of their constituents support the deal. The pathetic irony is that the democratic move of giving Congress a say in the Iran deal (instead of leaving the administration with the authority to seal the agreement), the billionaires have a better shot at drowning out the voices of the American people.  </div></div></div></div><div class="field field--name-field-author-profile field--type-entityreference field--label-hidden" style="box-sizing: inherit; margin: 50px 0px;"><div class="fielditems" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><div class="fielditem even" style="box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 10px;"><div id="cdreams-profile-6771" class="cdreams-profile teaser author" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><div class="content clearfix grid-size-16" style="box-sizing: inherit;">
<div class="field field--name-field-desc field--type-text-with-summary field--label-hidden" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><div class="fielditems" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><div class="fielditem even" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><a href="http://www.commondreams.org/author/medea-benjamin" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-image: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">Medea Benjamin</a>, co-founder of <a href="http://www.globalexchange.org/" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-image: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">Global Exchange</a> and <a href="http://www.codepinkalert.org/" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-image: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">CODEPINK: Women for Peace</a>, is the author of the new book, <a href="http://www.orbooks.com/catalog/inside-iran-medea-benjamin/" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-image: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">Inside Iran: The Real History and Politics of the Islamic Republic of Iran</a>. Her previous books include: <a href="http://www.orbooks.com/catalog/kingdom-of-the-unjust-by-medea-benjamin/" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-image: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">Kingdom of the Unjust: Behind the U.S.-Saudi Connection</a>; <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1935928813?ie=UTF8&tag=commondreams-20&linkCode=xm2&camp=1789&creativeASIN=1935928813" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-image: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">Drone Warfare: Killing by Remote Control</a>; <a href="http://www.amazon.com/dp/006097205X?tag=commondreams-20/ref=nosim" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-image: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">Don’t Be Afraid Gringo: A Honduran Woman Speaks from the Heart</a>, and (with Jodie Evans) <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B004D4Y3A2?ie=UTF8&tag=commondreams-20&linkCode=xm2&camp=1789&creativeASIN=B004D4Y3A2" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-image: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">Stop the Next War Now (Inner Ocean Action Guide)</a>. Follow her on Twitter: <a class="ProfileHeaderCard-screennameLink u-linkComplex js-nav" href="https://twitter.com/medeabenjamin" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-image: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">@medeabenjamin</a></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div><div></div></div><div>===
<div class="article_body_text" itemprop="articleBody">

Founded in the wake of the 9/11 attacks with the goal of pushing an

aggressive “war on terror” in the Middle East and hawkish “pro-Israel”

policies in Washington, the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD)

is a neoconservative think tank that claims to defend democratic

countries from “radical Islamism.” It is the successor organization of a

group called EMET, an education initiative founded earlier in 2001 as

part of an effort to gain support for Israel's response to the

Palestinian Intifada and to diminish public outcry against Israeli

actions.<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn1" name="ednref1" title="">[1]</a>

Regarding FDD’s predecessor EMET, Slate reported in mid-2015:

“On April 24, 2001, three major pro-Israel donors incorporated an

organization called EMET (Hebrew for ‘truth’). In an application to the

Internal Revenue Service for tax-exempt status, [FDD president <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/May_Clifford">Clifford May</a>]

explained that the group ‘was to provide education to enhance Israel’s

image in North America and the public’s understanding of issues

affecting Israeli-Arab relations.’”<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn2" name="ednref2" title="">[2]</a><img style="float:right;margin: 20px 0 20px 20px;" src="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Foundation-for-Defense-of-Democracies-FDD1.jpg" alt="" />

Describing itself as “a non-profit, non-partisan policy institute working to defend free nations against their enemies,”<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn3" name="ednref3" title="">[3]</a>

the organization at one point declared on its website that “a global

war is being waged against democratic societies. While the military

fights with arms, the Foundation for Defense of Democracies fights with

ideas. … We fight militant Islamism and other anti-democratic forces

with information, policy research, investigative journalism, strategic

communications, and democracy and counterterrorism education.”<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn4" name="ednref4" title="">[4]</a>

Writer John Judis argues that FDD has an “ideological affinity with the

Israeli government.” In an August 2015 piece, Judis wrote: “Its

research and advocacy have centered on the Middle East and in particular

on conflicts and issues that impinge on Israel. And its positions have

closely tracked those of the Likud party and its leader, Prime Minister

Benjamin Netanyahu.”<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn5" name="ednref5" title="">[5]</a>

Shortly after its founding, FDD quickly became a prominent member of a

group of neoconservative think tanks and advocacy groups—including the <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/american_enterprise_institute">American Enterprise Institute</a> and the <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/hudson_institute">Hudson Institute</a>—that

were influential in shaping the early foreign policy priorities of the

George W. Bush administration. At the height of the so-called “war on

terror,” FDD also absorbed the <a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/committee_on_the_present_danger">Committee on the Present Danger</a>, a Cold War-era anticommunist group that been reconstituted to push for hardline policies in the Middle East.

Today, FDD’s experts are leading advocates of U.S. military

intervention in Iran and Syria, promote overturning the comprehensive

July 2015 nuclear deal on Iran’s nuclear program, and advocate one-sided

U.S. support for Israel in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Partisan or Nonpartisan?

