Posts tagged with "josh paul"

Gaza Crisis: A Deciding Factor in the Election

Leave a reply

A New Policy released a statement analyzing the impact of the Gaza conflict and US policy towards it on the election results. The statement argues that the Gaza issue was a critical factor in key states like Michigan and revealed weaknesses in Biden’s campaign early on. It criticizes the Biden administration’s handling of the issue, particularly regarding the criminalization of student protests and Harris’s alignment with Biden’s unpopular stance on Gaza.

The statement suggests that the election outcome presents an opportunity to build a new coalition within the Democratic party, centering support for Palestinian rights, free speech, and a more just foreign policy. It emphasizes the need for strategic and urgent action to drive policy changes, shift American politics, and revive American values. Looking ahead, A New Policy expresses hope that President-Elect Trump’s transactional approach to foreign policy may lead to a change in US policy towards Israel. 

Read the full analysis of the election result below:

Josh Paul
Former Director, U.S. Department of State
Senior Advisor at DAWN, (DAWN; Founded by Jamal Khashoggi in 2018, DAWN promotes democracy & human rights in the Middle East and North Africa).
https://dawnmena.org/

Yesterday evening, before most States had been called, A New Policy issued the below release. In the morning light, every word of it stands.

But before we look forward, a look back: what was the role of Gaza and the Movement U.S. policy towards it has sparked in this election? Clearly, it was a critical factor in key states like Michigan. But even more than that, throughout the last year, it has been a leading indicator:

It was Gaza that first revealed the weakness in President Biden’s re-election campaign long before that fateful first debate. It was the criminalization of student protest that demonstrated the hypocrisy and signaled the failed nature of Biden’s, and then Harris’ attempt to woo millennials and Gen Zs long before the exit polls showed how badly she had underperformed. It was the hope for change in policy that buoyed Harris in the early days of her campaign, and then her unwillingness to separate herself from Biden on Gaza that signaled the fated strategy of hewing to the unpopular mantle of Biden long before Harris did so in any of the other policy areas. AIPAC may claim that this election was a victory for supporters of Netanyahu’s Israel, but in reality this election was a failure for those who could only see Gaza as a niche issue, rather than the vote-winner it could have been in many states, and the canary in the coalmine that it represented on issues far beyond Palestine.

And it will remain so. Whatever happens to America’s alliances, credibility, and civil rights in the year to come, it began with Joe Biden. It began with Gaza.

But all hope is not lost. President-Elect Trump has shown a clear transactionalism in his approach to foreign policy, and it is clear that unconditional support for Israel comes with a cost that exceeds its value. It is also clear that many across the Republican Party, and particularly in its base, believe that America should never offshore its own policy decisions. A New Policy will work with the incoming Administration and Congress wherever we can to ensure American interests are centered.

This is also a clear opportunity to take the new political cycle build and grow a new coalition in the Democratic party. Biden’s failure – Blinken’s failure – Sullivan’s failure – and the failure of many other senior officials who for over a year have turned a deaf ear to the calls from their own base, and a blind eye to the suffering of the Palestinian people – should be a wake-up call, and a chance to fundamentally shift support for Palestinian rights, support for free speech at home, and support for a more just American foreign policy, from the left of the party to its center.

There is much to be done, and for many people this morning the barriers to success may seem higher than ever. But we must work strategically, and with urgency, to drive urgent and overdue changes in America’s policies, to shift American politics, to center America’s interests, and to revive American values. That work begins today.

Former State Department Director Launches “A New Policy” to Restructure US Policy in Israel and Palestine

Leave a reply

In a significant move, Josh Paul, a former Director at the U.S. Department of State and Senior Advisor at DAWN, has announced the launch of “A New Policy.” This non-profit organization, accompanied by a Political Action Committee (PAC), aims to reshape US policy towards Israel and Palestine.

Paul, who resigned from the State Department a year ago, highlights the current policy’s misalignment with American interests, values, and the will of the voters. He believes the issue extends beyond policy itself, pointing to political and economic incentives that distort the decision-making process.

A New Policy distinguishes itself through its inclusive voice and ambitious vision. Click HERE to watch his interview with Democracy Now on the new non-profit that seeks to represent all Americans who are dissatisfied with the current approach and envisions a future where political incentives align with ethical and democratic principles. The organization plans to lobby Congress and the Executive Branch, while the PAC will support candidates who share their vision. Paul emphasizes the need for structural change and sees this as a long-term endeavor, inviting public support through contributions and engagement.

