Jeff Flake on Foreign Policy Republican Representative (AZ-6); Senate challenger

Did not oppose sale of F-35 aircraft to Turkey

U.S. foreign policy can and should be bipartisan

Partner with Congress on U.S. voice around the world

Flake, a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, earned his bachelor's degree from Brigham Young University in international relations. Flake spent his Mormon mission in South Africa and Zimbabwe. He served as the executive director of the Foundation for Democracy in Namibia and speaks Afrikaans. He chaired the Senate Foreign Relations Committee's special panel on Africa. In one of his many challenges to Trump, in 2018 Flake urged a more deliberative foreign policy.

Opposed Congressional efforts to recognize Armenian Genocide

Push to end the U.S. trade embargo on Cuba

Voted NO on supporting democratic institutions in Pakistan.

Proponent's argument to vote Yes:Rep. IKE SKELTON (D, MO-4): Pakistan is important to the Middle East and our intentions there. Their cooperation, of course, is so very, very important. This legislation gives economic and democratic development assistance to that country.

Rep. HOWARD BERMAN (D, CA-28): We can't allow al Qaeda or any other terrorist group that threatens our national security to operate with impunity in the tribal regions or any other part of Pakistan. Nor can we permit the Pakistani state and its nuclear arsenal to be taken over by the Taliban. To help prevent this nightmare scenario, we need to forge a true strategic partnership with Pakistan and its people, strengthen Pakistan's democrat government, and work to make Pakistan a source of stability in a volatile region.

Opponent's argument to vote No:Rep. ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN (R, FL-18): This bill focuses on past actions and failures attributed to the Pakistani Government, punishing the new leadership for the sins of its predecessors. While the authors of H.R. 1886 may have sought to empower our Pakistani partners to undertake the formidable task of fighting and winning against violent extremists, it does the opposite. We have gone down this road before. I recall during the Iraq debate, Members sought to prejudge the surge strategy before it could even be implemented. Let us hope that this will not be repeated with respect to Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Voted YES on cooperating with India as a nuclear power.

• Approves the US-India Agreement for Cooperation on Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy.
• Declares that it is US policy to prevent the transfer to India of nuclear equipment, materials, or technology from other participating governments in the Nuclear Suppliers Group or from any other source; and
• any nuclear power reactor fuel reserve provided to India for use in safeguarded civilian nuclear facilities should be commensurate with reasonable reactor operating requirements.

Proponent's argument to vote Yes:Rep. HOWARD BERMAN (D, CA-28): Integrating India into a global nonproliferation regime is a positive step. Before anyone gets too sanctimonious about India's nuclear weapons program, we should acknowledge that the five recognized nuclear weapons states have not done nearly enough to fulfill their commitments under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, including making serious reductions in their own arsenals, nor in the case of the US in ratifying the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.

Opponent's argument to vote No:Rep. BARBARA LEE (D, CA-9): In withholding my approval, I seek not to penalize the people of India but, rather, to affirm the principle of nuclear nonproliferation. Jettisoning adherence to the international nuclear nonproliferation framework that has served the world so well for more than 30 years, as approval of the agreement before us would do, is just simply unwise. It is also reckless.

Approval of this agreement undermines our efforts to dissuade countries like Iran and North Korea from developing nuclear weapons. By approving this agreement, all we are doing is creating incentives for other countries to withdraw from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.

Voted NO on deterring foreign arms transfers to China.

• Denial of participation in cooperative research and development
• Prohibition of ownership and control of any business registered as a manufacturer or exporter of defense articles or services
• Removal of all licenses relative to dual-use goods or technology
• Prohibition of participation of any foreign military sales

Voted YES on reforming the UN by restricting US funding.

• Requires the creation of an Independent Oversight Board with the authority to evaluate all operations of the UN
• Instructs the UN to implement procedures to protect whistle-blowers, individuals who reveal wrongdoings within an organization to the public or to those in positions of authority
• Obliges the creation of a uniform code of conduct for all UN officials
• Requires the shifting of the funding mechanisms of certain organizational programs from the regular assessed UN budget to voluntarily funded programs
• Compels the US President to influence the Secretary General of the UN to waive diplomatic immunity for UN officials under investigation or charged with serious criminal offences
• Creates a certification of UN cooperation to provide documentary evidence to member states investigating the Oil-for-Food program

Voted YES on keeping Cuba travel ban until political prisoners released.