While FDD purports to be nonpartisan, Republican Party insiders hold a

number of its top posts, and many of the group’s principals have been

vocal advocates of hawkish “pro-Israel” policies. FDD’s president,

Clifford May, is a former writer for the New York Times who

once served as director of communications for the Republican National

Committee. May is also a former editor of the party's official magazine (Rising Tide), a former vice chair of the <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/republican_jewish_coalition">Republican Jewish Coalition</a>, and a member of the <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Committee_on_the_Present_Danger">Committee on the Present Danger</a>. FDD’s chairman is former CIA director and longtime neoconservative activist <a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/woolsey_james">James Woolsey</a>, a self-described “Scoop Jackson Democrat” who advised George W. Bush and <a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/mccain_john">John McCain</a> on national security issues. Senior fellow <a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/hannah_john">John Hannah</a> is a former national security aide to <a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/cheney_dick">Dick Cheney</a>.

FDD no longer provides information on its website about its board of

directors or “Leadership Council.” In mid-2013, the Leadership Council

included several high-profile neoconservatives and Republican Party

figures. Among them were <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Dobriansky_Paula">Paula Dobriansky</a>, an undersecretary of state during the George W. Bush administration; publisher <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Forbes_Steve">Steve Forbes</a>, a former GOP presidential candidate; former FBI director Louis Freeh; the <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Weekly_Standard">Weekly Standard’s</a> <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Kristol_William">Bill Kristol</a>; Sen. <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Lieberman_Joe">Joe Lieberman</a> (I-CT); and former National Security Adviser Robert McFarlane. Former House Speaker <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/gingrich_newt">Newt Gingrich</a> was a past member, along with the late <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Kirkpatrick_Jeane_1926-2006">Jeane Kirkpatrick</a>, <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Kemp_Jack">Jack Kemp</a>, and <a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/kampelman_max">Max Kampelman</a>. Its board of directors had a similar makeup. In 2013, members included the Republican House Majority Leader Rep. <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/cantor_eric">Eric Cantor</a> (R-VA), religious right figure <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Bauer_Gary">Gary Bauer</a>, neoconservative Washington Post columnist <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Krauthammer_Charles">Charles Krauthammer</a>, Reagan-era Pentagon official <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Perle_Richard">Richard Perle</a>, and the Wall Street Journal’s <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Stephens_Bret">Bret Stephens</a>.

As of September 2015, FDD provides a list of “distinguished advisors”

on its website, which included many of the figures mentioned above,

including Lieberman, McFarlane, Freeh, Dobriansky, Stephens,

Krauthammer, Kristol, and Forbes. Other advisors included former CEO of

the Corporation for Public Broadcasting Richard Carlson, former Reagan

official Francis “Bing” West, and retired Gen. P.X. Kelley.<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn6" name="ednref6" title="">[6]</a>

FDD’s claims of nonpartisanship were severely damaged in February 2008

after it created a spin-off organization, the now-defunct <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Defense_of_Democracies">Defense of Democracies</a>,

to run an aggressive television ad campaign aimed at pressuring the

Democratic-led House to “pass the Senate’s version” of the “Terror

Surveillance Bill.” The controversial bill was aimed at providing

retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies that had cooperated

with the Bush administration’s warrantless surveillance programs. FDD

has 501(c)(3) non-profit status, which bars it from undertaking

political activities. However, according to a February 25, 2008

statement on the FDD website, the spin-off organization, which operated

out of the same offices as FDD, was “a nonprofit, nonpartisan 501(c)(4)

advocacy organization affiliated with, though separate from, the

Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Its mission is to support and

encourage policies, procedures and laws necessary to defeat terrorism.”

Targeted ads that aired in more than a dozen different Democratic-held

congressional districts left the impression that if the House didn’t

pass the bill in question, the United States would lose clearance to

“intercept Al Qaeda communications.” Spencer Ackerman, reporting in the Washington Independent,

wrote, “In fact, the intelligence community has the authority to

intercept Al Qaeda communications under other laws; the expired Protect

America Act allowed the National Security Agency to intercept

communications between any two persons of interest to a foreign

intelligence investigation, even including U.S. citizens, without a

warrant.”<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn7" name="ednref7" title="">[7]</a>

Noting that FDD had received State Department contracts in the past,

some observers pointed out that any use of State Department funding for

political advocacy would be illegal. “A spokesman for the foundation,

Brian Wise, said he did not know the exact monetary worth of the

foundation’s [State Department] grants,” reported Ackerman. “But he said

one grant was worth $487,000 for an unspecified democracy-promotion

program. Wise conceded that the foundation had founded the Defense of

Democracies organization last week ‘for tax purposes,’ adding that

‘Defense of Democracies [provides] issue advocacy, whereas the

Foundation for the Defense of Democracies is a policy institute and

academic institution.’ … Wise said he was ‘100 percent sure’ that no

federal funds received by the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies

went to the Defense of Democracies. ‘They are completely separate

organizations with separate funding sources.’”<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn8" name="ednref8" title="">[8]</a>

FDD’s efforts to distinguish itself from Defense of Democracies did not

satisfy many Democratic supporters of the foundation, some of whom

expressed outrage that FDD would target their colleagues. Within days of

the ads’ airing, nearly all the Democrats who had served on FDD’s board

of advisors quit, including Sen. Charles Schumer of New York, Rep.

