Morris Amitay, an influential Washington lobbyist and longtime legislative assistant in Congress, is the former head of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and former vice chairman of the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA), a Likud-aligned organization based in Washington, DC. Described in glowing terms by Michael Ledeen of the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) as "one of the great political minds in recent Washington history" (AEI, May 6, 2003), Amitay is associated with a long list of neoconservative-led or hardline pro-Israel letterhead groups and policy organizations, including the Center for Security Policy (CSP), the Coalition for Democracy in Iran (CDI), the Jerusalem Summit, the Committee on the Present Danger (CPD), the AEI, and the Washington Public Affairs Committee (or Washington PAC), a rightist pro-Israel lobby group founded by Amitay in the early 1980s.
A vocal proponent of the interventionist Mideast agenda shaped by neoconservative ideologues at coalitions like the Project for the New American Century and then largely implemented by the George W. Bush administration in the wake of the 9/11 terror attacks, Amitay supported the invasion of Iraq and has promoted expanding the anti-terror fight to additional countries, including Iran. In 2003, Amitay and Ledeen founded the CDI, an advocacy group pushing for regime change in Iran. The now-defunct coalition proclaimed on its website, "The Islamic Republic as a whole must be held accountable for its actions. Engaging reformists tied only to the regime is counterproductive since it stifles the growth of more democratic forces inside Iran. Perpetuating the behavior of the current regime fundamentally undermines U.S. moral values and national security interests." Among the group's supporters and cofounders were CSP's Frank Gaffney, AEI's Joshua Muravchik and Danielle Pletka, and former CIA director James Woolsey.
In mid-2004, Amitay joined a similar group of hawkish government officials and pundits in reviving the Committee on the Present Danger, a group that led the backlash against the détente policies of the 1970s and helped set the stage for the Reagan Revolution and a revived Cold War. In its more recent incarnation, the CPD says it "is dedicated to protecting and expanding democracy by supporting policies aimed at winning the global war against terrorism and the movements and ideologies that drive it." According to the CPD, "Our mission is to educate free people everywhere about the threat posed by global radical Islamist and fascist terrorist movements; to counsel against appeasement of terrorists; to support policies that are part of a strategy of victory against this menace to freedom; and to support policies that encourage the development of civil society and democracy in those regions from which the terrorists emanate." In addition to Amitay, CPD members include Kenneth Adelman, Rachel Ehrenfeld, Clifford May, and several original CPD figures from the 1970s, including William Van Cleave, Max Kampelman, Midge Decter, Norman Podhoretz, and Peter Rosenblatt. CPD's honorary co-chairs are Sen. Jon Kyl, Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-CT), and George Shultz.
During a May 2003 conference at the AEI on the future of Iran, Amitay sharply criticized the U.S. State Department's efforts to engage the Islamic Republic, saying that Newt Gingrich's much-publicized lambasting of the State Department and Colin Powell had not gone far enough. Clearly eager to see the United States take direct action against Iran, Amitay, who was introduced by Ledeen as the "godfather" of AIPAC, grudgingly acknowledged that such action would be difficult before the 2004 presidential elections: "As far as the administration is concerned, I think we have to concede that from now until November of 2004, the presidential reelection will be a very, very high priority, and that having taken on Iraq, I don't think that this administration or any administration would want to undertake the use of force for regime change anywhere else in the world. So I think what we will see is what we saw for most of [Bill] Clinton's eight years, a policy of kicking the can down the road, a hoping for the best, making tactical decisions, no really decisive, bold decisions."
Regarding the State Department, Amitay said: "The role of the State Department, then, with the White House I think paying less attention to Iran than it deserves, will be crucial. ... I think at this point it's not enough to say that the Secretary of State is just a captive of the State Department. ... In a State mind-set, no tyrannical regime can't be made a friend by showing our own goodwill, politeness, process, and accommodation, as Gingrich put it. ... The Congress is held in contempt by the State Department. They are know-nothings. They're a bunch of yahoos. ... They don't have the sophistication. Some members of Congress are flattered by the State Department as being one of us, and as we go to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee with Senator [Sam] Brownback's initiatives, we're going to have some problems with some of the leading members."
After Amitay's diatribe, Ledeen quipped, to laughter and applause: " Sooner or later, someone will have to give an anti-State Department talk at some other place than the American Enterprise Institute. Otherwise people will think badly of us. They will think that that's all we do here."