This initiative marks a notable development in the discourse surrounding US foreign policy in the Middle East, promising to bring fresh perspectives and advocacy for change.

Josh Paul
Former Director, U.S. Department of State.
Senior Advisor at DAWN, (DAWN; Founded by Jamal Khashoggi in 2018, DAWN promotes democracy & human rights in the Middle East and North Africa).
https://dawnmena.org/

America needs A New Policy. But in the year since I resigned, and even before then, it’s been clear that what we face today is not only a policy problem – it is a political problem. The political-economic incentive structures around our elected officials and government leaders skew American politics and policymaking away from American interests, values, and the will of the American voter.

That’s why, together with former Biden appointee Tariq Habash and an extraordinary group of leaders including incoming board members former U.S. Ambassador Robert Ford and trailblazing corporate executive Jaleh Bisharat, today I’m proud to announce the launch of A New Policy.

A New Policy is a non-profit organization, A New Policy, Inc., to lobby Congress and the Executive Branch on policy towards Israel and Palestine.  It exists alongside A New Policy PAC, a Political Action Committee that will directly support candidates for elected office who agree that it is time for change.

What makes A New Policy different? Its voice and its vision. Its voice: A New Policy represents *all* Americans who believe that our current policies towards Israel and Palestine are unjust, irrational, out of step with American values, and out of line with the American interest. Its vision: A New Policy envisions and will relentlessly pursue a restructuring of the political-economic incentives so that American politicians can vote in line with their conscience and the desires of their electorate.

So many of you have reached out to me over the past year to ask “what can we do? Nothing seems to be working!” A New Policy is my answer to that question, and as a Director it will be my main focus and line of effort for the foreseeable future: an enduring project to bridge communities, span partisan politics, and work for the years to come to address the entrenched structural, political, and resource obstacles within our system.

Visit our new webpage to learn more about us and our policy positions, and consider making a contribution (one-time, or recurring) that will enable us to demonstrate to Washington the deep support for A New Policy from across these United States. Change will take time; it will take work; it will take money – but, with fierce urgency, change starts now.

It is time for A New Policy.

www.anewpolicy.org

Unconditional Support for Israel: The Risks and Consequences of THAAD Deployment

Leave a reply

Josh Paul

Former Director, U.S. Department of State.
Senior Advisor at DAWN, (DAWN; Founded by Jamal Khashoggi in 2018, DAWN promotes democracy & human rights in the Middle East and North Africa).
https://dawnmena.org/

In 2008, when I worked in the Pentagon, one of my roles was to brief the Undersecretary on the Middle East portion of the SDOB – the Sec Def’s Orders Book, which directs out-of-cycle deployments. As we learn of U.S. plans to deploy a THAAD battery to Israel, I can picture the tab in that thick binder that will have gone forward, with its proposal for deployment, estimated cost, and likely competing perspectives from stakeholders such as the US Army, US European Command, and US Indo-pacific Command. But one thing the SDOB will not have included will have been a political assessment.

Israeli civilians, like all peoples, should not have to live under the threat of rocket fire or ballistic missiles, and on its face, THAAD provides that protection. But does it truly? As others have noted, the THAAD deployment may make Prime Minister Netanyahu more comfortable in ordering a devastating and disproportionate strike against Iran. Even if it succeeds in its tactical objectives, such a strike would be a step away from a regional settlement and lasting peace. The decision to deploy THAAD to Israel is not simply a decision to protect Israel – it is a decision to enable further military escalation. A policy that was truly in the Israeli interest would be one that used American leverage to wind down Israel’s military operations, end the occupation, and frame a pathway to a just and lasting peace.