Eliot Engel of New York, Rep. Jim Marshall of Georgia, and former Al

Gore campaign manager Donna Brazile. Asked about the resignations, FDD’s

Clifford May told Newsweek, "I'm disappointed that the

political pressures have been such that several Democratic members of

FDD's board of advisors—including several who I'm pretty sure agree with

us on the substance of the issue—have decided to resign. The Senate

bill passed with overwhelming bipartisan support, which persuaded us

this was not a partisan issue.”<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn9" name="ednref9" title="">[9]</a>

Iran

FDD’s activities on Iran have increased considerably since 2008, when leading hawks <a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/ledeen_michael">Michael Ledeen</a> and <a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/gerecht_reuel_marc">Reuel Marc Gerecht</a> joined the foundation after leaving the <a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/american_enterprise_institute">American Enterprise Institute</a>.<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn10" name="ednref10" title="">[10]</a> By 2011, FDD had launched three projects directly focused on Iran: the Iran/Hezbollah Project,<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn11" name="ednref11" title="">[11]</a> the Iran Energy Project,<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn12" name="ednref12" title="">[12]</a> and the Iran Human Rights Project, which helped found iranchannel.org.<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn13" name="ednref13" title="">[13]</a>

Of these projects, which as of 2015 all appear defunct, the Iran Energy

Project was arguably the most influential. Led by FDD executive

director <a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/dubowitz_mark">Mark Dubowitz</a>,

the project became a clearinghouse for research and talking points in

favor of a crippling U.S. and international sanctions regime on Iran.

“As the Iran issue turned into a hot-button foreign policy problem for

Obama,” an OZY profile noted in January 2014, “Dubowitz and FDD

colleagues like Jonathan Schanzer, a former Treasury Department

official on terrorist financing, have become go-to sources for the New York Times, AP and others,” including for “sanction hawks” in Congress.<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn14" name="ednref14" title="">[14]</a>

In particular, Dubowitz has pushed for sanctions that would cause domestic hardship and turmoil inside Iran and <a href="http://storify.com/youbsanctioned/discussion-of-sanctions-effect-on-availabity-of-me">argued</a> against adapting U.S. laws to ease the import of sanctions-exempt U.S. medicines.<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn15" name="ednref15" title="">[15]</a> "Political and economic isolation is designed to nurture Iran's convulsive internal contradictions," Dubowitz wrote in a 2011 <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/weekly_standard">Weekly Standard</a>

piece coauthored with Gerecht. "The issue is timing: Can we put enough

pressure on [Iranian Supreme Leader Ali] Khamenei and his praetorians to

either crack the regime or make the supreme leader believe that the

nuclear program actually threatens his rule?"<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn16" name="ednref16" title="">[16]</a>

FDD was strongly critical of the nuclear negotiations between Iran and

six world powers that led to a comprehensive nuclear deal in July 2015.

Dubowitz staunchly opposed any lapse in economic pressure after Iran

reached an interim nuclear deal with the six world powers known as the

P5+1 in late 2013. "The efficacy of sanctions depends on the threat of

escalation, where an ever-expanding web of restrictions scares off

foreign businesses," he and Gerecht wrote in a November 2013 Wall Street Journal op-ed.

"The sanctions game with Iran has been as much psychological as legal,"

they added. "When the Obama administration sends a signal that it is

willing to reduce economic sanctions for little in return, the general

impression abroad…is that the White House's resolve is waning."<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn17" name="ednref17" title="">[17]</a> Dubowitz was a staunch supporter of sanctions legislation introduced during the talks by Sens. <a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/kirk_mark">Mark Kirk</a> and <a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/menendez_robert">Robert Menendez</a>,

which observers argued were designed to scuttle the process altogether

by violating a U.S. pledge not impose new penalties during the

negotiations.<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn18" name="ednref18" title="">[18]</a>

In a testimony before the House Foreign Affairs Committee shortly

before the November 2014 deadline for negotiations between Iran and the

P5+1, Dubowitz suggested that the sanctions regime on Iran should remain

even if an agreement is reached. Congress should “’defend the sanctions

architecture it was so instrumental in creating’ to enforce a nuclear

deal that may be announced between the United States and its allies and

Iran in the coming days,” an FDD press release quotes him as saying.<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn19" name="ednref19" title="">[19]</a>

Dubowitz also wrote in a opinion piece that “If the president chooses

to ignore Congress,” then it should withhold funding to implement any

deal.<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn20" name="ednref20" title="">[20]</a>

FDD fellows and staff assailed the July 2015 nuclear deal reached

between Iran and the P5+1. “This deal is going to leave the next

president with an excruciatingly difficult decision: either to accept an

Iranian bomb or to bomb Iran,” claimed Dubowitz after the agreement was

announced.<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn21" name="ednref21" title="">[21]</a>

FDD President Clifford May contended that “Mr. Obama seeks to

accommodate and appease Iran’s rulers.” He added: “It would be an

exaggeration to say that such policies always lead to major wars and

holocausts. But can you tell me when such policies have led to good

outcomes?”<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn22" name="ednref22" title="">[22]</a>

In an op-ed for the right-wing Washington Times, May also

denounced the Obama administration for working with the rest of the P5+1

to pass a U.N. Security Council Resolution backing the agreement. “If

that isn’t technically a surrender of American sovereignty, it certainly

opens that door—and, I’m afraid, removes the remaining hinges,” May

declared. He further accused Obama of “setting changes to the

Constitution” for not passing the deal as a treaty through Congress.<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn23" name="ednref23" title="">[23]</a>