Voted YES on withholding $244M in UN Back Payments until US seat restored.

Foreign aid often more harmful than helpful .

As adopted by the General Membership of the Republican Liberty Caucus at its Biannual Meeting held December 8, 2000.
• WHEREAS libertarian Republicans believe in limited government, individual freedom and personal responsibility;
• WHEREAS we believe that government has no money nor power not derived from the consent of the people;
• WHEREAS we believe that people have the right to keep the fruits of their labor; and
• WHEREAS we believe in upholding the US Constitution as the supreme law of the land;

BE IT RESOLVED that the Republican Liberty Caucus endorses the following [among its] principles:
1. The United States should not be answerable to any governing body outside the United States for its trade policy.
2. Foreign aid is often more harmful than helpful and should be curtailed.
3. US military personnel should always be under US command.

International Criminal Court decisions not valid for US.

OFFICIAL CONGRESSIONAL SUMMARY: Prohibits the use of appropriated funds for the establishment or operation of the International Criminal Court. Declares that any action taken by or on behalf of the Court: (1) against any member of the US armed forces shall be considered an act of aggression against the US; or (2) against any US citizen or national shall be considered an offense against the law of nations.

SPONSOR'S INTRODUCTORY REMARKS: Rep. PAUL: This bill prohibits funds made available by the US Government from being used for the establishment or operation of the International Criminal Court. Perhaps the most significant part of the bill makes clear that any action taken by or on behalf of the Court against members of the US Armed Forces shall be considered an act of aggression against the US.

In May 2002, Pres. Bush took the commendable step of repudiating the Statute of the International Criminal Court. The Court is an illegitimate body even by the UN's own standards. The Statute of the International Criminal Court was enacted by the UN General Assembly, whereas according to the UN Charter, the authority to create such a body lies only in the UN Security Council.

The International Criminal Court puts US citizens in jeopardy of unlawful and unconstitutional criminal prosecution. The Court does not provide many of the Constitutional protections guaranteed every American citizen, including the right to trial by jury, the right to face your accuser, and the presumption of innocence, and the protection against double jeopardy.

Members of the US Armed Forces are particularly at risk for politically motivated arrests, prosecutions, fines, and imprisonment for acts engaged in for the protection of the US. I hope all members of this body will join me in opposing this illegitimate and illegal court.

LEGISLATIVE OUTCOME:Referred to House Committee on International Relations; never came to a vote.

End the Cuban embargo.

SPONSOR'S INTRODUCTORY REMARKS: Rep. PAUL: This bill lifts the harmful and counterproductive US embargo on Cuba. The sanctions have failed to remove Castro from power, and other nations are unwilling to respect the embargo.

I oppose economic sanctions for two very simple reasons. First, they don't work as effective foreign policy. Time after time, from Cuba to China to Iraq, we have failed to unseat despotic leaders by refusing to trade with the people of those nations. If anything, the anti-American sentiment aroused by sanctions often strengthens the popularity of such leaders. While sanctions may serve our patriotic fervor, they mostly harm innocent citizens and do nothing to displace the governments we claim as enemies.

Second, sanctions simply hurt American industries, particularly agriculture. Every market we close to our nation's farmers is a market exploited by foreign farmers. China, Russia, North Korea, and Cuba all represent huge markets for our farm products, yet many in Congress favor trade restrictions that prevent our farmers from selling to the billions of people in these countries.

I certainly understand the emotional feelings many Americans have toward nations such as Iran, Iraq, Libya, and Cuba. Yet we must not let our emotions overwhelm our judgment in foreign policy matters, because ultimately human lives are at stake. Economic common sense, self-interested foreign policy goals, and humanitarian ideals all point to the same conclusion: Congress should work to end economic sanctions against all nations immediately.

The legislation I introduce today is representative of true free trade in that while it opens trade, it prohibits the US taxpayer from being compelled to subsidize the US government, the Cuban government or individuals or entities that choose to trade with Cuban citizens.

LEGISLATIVE OUTCOME:Referred to House Committee on Immigration & Border Security; never came to a vote.

Withdraw from UNESCO.