The THAAD deployment may also have more immediate consequences, not all of them predictable. If Israel does strike Iran, Iran’s response options will have to take the THAAD and its 48-interceptor-load into account. Do they increase their missile load to overwhelm the system, utilize cruise missiles launched from nearer Israel to destroy the system first, or recalibrate their response to focus it on easier targets such as Gulf oil infrastructure (this need not be a kinetic operation – simply scuttling a large ship in the Straits of Hormuz would do measurable harm to the global economy)? Each of these options, particularly the second, also comes with increased risk of direct harm to U.S. assets and personnel, which will be a factor for Iran to carefully consider, but also means that Biden effectively using U.S. forces not only as a deterrent but also as a triggering mechanism that may draw the U.S. further into a regional conflict – and the deployment also places THAAD, whose only operational success has been against a single missile launched from Yemen into the UAE, and which is critical to the defense of Korea and the Gulf, to the test. It will likely prove very effective – but if it fails against a large-scale barrage, there will also be a weakening of its deterrent factor in and beyond the region.

For a year, faced with a wide array of alternatives, each time the Biden Administration has chosen to double-down on unconditional support for Israel. The consequences so far have been devastating for Palestinians, destabilizing for the Middle East, and damaging to America.

Hopes for Harris Presidency Hinge on Concrete Policy Changes

Leave a reply

By Josh Paul

Former Director, U.S. Department of State.
Senior Advisor at DAWN, (DAWN; Founded by Jamal Khashoggi in 2018, DAWN promotes democracy & human rights in the Middle East and North Africa).
https://dawnmena.org/

When asked by media and allies I have expressed a belief that a Harris presidency would be “slightly better” than the Biden Presidency has been for Gaza, in part because she is not a hard-cast ideologue on this issue as Biden is, and in part because her team are more moderate and reasonable (and frankly also more thoughtful and self-aware) than Biden’s team are.

But the devil is in the details. When it comes to those details, it is hard to point to a specific area where we can be sure a Harris presidency would be better. Would they be more likely to condition or suspend arms transfers? They have been explicit that they would not. Would they enforce the U.S. laws already on the books, such as 620I or Leahy? They have not said they would. Would they stand up for the rights of peaceful protestors on campuses across America? They have given no sign of doing so, and indeed, Harris’ responses both to the protests at the time of Netanyahu’s visit to Washington DC, and to protests at her own campaign events, have been deeply disappointing – and their unwillingness to even give a Palestinian-American a voice at the Democratic Convention was a very worrying sign.

I also believe that no individual, not even at the level of the President of the United States, can bring transformative change to U.S. policy on this issue in the next four years given how firmly entrenched the current approach is across American politics – this is something that will take many years to fix, and in the coming weeks I will be unveiling a new effort to address this strategically, holistically, and effectively.

In the meantime, I, and others I have spoken to, would like to believe that Harris would be slightly better than where we are. But there is only so long we can wave our hands at generalities and presumptions – we need clear words from the Harris campaign that give a basis for these hopes. Without those, it is becoming increasingly difficult to hold to such hopes, and the polls demonstrate that the Harris campaign should be increasingly concerned about the implications of this gap between hopes and words – let alone actions – for outcomes of the election in key states.

The ball is in their, and her, court.

USAID Report: Gaza “Humanitarian Pier” A Costly and Ineffective Venture

Leave a reply

BY JOSH PAUL

Former Director, U.S. Department of State / Senior Advisor at DAWN / DAWN; Founded by Jamal Khashoggi in 2018, DAWN promotes democracy & human rights in the Middle East and North Africa. 

We all remember the fiasco that was the “humanitarian pier” (and the airdrops – what happened to those, by the way?).

Yesterday, the USAID Inspector General released their review of the pier, finding that this $230 million exercise “allowed for the delivery of aid in Gaza at a time when land routes were restricted, it operated for about 20 days and allowed delivery of enough assistance to feed only 450,000 people in Gaza.”

This is notable for several reasons, primary among which is the line that “and routes were restricted” – of course without adding “by Israel.” Under U.S. law (Section 620I of the Foreign Assistance Act) we are not permitted to provide any form of assistance, including military assistance, to a country that is restricting the delivery of US-funded humanitarian assistance. As if it had not been obvious for, frankly, many years (let alone the past 10+ months) that this was the case in Gaza, the USAID OIG report is further evidence from the lips of the U.S. Government that these restrictions exist. Every single day and every single dollar that funds the IDF’s capabilities is a violation of our laws.

You can read the entire OIG report HERE, including the finding that “multiple USAID staff expressed concerns that the focus on using JLOTS [the pier] would detract from the Agency’s advocacy to open land crossings in Israel and Egypt, which were seen as more efficient and proven avenues for delivering aid to Gaza.”