Some observers have noted that FDD’s real opposition to the Iran

nuclear deal is the potential it created for a broader U.S.-Iran

rapprochement. According to John Judis: “[Clifford] May described

sympathetically Israel’s ‘worry that Mr. Obama means to form a de facto

alliance with Iran.’ Some observers have long said that this concern

actually lies at the heart of the Israeli government’s opposition to a

deal with Iran: Netanyahu fears that a deal would wed American foreign

policy to an irredeemably revolutionary Iran at the expense of Israel.”<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn24" name="ednref24" title="">[24]</a>

However, in their opposition to the Iran deal, FDD and its like-minded

allies have sought to emphasize the supposed threats the agreement poses

to the United States, as opposed to Israel. “FDD experts have lately

stressed the Iran agreement’s threat to America rather than its threat

to Israel. <a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/American_Israel_Public_Affairs_Committee">AIPAC</a> has followed the same path in an ad called”<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn25" name="ednref25" title="">[25]</a>

In November 2012, FDD added a fourth Iran ini ‘We Need a Better Deal,’ which its <a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/citizens_for_a_nuclear_free_iran" style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: large;">Citizens for a Nuclear Free</a> Iran produced. People at AIPAC and FDD may be worried that they will be accused of acting solely in Israel’s interest or of putting Israel’s interest before that of the United States.tiative funded by the

Targum Shlishi Foundation called the “Iran Corruption and Social Media

Project.” According to a Targum Shlishi email bulletin: “The project

will use military grade social media technology to comb through hundreds

of thousands of social media conversations to determine whether the

economic sanctions are broadening anger against the regime from a cross

section of the population, ranging from middle and upper class to lower

working class Iranians. The results will help FDD allies in the

government both to gauge the impact of the sanctions and help them

counter accusations that sanctions hurt only the average Iranian.”<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn26" name="ednref26" title="" style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: large;">[26]</a>

“Iran is an existential threat to Israel, and time is running out,”

noted Aryeh Rubin, director of Targum Shlishi. “While the sanctions have

been a heavy blow, they are not enough. We hope this FDD project will

provide valuable information about what is going on in the minds and

hearts of the Iranian people and that it will also help to identify

examples of regime corruption—ultimately, we hope this project will

contribute to countering the threat a nuclear Iran poses to Israel. We

applaud the FDD’s use of state-of-the-art technology to further the

cause of democracy, of all people of goodwill, and of Israel and the

Jewish people.”<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn27" name="ednref27" title="">[27]</a>

FDD has also promoted providing direct support to Iran’s opposition

“Green Movement.” In 2010, at its annual forum on the theme “Countering

the Iranian threat,” then-newly elected Sen. <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Kirk_Mark">Mark Kirk</a>,

the event’s keynote speaker, argued that President Obama should reach

out to exiled members of the Green Movement, increase aid to Iranian

democracy groups, and make Iranian political prisoners "household names

throughout America" like President Ronald Reagan did with Soviet

detainees in the 1980s.<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn28" name="ednref28" title="">[28]</a>

Many figures associated with FDD have been vocal proponents of direct

military action against Iran. “We are in a big war, and Iran is at the

heart of the enemy army,” wrote Ledeen in 2009. “Most of the time, our

leaders have refused to accept the fact that Iran will do everything

possible to dominate or destroy us. Instead of trying to defeat the

mullahs, every president has sought rapprochement, just as Obama is

doing now."<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn29" name="ednref29" title="">[29]</a>

Remarking on his own longtime advocacy for war with Iran, Gerecht once

quipped, "I've written about 25,000 words about bombing Iran. Even my

mom thinks I've gone too far.”<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn30" name="ednref30" title="">[30]</a>

Israel-Palestine

Another core FDD preoccupation is the Israeli-Palestinian conflict,

about which the organization promotes views similar to those of Israel’s

right-wing Likud Party. An early example of its advocacy on this issue

came in Spring 2002, when in an apparent effort to thwart Bush

administration initiatives to reopen Palestinian-Israeli peace

negotiations, FDD aired 30-second television spots conflating Yasser

Arafat with Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein.<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn31" name="ednref31" title="">[31]</a> The video's producer was Nir Boms, FDD's first vice president and a former officer for the Israeli Embassy in Washington.<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn32" name="ednref32" title="">[32]</a>

During the 2014 Gaza War, FDD “journalist-in-residence” Claudia Rosett

vociferously criticized the United Nations Relief Agency for Palestine

Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), claiming that it was “one of the

U.N.’s most perverse, destructive creations” and that “it essentially

functions as Hamas’s handmaiden” in the Gaza Strip. Rosett decried UNRWA

for having accused Israel of violating international law during the

conflict and lamented that an UNRWA spokesman had “wept for the

Palestinians” on Al Jazeera. She added: “U.S. tax dollars fund UNRWA

officials now lobbying in Washington to obtain yet more money for an

agency entwined with the rocket-launching, tunnel-digging rulers of

Gaza.”<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn33" name="ednref33" title="">[33]</a>

In late February 2004, FDD submitted a supporting brief to the

International Court of Justice, which was considering a Palestinian

petition to have the massive wall Israel is building in the West Bank

condemned as a breach of international law. FDD claimed that the wall,

which has been at the center of violent disputes between Palestinians

and Israelis as well as a campaign of nonviolent resistance, was a first

step toward resolving the conflict: "The terrorism prevention barrier

can benefit the Palestinians because with it in place, Israel's

re-occupation of West Bank cities and towns will no longer be necessary.