EXCERPTS OF RESOLUTION:

• Whereas President Ronald Reagan, citing gross financial mismanagement, anti-American bias, and anti-freedom policies, withdrew the US from membership in the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) in 1984;
• Whereas the US rejoined UNESCO in 2003;
• Whereas the US has only a single vote in UNESCO despite being assessed 25% of the UNESCO budget;
• Whereas UNESCO membership may force unconstitutional restraints on US freedom of the press;
• Whereas UNESCO effectively bypasses congressional authority to manage Federal lands by establishing management policies;
• Whereas UNESCO membership would undermine US sovereignty by forcing US adherence to the UN global policy on bioethics; and
• Whereas UNESCO seeks to levy an unconstitutional 'global tax' on Internet use on US citizens

Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the House of Representatives, That it is the sense of Congress that--
1. the United States should formally withdraw from UNESCO; and
2. any funds appropriated towards the US contribution to UNESCO, but not yet transferred to UNESCO, should be returned to the Treasury.

LEGISLATIVE OUTCOME:Referred to House Committee on International Relations; never came to a vote.

Withhold UN funding until voluntary and program-specific.

Directs the President to influence the UN to shift the funding mechanism for the UN from an assessed to a voluntary basis.
• Withholds up to 50% of nonvoluntary US contributions to the regular budget of the UN unless 80% of the total regular budget of the UN is apportioned on a voluntary basis.
• Requires the annual congressional budget justification to include a detailed itemized request.
• Prohibits making funds available for international peacekeeping activities for any purpose other than the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) or to the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR).
• States that it is US policy to oppose any proposals on expansion of the Security Council that would include veto rights for new members.
• Withholds US contributions from any UN entity that recognizes a Palestinian state or upgrades the status of the Palestinian observer mission at the UN.
• Withholds funds for human rights investigations in Palestinian territories.
• Withholds support for any member state which is subject to Security Council sanctions, has repeatedly supported acts of international terrorism, or is a country of particular concern for religious freedom.

1. The US pays billions of dollars into the UN system every year (almost $7.7 billion in 2010), significantly more than any other nation.
2. The UN system suffers from unacceptably high levels of waste, fraud, and abuse, which seriously impair its ability to fulfill the lofty ideals of its founding.
3. Amidst the continuing financial, corruption, and sexual abuse scandals of the past several years, American public disapproval of United Nations has reached all-time highs: 62% of Americans believe that the UN is doing a poor job
4. Significant improvements in UN transparency and accountability are necessary for improving public perceptions of and American support for UN operations.

Rated -3 by AAI, indicating a anti-Arab anti-Palestine voting record.

The Arab American Institute has compiled a Scorecard to catalogue the voting record of the 112th Congress on issues of importance to the Arab American community. For the House, we included 15 items: two bills on the Arab Spring, five bills and one letter on Palestine, two bills on Lebanon, three bills and a letter regarding civil liberties, and two bills on immigration.

1. H.Res. 88 (+): supporting democratic aspirations in Egypt
2. H.R. 2643 (+): penalizing the Bahraini government for attacking medical personnel
3. H.R. 1006 (-): the Jerusalem Embassy and Recognition Act
4. H.R. 1501 (-): withholding US contributions until the UN retracts accusations of Israeli war crimes.
5. H.Res. 268 (-): opposing any unilateral declaration of a Palestinian state
6. H.R. 2457 (-): prohibiting any US government document from referring to "Palestine"
7. H.R. 2829 (-): defunding the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees. The bill's 141 co-sponsors receive a (-).
8. 8. (+). Rep. David Price (D-NC) and Rep. Peter Welch (D-VT) issued a letter titled "Support Palestinian Aid and Israel's Security," in which they call upon Congress to continue aid to the Palestinian Authority.
9. H.R. 2215 (*) "to ensure that United States taxpayer dollars are not used to fund terrorist entities in Lebanon
10. H.R. 996 (+): to raise awareness of the use of cluster munitions where civilians are present
11. H.R. 140 (-): the "Birthright Citizenship Act, to eliminate "anchor babies" by changing the 14th Amendment.
12. H. Res. 283 (+): to counter violence and discrimination against Muslim, Arab, Sikh, and South Asian communities
13. H.R. 1805 (-): authorizing an extension of the USA PATRIOT Act until 2013, and amending the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA)
14. H.R. 1842 (+): the DREAM Act to protect undocumented minors pursuing higher education.
15. H.R. 1932 (-): the Keep our Communities Safe Act for greater power to detain undocumented immigrants.

