A Democratic senator has blocked a measure that combats the anti-Israel Boycott, Divest, Sanctions (BDS) movement due to its use of the term “Israeli-controlled territories.” But the senator voted for a bill—now a law—that contained similar language months ago.
In February, Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont voted for the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015 (TFTA), binding legislation that defined a boycott of Israel as “Israel or … any territory controlled by Israel.” Now, Leahy and critics of the anti-BDS measure argue that its use of the term “Israeli-controlled territories” prejudges the outcome of potential Israeli-Palestinian negotiations.
Leahy’s spokesman told THE WEEKLY STANDARD Wednesday that the anti-BDS amendment uses terms far removed from TFTA, which he said was non-binding legislation anyway.
“The […] amendment defines an “Israeli Occupied Territory” as “Israel,”” spokesman David Carle said. “That is factually inaccurate, contrary to longstanding U.S. policy, and a significant departure from the language in the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act. And the language in that Act was a “Statement of Policy,” not binding legislation.”
But the amendment, drafted by Sen. Mark Kirk, an Illinois Republican, and other pro-Israel senators, uses the term “Israeli-controlled territories,” not “Israeli Occupied Territory,” and the former is nearly identical to language used in TFTA—which is binding.
Carle also said that Sen. Kirk’s measure was a “cynical attempt to enact legislation in the name of anti-BDS that would recognize disputed occupied territories as part of Israel,” and underscored that Leahy “is not opposed to the concept of anti-BDS.”
However, after the amendment’s introduction and in response to such criticism, the senators added a clause to ensure that the measure did not prejudge the outcome of Israeli-Palestinian issues, “including border delineation, that can only be resolved through direct negotiations between the parties.” The senators did not remove the “Israeli-controlled territories” language, however, because they argued doing so would significantly weaken the measure. Furthermore, that language already existed in law.
Leahy’s objection to the measure cropped up soon after Ohio senator Sherrod Brown dropped his, due to pressure from pro-Israel supporters, according to a congressional source. Brown’s refusal to clear also had to do with the measure’s language, the source said. But the Ohio senator voted against both bills that contain similar language in the past, while Leahy only voted against one, roughly a year ago.
In addition to objecting to the measure’s language, the Vermont senator attributed the amendment’s dead-end to Utah senator Mike Lee and his “blanket refusal” to allow amendments to the Senate floor. He further claimed, according to a source, that the measure was non-germane to the defense bill it was a part of, the National Defense Authorization Act of 2017.
Leahy is a long-time Israel critic. A week after he voted for TFTA, the Vermont senator wrote a letter to Secretary of State John Kerry requesting that the administration investigate Israel’s alleged “gross violations of human rights.”