Tanks, troops, checkpoints, and roadblocks will be removed as terrorism

declines. Under such circumstances, the chances for renewed

negotiations leading to a settlement can increase.”<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn34" name="ednref34" title="">[34]</a>

FDD has also pushed for the United States to aggressively confront and

marginalize the grassroots BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions)

movement, which promotes placing economic pressure on Israel to end its

occupation of the Palestinian territories. Speaking before the House

Committee on Oversight and Government Reform in July 2015, FDD executive

director <a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/dubowitz_mark">Mark Dubowitz</a>

stated: “The BDS movement is a tool of political, economic, and

financial warfare against Israel. Those waging this war seek to first

isolate and delegitimize Israel and to turn it into an international

pariah. From there, doing economic damage to Israel becomes an easier

task.”<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn35" name="ednref35" title="">[35]</a>

Dubowitz added: “While many in this country are focused on the

threatening atmosphere that the BDS movement has created for pro-Israel

students on campus, FDD’s research has determined that the economic and

financial warfare campaign currently targeting Israel’s economic and

financial relationships with Europe is far more dangerous. … BDS is a

form of economic and financial warfare. We can and should weaken it

through tactical measures. This hearing is an important step to that

end. But BDS must also be viewed within a broader problem set that must

be addressed at a more strategic level. Failure to do so will leave us

vulnerable to attack, while also leaving exposed our most reliable

partner in the Middle East as well as other important allies in Europe,

Asia and around the world.”<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn36" name="ednref36" title="">[36]</a>

In October 2010, FDD released a report called “Palestinian Pulse: What

Policymakers Can Learn From Palestinian Social Media.” Similar to the

Iranian social media project it launched in 2012, the project purported

to use “military-grade software to cull information from social

networks” to “determine Palestinian public sentiment and its potential

impact on U.S. foreign policy.” Report coauthor Mark Dubowitz suggested

that the results showed a lingering Palestinian antipathy toward Israel.

"If the online environment is even a remotely accurate indicator of

Palestinian public sentiment,” he said, “the Obama administration's

Middle East peace initiative may encounter more challenges than

expected. The United States cannot discount the impact of deepening

Palestinian rejectionism."<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn37" name="ednref37" title="">[37]</a>

Although the report seemed to suggest that attitudes tracked through

social media could shed some light on the outcome of peace talks, no

corresponding analysis of Israeli social media postings was apparently

conducted (though the authors did acknowledge toward the end of the

report that such research “could be carried out”).<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn38" name="ednref38" title="">[38]</a>

Staff and Projects

The FDD has a stable of policy wonks with hawkish track records,

especially on Mideast-related issues. Prominent senior fellows and

staffers have included <a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/mccarthy_andrew_c">Andrew C. McCarthy</a>, a contributor to the National Review and former federal prosecutor; <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/dershowitz_toby">Toby Dershowitz</a>, a former spokesperson for the <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/american_israel_public_affairs_committee">American Israel Public Affairs Committee</a> (AIPAC) and fundraiser for the Brussels-based <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/european_foundation_for_democracy">European Foundation for Democracy</a>;

and journalist Claudia Rosett, a winner of the Eric Breindel Award for

Excellence in Opinion Journalism (which was established by <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/murdoch_rupert">Rupert Murdoch</a>, a close ally of many neoconservatives). Other notable FDD scholars have included <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Ottolenghi_Emanuele">Emanuele Ottolenghi</a>, <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/phares_walid">Walid Phares</a>, <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/smith_lee">Lee Smith</a>, and <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Kirchick_james">James Kirchick</a>.

a now-defunct neoconservative institute that was one of the leading

promoters of the Iraq War and the Bush administration's aggressive

agenda in the Middle East. These include James <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Woolsey_James">Woolsey</a>, Frank <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Gaffney_Frank">Gaffney</a>, Bill <a href="http://www%2Crightweb.irc-online.org/profile/kristol_william">Kristol</a>, Steve <a href="http://www%2Crightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Forbes_Steve">Forbes</a>, Richard <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Perle_Richard">Perle</a>, Jeane <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Kirkpatrick_Jeane_1926-2006">Kirkpatrick</a>, and Charles <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Krauthammer_Charles">Krauthammer</a>, among others.

FDD runs many projects and programs, though some appear dormant. In

addition to the projects noted above, FDD operates a program explicitly

devoted to “promoting regime change in Syria”<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn39" name="ednref39" title="">[39]</a>

and another dedicated to ensuring U.S. support for Israel’s

“quantitative military edge” in the Middle East. Other projects have

included the Center for Terrorism Research, at one time headed by Daveed

Gartenstein-Ross and Walid Phares; the Center for Law &

Counterterrorism, headed by Andrew McCarthy; the Future of Terrorism

Project; and the Radical Islam in Africa Project focusing on the Horn of

Africa, which FDD calls the “forgotten front” in the war on terror. In

addition, FDD hosts the Shield America project, dedicated to promoting

elaborate “missile defense” projects and alerting the public and policy

makers about the discredited “threat” of an EMP (electromagnetic pulse)

terrorist attack from Iran. (For more on the EMP threat, see Robert

Farley, “<a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/articles/display/the_emp_threat_lots_of_hype_little_traction">The EMP Threat: Lots of Hype, Little Traction</a>,” Right Web, October 2009.)<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn40" name="ednref40" title="">[40]</a>