Disallow Palestine from joining ICC to threaten Israel.

Excerpts from Letter from 73 Senators to Secretary of State Kerry We are deeply concerned by the decision of the Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas to seek membership in the International Criminal Court (ICC), because the Palestinian Authority is not a state and its express intent is to use this process to threaten Israel.

Pres. Abbas' effort contravene the spirit of earlier agreements between Israel and the Palestinian Authority and erodes the prospect for peace. Therefore, the US must make clear that joining the ICC is not a legitimate or viable path for Palestinians.

Israel is a major strategic partner of the US and is facing increasing pressure from those who seek to delegitimize its very existence. The only realistic and sustainable path to resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is through direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.

Supporting argument: (Heritage Foundation, "U.S. Should Not Join the ICC," Aug. 18, 2009): The ICC prosecutor is exploring a request by the Palestinian National Authority to prosecute Israeli commanders for alleged war crimes committed during the recent actions in Gaza. Palestinian lawyers maintain that the Palestinian National Authority can request ICC jurisdiction as the de facto sovereign even though it is not an internationally recognized state. By countenancing Palestine's claims, the ICC prosecutor has enabled pressure to be applied to Israel over alleged war crimes, while ignoring Hamas's incitement of the military action and its commission of war crimes against Israeli civilians. Furthermore, by seemingly recognizing Palestine as a sovereign entity, the prosecutor's action has created a pathway for Palestinian statehood without first reaching a comprehensive peace deal with Israel. This determination is an inherently political issue beyond the ICC's authority.

Two-state solution despite Israeli settlements on West Bank.

Congressional Summary: S.Res.6/H.Res.11 objects to U.N. Security Council Resolution 2334, which characterizes Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem as illegal and demands cessation of settlement activities.

• Calls for such resolution to be repealed or fundamentally altered and allows all final status issues toward a two-state solution to be resolved through direct bilateral negotiations between the parties.
• Notes that granting membership and statehood standing to the Palestinians at the UN, its specialized agencies, and other international institutions outside of the context of a bilateral peace agreement with Israel would cause severe harm to the peace process.
• Urges upholding the U.S. practice of vetoing all Security Council resolutions that recognize unilateral Palestinian actions or dictate terms and a time line for a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
• Reaffirms that it is U.S. policy to seek a sustainable, just, and secure two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Opposing argument: (Cato Institute, Dec. 19, 2003): In principle, separation seems the best answer to stop the killing. For this reason, a security fence makes sense--if it actually separates Jew from Arab. Unfortunately, to protect a number of disparate Israeli settlements erected in the midst of Palestinian communities, Israel currently is mixing Jew and Arab and separating Arab from Arab. Thus are sown the seeds for conflict. After 36 years of occupation, the land remains almost exclusively Arab. The limited Jewish presence is the result of conscious colonization. The settlements require a pervasive Israeli military occupation, imposing a de facto system of apartheid. Separation offers the only hope, but separation requires dismantling Israeli settlements.

Allow travel between the United States and Cuba.

Prohibits the President from regulating or prohibiting travel to or from Cuba by U.S. citizens or legal residents or any of the transactions ordinarily incident to such travel, except in time of war or armed hostilities between the United States and Cuba, or of imminent danger to the public health or the physical safety of U.S. travelers.

Commitment to unbreakable U.S.-Israel bond.

Dear Secretary Clinton:

We are writing to reaffirm our commitment to the unbreakable bond that exists between our country and the State of Israel and to express to you our deep concern over recent tension. In every important relationship, there will be occasional misunderstandings and conflicts.

Our valuable bilateral relationship with Israel needs and deserves constant reinforcement. As the Vice-President said during his recent visit to Israel: "Progress occurs in the Middle East when everyone knows there is simply no space between the U.S. and Israel when it comes to security, none. No space." Steadfast American backing has helped lead to Israeli peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan. And American involvement continues to be critical to the effort to achieve peace between Israel and the Palestinians.

We recognize that, despite the extraordinary closeness between our country and Israel, there will be differences over issues both large and small. Our view is that such differences are best resolved quietly, in trust and confidence, as befits longstanding strategic allies. We hope and expect that, with mutual effort and good faith, the United States and Israel will move beyond this disruption quickly, to the lasting benefit of both nations.