|
 |
||||
|
|
|||||
| March 27, 2006 Outing the bashful behemoth U.S. pro-Israel lobby caught in unwelcome spotlight by Dave Himmelstein (Originally published in the Montreal Planet.) While Israel's Separation Wall goes forward on the ground, wreaking havoc in Palestinian lives, Israel's public relations wall in North America is beginning to crumble. Much to its dismay, the robust pro-Israel establishment in the United States finds itself increasingly in the public spotlight. This month, it was jolted by a devastating critique of its reach and clout by two heavyweight scholars in international affairs who provide a systematic factual review of the United States-Israel relationship. Stephen Walt is Academic Dean and Professor of International Affairs at the John F. Kennedy School of Government of Harvard University. His latest book is Taming American Power: The Global Response to U.S. Primacy (W. W. Norton & Co., ISBN 0393052036 ). John Mearsheimer is a Professor of Political Science and the co-director of the Program on International Security Policy at the University of Chicago. He is the author of Tragedy of Great Power Politics (W.W. Norton & Co., ISBN 039332396X ). Their examination reaches a conclusion amounting to a policy earthquake: Israel is not a strategic asset to the United States. Their assessment on a values level is even more threatening to Israel's public stature, inasmuch as they find no "compelling moral case for sustained U.S. backing". What the Israel lobby has been able to accomplish, they say, is "to divert U.S. foreign policy as far from what the American national interest would otherwise suggest, while simultaneously convincing Americans that U.S. and Israeli interests are essentially identical." The paper describes the nuts and bolts of pro-Israel image-making, sketching the broad range of activities - both public and behind-the-scenes - undertaken by pro-Israel advocacy groups. A pattern of intimidation is uncovered in their efforts to promote a misleading public image of Israel, efforts directed at the press, "think tanks" and even in the hallowed halls of academe. Their crowning success is the steering policy influence they exercise at both the Congressional ("a stranglehold") and Executive levels. While much of this is familiar to activists on both sides of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, the prestigious auspices of this report will give it a wider audience. Nonetheless, don't be surprised if you haven't heard about it yet through mainstream Canadian or American media. The authors certainly won't be surprised: "It is hard to imagine any mainstream media outlet in the United States publishing a piece like this one." They find a prevailing, unmistakable pro-Israel slant in press commentary: "Newspapers occasionally publish guest op-eds challenging Israeli policy, but the balance of opinion clearly favors the other side." Hint of espionage An even more ominous shadow is stalking Israel's defenders in the United States, with this month's opening of the trial of two former top staffers of the powerhouse AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) lobby. Steve Rosen, AIPAC's chief lobbyist for 20 years, and Keith Weissman, AIPAC's leading foreign policy analyst, are accused of receiving sec ret Pentagon documents from Larry Franklin, Pentagon specialist, and turning them over to Israeli diplomatic personnel. These confidential documents relate to Iran - a subject matter with chilling timeliness at a moment when a pre-emptive U.S. and/or Israeli air-strike seems highly probable. Franklin has already pleaded guilty and been sentenced to 12 ½ years in prison. His plea bargain arrangement involves testifying at the AIPAC trial. The defendants have been feuding with their former employer over liability and legal fees, and have threatened to bring in embarrassingly high-profile defense witnesses. And the trial of the two Americans will inevitably stir up Zionism's touchiest bugaboo: the accusation of "dual loyalty". Although the pervasive clout of pro-Israel lobbying in the United States is legendary, critical examination of the subject risks being tarred as anti-Semitic. Nevertheless, a widespread perception of an unhealthily extensive pro-Israel influence on U.S. policy was brought into memorable focus in a column by the New York Times' Thomas Friedman, which reported that many Iraqis were referring to American soldiers in Iraq as "the Jews". (Ironically, a compilation of nationwide opinion polls by the Pew Research Center showed less support for the Iraq war among Jews than among the population at large.) The U.S. attack on and occupation of Iraq has spurred closer scrutiny of the United States' pro-Israel tilt, to a point where President George W. Bush has found it necessary (or expedient) to publicly deny that Israel's interests were responsible for the U.S. military thrust into Iraq. However, that denial must be weighed against an assessment given six months before the initial attack by Philip Zelikow, a member of the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board and later to become Executive Director of the official c ommission investigating 9/11 . This Washington super-insider was indiscreetly candid when speaking at the University of Virginia in September 2002. With the buildup to the Iraq invasion moving into high gear, Zelikow swept aside cloudy projections of Weapons of Mass Destruction, opining that "the threat that dare not speak its name" was the danger which Saddam Hussein posed to Israel. "The American government," he added, "doesn't want to lean too hard on it rhetorically, because it is not a popular sell." And it may be getting even less popular. *************************** Click here to read Walt and Mearsheimer paper. |