The foundation directs a number of projects at young people. It

operates a Campus Program, a “National Security Fellows” program for

“up-and-coming members of the policy community, and a “National Security

Trip to Israel,” which takes aspiring young DC professionals for

private meetings with Israeli political and security officials.”<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn41" name="ednref41" title="">[41]</a>

FDD has operated numerous democracy-support programs over the years,

including an education program with the "goal of advancing democratic

values of liberty, tolerance, pluralism, and individual rights in the

Greater Middle East"; a program that promoted "democracy activists" in

the Middle East; and one that focused on South Asia.  During the George

W. Bush administration, FDD expanded its democracy programs in the

Middle East with U.S. government funding. One such program was the Iraqi

Women's Educational Institute (IWEI), a joint initiative of the

American Islamic Conference, FDD, and the conservative <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/independent_womens_forum">Independent Women's Forum</a>.

The mission of this short-lived organization was, according to FDD, to

promote the participation of women in Iraqi society through programs on

democracy education and coalition building.<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn42" name="ednref42" title="">[42]</a> Between 2004 and 2006, the IWEI ran two initiatives with funding from the U.S. State Department.<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn43" name="ednref43" title="">[43]</a>

In mid-2006, FDD and the <a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/european_foundation_for_democracy">European Foundation for Democracy</a>, both of which listed <a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/phares_walid">Walid Phares</a> as a fellow, created a joint project called the Center for Liberty in the Middle East (CLIME), “a

non-profit organization that supports individuals and civic groups that

are spreading democratic values of liberty and tolerance in the Middle

East.” With headquarters in both Brussels and Washington, D.C. and a

multinational staff made up of scholars from Europe, the Middle East,

and the United States, CLIME’s website claims to advocate “peaceful

transitions to political systems that protect individual liberties,

enable full political participation, and respect ethnic, religious and

political diversity.”<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn44" name="ednref44" title="">[44]</a>

Funding

FDD has long been secretive about its sources of funding, with May

insisting that the organization enjoys the support of “all kinds of

donors who are interested in defending democratic societies around the

world from their sworn enemies.” But an August 2013 Salon

report revealed that FDD subsisted primarily on the largesse of a

“handful” of the Republican Party’s “heavyweight donors, fundraisers,

and outspoken critics of the Obama White House’s foreign policy.” Key

donors have included Home Depot founder <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/marcus_bernard">Bernard Marcus</a>, hedge fund billionaire and <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/jewish_institute_for_national_security_affairs">Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs</a> board member <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/singer_paul">Paul Singer</a>, and casino magnate <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/adelson_sheldon">Sheldon Adelson</a>, also a well-known funder of right-wing “pro-Israel” pressure groups. All three are prominent backers of the <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/republican_jewish_coalition">Republican Jewish Coalition</a> who donated heavily to <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/romney_mitt">Mitt Romney</a>’s 2012 presidential campaign.<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn45" name="ednref45" title="">[45]</a> Singer, moreover, is the former hedge fund boss of leading Romney foreign policy adviser <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/senor_dan">Dan Senor</a>, a key figure behind the neoconservative pressure group <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Foreign_Policy_Initiative">Foreign Policy Initiative</a>.

Although FDD’s 2011 990 filing reported only a little over $8 million in revenues,<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn46" name="ednref46" title="">[46]</a> Salon

reported that the group’s Schedule A form from the same year reported

nearly $11 million in receipts from Marcus, $3.6 million from Singer,

and over $1.5 million from Adelson. Rounding out the list were

million-dollar contributions from both Newton Becker and his family

foundation, the Abramson Family Foundation, and the Sarah <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/scaife_foundations">Scaife Foundation</a>—all of which have supported the work of other neoconservative groups in the past. Journalist Eli Clifton concluded for Salon that

the numbers belied FDD’s claims to bipartisan support. “FDD’s

right-wing national security work,” he wrote, “has long corresponded

nicely with the politics of the nation’s right-leaning political party.”<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn47" name="ednref47" title="">[47]</a>

A 2011 investigation by Think Progress revealed the dozens of

donors who helped launch FDD and keep it afloat during its formative

years. According to tax documents obtained by Think Progress, which were

combined into <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/FDDdonors.pdf">one PDF</a>

with addresses deleted, among the main funders during the 2001-2004

period were the Abramson Family Foundation, led by the founder of U.S.

Healthcare Leonard Abramson. It provided the largest portion of FDD’s

startup funding with a $222,523 grant in 2001. Abramson continued

funding the group with an $600,000 in contributions during 2002-2004.

The heirs to the Seagram liquor company fortune, Canadians Edgar M. and

Charles Bronfman, gave $1,050,000 to FDD during this period. According

to Think Progress, “<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edgar_Bronfman,_Sr.">Edgar M. Bronfman</a> served as president of the <a href="http://www.worldjewishcongress.org/">World Jewish Congress</a> from 1979 to 2007. Charles Bronfman, along with fellow FDD donor <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Steinhardt">Michael Steinhardt</a>, cofounded <a href="http://www.birthrightisrael.com/site/PageServer">Taglit Birthright</a>

which offers free trips to Israel for young Jewish adults. Steinhardt

is a hedge fund mogul who contributed $850,000 to FDD from 2001 to

2004.”