More recently, Amitay has focused his invective, which he publishes in the form of a regularly written column posted on the website of his Washington PAC, against realist opponents of the Iraq War and others who are not, in his mind, sufficiently supportive of the cause of intervening in Iran. In his March 7, 2007 column, Amitay attacked some hardline U.S. pro-Israel groups for being soft on Tehran. He wrote: "The Jewish Council for Public Affairs purports to represent a consensus on issues of importance to the American Jewish community. However, its failure to issue any statement on Iran at its plenum here in Washington late last month was both shocking and shameful. It reminds one of the story of the two hapless Jews caught by the Gestapo during World War II, and lined up against a wall to be shot. Seeing that the end was near, one cried out 'long live the Jewish people.' His companion implored him to be quiet—'or you'll get us both in trouble'! With Israel (surely a subject of importance to Jews) being openly threatened with annihilation by the rulers of Iran who are seeking nuclear weapons, how does one explain this glaring omission? Has the JCPA been so intimidated—or indoctrinated—by the voices raised against the possibility of the use of force against Iran, that it could in good conscience just take a pass here?"
Amitay continued this line of thinking in an April 2007 letter to Commentary, writing:
"The real threat to continued strong American public and congressional support for close U.S.-Israel ties comes from anti-Israel bias in the major media, elite universities, and most importantly from ultra-liberal Jewish organizations like Americans for Peace Now and individual Jews who seem to have difficulties dealing with their own Jewishness" (Commentary, April 2007).
Shortly after the final report of the Iraq Study Group (the presidentially authorized group led by former Secretary of State James Baker) was released in December 2006, calling for increased diplomatic efforts with Iraq's neighbors and a gradual drawdown of troops in Iraq, Amitay wrote a scathing critique of the report. He argued that those parts " dealing with the region go beyond foolish stupidity and could be viewed as being closer to appeasement of sworn enemies of the United States, and indicating malice toward Israel. The Report could also serve as an example of Churchill's definition of a second marriage—'the triumph of hope over experience.' Or, as one pundit put it 'the victory of assertion over analysis.' Surely our experience with Iran and Syria should have taught us what a fool's game it must be to rely on one's enemy to save you. Under the heading 'Throw the Iraq Report in the Trash,' Max Boot aptly described it as 'an anticlimactic combination of banalities ... leavened with generous dollops of wishful thinking.' Perhaps he was being too kind" (Amitay, December 22, 2006).
Like his neoconservative friends, Amitay is fond of the term "Islamofascist." In his April 20, 2007 column, Amitay used the mass killings at Virigina Tech as a backdrop for his argument about why Americans need to be worried about the Islamofascists. He also repeated misleading accusations, made by the likes of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, that what radical Islamists really want is to establish a caliphate across the entire planet. He wrote: "Inevitably after the tragic Virginia Tech shootings much attention was focused on why, despite the warning signs raised by the shooter's previous behavior, no action was taken. On a much more macro scale the question must be asked why are we not taking effective action against the very overt threats posed by Iran and the spread of Islamofascism? Surely unambiguous warning signs are there in abundance. We have the resurgence of the Taliban, Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons, its support of jihadist terrorists worldwide, and its proxies killing Americans in Iraq. The bellicose statements of Iran's leaders calling for the annihilation of Israel, their national slogan of 'death to America,' and the calls for even more 'martyrs' make perfectly clear their future intentions. Fueling this bitter enmity toward Western civilization is a fundamentalist religious belief that inevitably a caliphate will be established to rule over the entire world."
When not busy advocating U.S. intervention in more places, Amitay is actively working to persuade congressional figures to push for hawkish pro-Israel legislation. He served as executive director of the powerful AIPAC from 1974 to 1980. Since then, he has directed Washington PAC, which according to its website is "the second-largest pro-Israel PAC in terms of contributions to candidates. And while the largest pro-Israel PAC contributed less than 40% of its receipts to candidates over the last decade, this PAC contributed 80%. Overall, over two million dollars has been carefully distributed to Senators, Representatives, and candidates of both parties who share the view that a secure Israel was in the best interests of the United States.
|
Affiliations
Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs: Vice Chairman
Center for Security Policy: Member, National Security Advisory Council
Jerusalem Summit: Member of Presidium
American Israel Public Affairs Committee: Former Executive Director
Coalition for Democracy in Iran: Cofounder
Coalition for a Democratic Majority: Former Board Member
Washington Public Affairs Committee: Founder and Treasurer
Washington Kurdish Institute: Advisory Board Member
Council on Foreign Relations: Member
Government Service
U.S. Senate: Former Assistant in Office of Legislative Counsel
State Department: Former Foreign Service Officer
U.S. House of Representatives: Former Legislative Assistant
Education
Columbia University: A.B.
Harvard University: LL.B.
|