Other donors included “Home Depot cofounder Bernard Marcus who

contributed $600,000 between 2001 and 2003; mortgage backed securities <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liar%27s_Poker">pioneer</a> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_Ranieri">Lewis Ranieri</a>

contributed $350,000 between 2002 and 2004; and Ameriquest owner, and

Bush administration ambassador to the Netherlands from 2006 to 2008,

Roland Arnall contributed $1,802,000 between 2003 and 2004. … [M]edia

mogul and Democratic Party donor Haim Saban, a surprising donor

considering FDD’s Republican bent and <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/May_Clifford">Clifford May’s</a> former role as an RNC spokesperson; <a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/The_Israel_Project">The Israel Project</a> director Jennifer Mizrahi; and Dalck Feith, father of former Under Secretary of Defense <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Feith_Douglas">Douglas Feith</a>.”<a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies/#edn48" name="ednref48" title="">[48]</a>

       </div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /><br />==<br />http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/coates_victoria/<br /></font><div class="article_body_text" itemprop="articleBody">

Victoria Coates is the National Security Adviser on the Senate staff of Sen. <a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/cruz_ted">Ted Cruz</a> (R-TX), a leading Republican nominee for the 2016 presidential election.<a title="" href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/coates_victoria/#edn1" name="ednref1">[1]</a>

Coates has distinct neoconservative leanings, having served as director of research for former Defense Secretary <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/rumsfeld_donald">Donald Rumsfeld</a> and completed a stint as adjunct fellow at the <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/foundation_for_defense_of_democracies">Foundation for Defense of Democracies</a>.<a title="" href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/coates_victoria/#edn2" name="ednref2">[2]</a> These tendencies were clearly on display in March 2016 when <a href="http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2016-03-17/cruz-assembles-an-unlikely-team-of-foreign-policy-rivals" target="_blank">Cruz announced his foreign policy team</a>,

which included a host hard-right and “pro-Israel” ideologues, many of

whom were associated with the campaign to push the George W. Bush

administration to attack Iraq after the 9/11 attacks, including <a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Abrams_Elliott/" target="blank">Elliott Abrams</a>,  <a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/ledeen_michael/" target="blank">Michael Ledeen</a>, and <a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/gaffney_frank/" target="blank">Frank Gaffney</a>. When asked about this team, Coates <a href="http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2016-03-17/cruz-assembles-an-unlikely-team-of-foreign-policy-rivals" target="blank">noted her role</a>

in assembling it: “Both Frank and Elliott are people I went out of my

way to set up meetings with the Senator. He has met with both of them

individually for years.”<img style="float:right;margin: 20px 0 20px 20px;" src="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/victoria-coates1.jpg" alt="" />

According to the Daily Beast, Coates requires interns

working for Ted Cruz to read a controversial essay by former U.S.

ambassador to the UN and influential neoconservative ideologue <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/kirkpatrick_jeane_1926-2006">Jeane Kirkpatrick</a> titled “Dictatorships and Double Standards.”<a title="" href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/coates_victoria/#edn3" name="ednref3">[3]</a> The essay, published by Commentary Magazine in

1979, was a widely noted rightwing critique of President Jimmy Carter’s

efforts to emphasize human rights in U.S. foreign policy. It was also

notorious for its attempt to justify U.S. alliances with brutal

right-wing dictatorships as part of the U.S. anti-communist crusade in

places like Central America.<a title="" href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/coates_victoria/#edn4" name="ednref4">[4]</a>

Coates, who has a PhD in art history from the University of Pennsylvania, is a contributor to the conservative blog, RedState, as well as the <a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/searchresults?q=william%20kristol">William Kristol</a>-edited <a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Weekly_Standard">Weekly Standard</a>.<a title="" href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/coates_victoria/#edn5" name="ednref5">[5]</a> During the 2012 president election, she served as a foreign policy adviser to Republican Texas Governor <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/perry_rick/">Rick Perry</a>’s presidential campaign.<a title="" href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/coates_victoria/#edn6" name="ednref6">[6]</a>

Foreign Policy Views

In a 2012 review of neoconservative writer and historian <a href="http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/kagan_robert">Robert Kagan’s</a> book The World America Made,

Coates highlighted the “importance” Kagan places on “human initiative

and action” in bringing about a “more liberal political and economic

order.” Pointing to U.S. influence around the world, Coates wrote:

“Kagan’s insistence on the spread of democracy as a necessity for

improving greater good, even when it is difficult, is welcome.”<a title="" href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/coates_victoria/#edn7" name="ednref7">[7]</a>

Other commentators, such as Eliana Johnson of the conservative National Review,

have pointed out that Kagan’s book “posits that the modern world order

rests not on America’s cherished ideals—respect for individual rights

and human dignity—but on economic and military power, and that its

preservation requires bolstering America’s hard power.”<a title="" href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/coates_victoria/#edn8" name="ednref8">[8]</a>

Coates has argued that the United States should launch military

strikes against Syria similar to those conducted against Libya in 2011.

“In dealing with Libya and Syria, consistency need not be the hobgoblin

of little minds but can rather be the hallmark of a consistent and

coordinated foreign policy. There are equivalencies to be drawn between

the two crises, and once these are recognized we should take equivalent

action. It is not a decision to be taken lightly, but we would not be

alone and the cause is just,” Coates wrote on her blog in February 2012.

“We have the unified support of our European and Arab allies. We have

moral and strategic interests at stake. Rather than whining about the

shocking moral turpitude of the United Nations, the President of the

United States needs to remember his responsibilities as the leader of

the free world—and lead.”<a title="" href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/coates_victoria/#edn9" name="ednref9">[9]</a>

Coates has also been a vociferous critic of President Obama,

particularly his support for a two-state solution to the

Israeli-Palestinian conflict based on the pre-1967 war borders, which

has been stated U.S. policy for decades.<a title="" href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/coates_victoria/#edn10" name="ednref10">[10]</a>

“What the President is asking is that more than 70% of that [Israel’s]

history be erased, beginning with the reasons it was deemed necessary to

annex the territories in 1967, and continuing on through the failed

diplomatic initiatives, UN humiliations and relentless, deadly terrorist

attacks of the past decades,” Coates wrote in May 2011. “Perhaps for

our President Israel is still an abstract phantasm that might or might

not exist, but for others it has been a reality for the last 63 years.

Israel has the right to all of its history, and all of its territory.”<a title="" href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/coates_victoria/#edn11" name="ednref11">[11]</a>

       </div>  
    <div class="site_share">

Share RightWeb

</div> Please note: IPS Right Web neither represents nor endorses any of the individuals or groups profiled on this site.

      
       <div class="content_centre_title">
     <h2><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Sources</font></h2>
    </div>
    <div class="content_centre centre_sources">
     
     <p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a title="" href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/coates_victoria/#_ednref1" name="_edn1">[1]</a> Eli Lake, “How Ted Cruz Trolls Obama’s Foreign Policy,” The Daily Beast, July 29, 2014, <a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/07/29/how-ted-cruz-trolls-obama-s-foreign-policy.html">http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/07/29/how-ted-cruz-trolls-obama-s-foreign-policy.html</a>.</font><br/>

<a title="" href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/coates_victoria/#ednref2" name="edn2">[2]</a> Commonwealth Foundation, “Victoria Coates,” <a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/07/29/how-ted-cruz-trolls-obama-s-foreign-policy.html">http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/07/29/how-ted-cruz-trolls-obama-s-foreign-policy.html</a>.

<a title="" href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/coates_victoria/#ednref3" name="edn3">[3]</a> Eli Lake, “How Ted Cruz Trolls Obama’s Foreign Policy,” The Daily Beast, July 29, 2014, <a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/07/29/how-ted-cruz-trolls-obama-s-foreign-policy.html">http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/07/29/how-ted-cruz-trolls-obama-s-foreign-policy.html</a>.

<a title="" href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/coates_victoria/#ednref4" name="edn4">[4]</a> Sahil Kapur, “Ted Cruz’s Brain Trust: The Advisers Who Want To Make Him President,” Talking Points Memo, November 20, 2014,<a href="http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/ted-cruz-top-advisers">http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/ted-cruz-top-advisers</a>.

<a title="" href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/coates_victoria/#ednref5" name="edn5">[5]</a> Commonwealth Foundation, “Victoria Coates,” <a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/07/29/how-ted-cruz-trolls-obama-s-foreign-policy.html">http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/07/29/how-ted-cruz-trolls-obama-s-foreign-policy.html</a>.

<a title="" href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/coates_victoria/#ednref6" name="edn6">[6]</a> Sahil Kapur, “Ted Cruz’s Brain Trust: The Advisers Who Want To Make Him President,” Talking Points Memo, November 20, 2014,<a href="http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/ted-cruz-top-advisers">http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/ted-cruz-top-advisers</a>.

<a title="" href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/coates_victoria/#ednref7" name="edn7">[7]</a> Victoria Coates, “It’s a Wonderful Country: Robert Kagan’s “The World America Made,” RedState, February 28, 2012,<a href="http://www.redstate.com/2012/02/28/its-a-wonderful-country-robert-kagans-the-world-america-made/">http://www.redstate.com/2012/02/28/its-a-wonderful-country-robert-kagans-the-world-america-made/</a>.

<a title="" href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/coates_victoria/#ednref8" name="edn8">[8]</a> Eliana Johnson, “The Neocons Return,” National Review, October 6, 2014, <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/article/389598/neocons-return-eliana-johnson">http://www.nationalreview.com/article/389598/neocons-return-eliana-johnson</a>.

<a title="" href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/coates_victoria/#ednref9" name="edn9">[9]</a> Victoria Coates, “Why is Syria Different?” BlogSpot, February 8, 2012, <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/article/389598/neocons-return-eliana-johnson">http://www.nationalreview.com/article/389598/neocons-return-eliana-johnson</a>.

Ben Armbruster, “Obama’s Call For Israeli & Palestinian Borders To

Be ‘Based On The 1967 Lines’ Mirrors Bush, Clinton Policy,”

ThinkProgress, May 19, 2011, <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/security/2011/05/19/176617/obama-israel-1967/">http://thinkprogress.org/security/2011/05/19/176617/obama-israel-1967/</a>.

<a title="" href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/coates_victoria/#ednref11" name="edn11">[11]</a> Victoria Coates, “Erasing History: The Perils of the Pre-1967 Proposal,” BlogSpot, May 20, 2011, <a href="http://victoriacoates.blogspot.com/2011/05/erasing-history-perils-of-pre-1967.html">http://victoriacoates.blogspot.com/2011/05/erasing-history-perils-of-pre-1967.html</a>.

    </div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font><div class="article_body_text" itemprop="articleBody">