A
Truly Inconvenient Truth
By Ira Glunts
22 September, 2007
Countercurrents.org
Review of The Israel
Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy by John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M.
Walt, Farrar, Strauss and Giroux, 2007.
When
the article titled “The Israel Lobby” by Professors John
J. Mearsheimer (University of Chicago) and Stephen M. Walt (Harvard)
appeared in the London Review of Books and in an expanded form as a
working paper on the web site of Harvard’s The Kennedy School
of Government in March 2006, the authors were battered by a tsunami
of criticism, insults and slander that even the telling of a very inconvenient
truth rarely receives. They were called “anti-Semitic,”
“unpatriotic,” “ignorant,” and “dangerous.”
Their work was labeled “poor scholarship,” and it was claimed
that their article used racist web sites such as that of white supremacist,
David Duke as a source of information and inspiration. These scurrilous
and ludicrous charges, all of which were made by a number of their colleagues
at Harvard, as well as prominent politicians, political analysts and
other shapers of public opinion, were trumpeted in The Wall Street Journal,
The Washington Post, and The Boston Globe, as both opinion and “straight”
news coverage. This is an unusual reaction to an academic article written
by two distinguished political scientists from first rate universities.
Ironically, it served to demonstrate one of the authors’ main
contentions: that the media has convinced the American public that US
and Israeli interests are identical and any opinion to the contrary
is unacceptable, outrageous and will be treated as intolerable.
Now Mearsheimer and Walt
have expanded their article into a book called The Israel Lobby and
U.S. Foreign Policy. The main assertions of the authors are: current
US policy of unequivocal support for Israel is contrary to US self-interest;
US policy is determined by a small special interest group they call
the Israel lobby; this group successfully suppresses debate on US/Israeli
relations; and finally, the existence of the Israel lobby was a necessary
condition for the US invasion of Iraq and is now a powerful force in
promoting the use of military force against Iran, Lebanon and Syria.
The authors conclude that while the US should insure Israel’s
existence, it should treat its government as it treats all other allies.
In other words, the US should forego its so-called “special relationship”
with the Jewish state.
The Israel Lobby does not
present much if any primary research, but has instead built a case for
ending the US/Israeli “special relationship” from various
existing published sources, popular and academic, both American and
Israeli. However, despite the use of secondary sources, The Israel Lobby
is an important book. Its surprising impact and importance are based
on a number of felicitously convergent factors. First, Mearsheimer and
Walt are well-regarded academics from high-powered institutions whose
previous writings are in the mainstream politically. Their stature and
politics led many in the pro-Israel camp to fear they might draw greater
attention to the same views than had previous writers. So the lobby
viciously attacked them. Ironically but predictably, the storm of unfair
and overwrought criticism of the original article brought more attention
to the authors and their work than they ever could have anticipated.
Secondly, the publication and success, despite a smear campaign, of
Jimmy Carter’s book, Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid did much to
legitimize criticism of Israel and the current US/Israeli relationship.
Finally, and this cannot be emphasized enough, the clarity of the arguments,
the calm and reasoned manner in which the evidence is presented and
the authors’ decision to include materials covering a very wide
range of perspectives and sources makes a very compelling case. Particularly
powerful are the inclusion of historical and moral arguments from the
works of Israeli historians and journalists.
Mearsheimer and Walt begin
their exposition by detailing the three to four and a half billion dollars
in annual aid the US gives Israel. It is more than 25% of the total
American foreign aid budget. In addition to the monetary assistance,
the authors describe the political support the US provides for Israeli
policies and actions which are condemned worldwide as illegal and immoral.
They refute the argument that Israel is a strategic asset and then make
the case that it is actually a liability. They aver that unconditional
support of Israel is detrimental to US relations with other nations
and encourages hatred and terrorism directed toward us. Their conclusion,
buttressed by a great deal of evidence, is that the reason for the US
devotion to Israel is the influence of its lobby.
Whether the lobby was a necessary
condition for America’s invasion of Iraq probably will remain
a topic of debate. I agree with those who maintain that factors such
as the oil and defense industry lobbies, revenge, and the past history
of US interventionism, are not given enough consideration. Although
it has elicited less comment, the authors’ case for the deleterious
influence of the lobby in pushing for long-term support of the Israeli
occupation (and illegal settlement) of territories conquered in the
1967 War, is insightful, as is the more recent advocacy of the lobby
for US confrontation with Iran.
One of the most common justifications
given for the US support of the Jewish State of Israel is its moral
behavior and ethical values. This is juxtaposed with the image of Palestinians
and Arab neighbors, who are alleged to be obsessed with the destruction
of Israel and who have purportedly rejected numerous peace offers. This
perception, in which most Americans believe, has no basis in reality.
It is a national myth which has been sold to both Israelis and the American
public. Mearsheimer and Walt opine that “[i]n fact a good case
could be made that current U.S. policy conflicts with basic American
values and if the United States were to choose sides on the basis of
moral considerations alone, it would back the Palestinians, not Israel.”
One moral consideration is
that during the 1948 War that resulted in Israeli independence, 700,000
Palestinians either were expelled or fled the attacking Israeli armed
forces, who frequently engaged in massacres, rapes and looting of unarmed
Palestinian villages. The Israeli government then barred the refugees
from returning to their homes, refusing to abide by UN resolution 194
and existing international law, which gave those that fled during wartime
the right to return to their homes. Contrary to Israeli propaganda,
Israel was the aggressor in its 1956, 1967, 1982, and 2006 wars. Contrary
to the myth which has been sold assiduously by the Jewish lobby and
the Israeli public relations machine, with the invaluable assistance
of former President Bill Clinton, it was Israel, not the Palestinians,
who was responsible for the failure of the Oslo process and the Camp
David summit. As former Foreign Minister Shlomo Ben Ami is quoted as
saying “if [he] were a Palestinian he would have rejected Camp
David, as well.”
Then there is the matter
of the second-class status of Palestinians who remained in Israel after
1948, who comprises 20% of the population. They are discriminated against
in law and in practice. They are treated by the government with neglect,
oppression and suspicion. . This permanent second-class status of the
Palestinians is not the kind of multi-ethnic society which Americans
associate which free and just societies. This inconvenient truth which
is rarely mentioned even by critics of Israel (compare Carter’s
Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid) is laid out in a quite straight forward
manner by Mearsheimer and Walt. Of course we cannot forget Israel’s
40-year occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, with the continual expansion
of Jewish settlements. and the oppression of the Palestinian population
there. This occupation has featured mass expulsion (over 100,000 after
the 1967 War), land confiscation, mass imprisonment without due process,
as well as periodic military assaults which are purportedly directed
at militants, but invariably take a heavy toll on the civilian population
and infrastructure.
Mearsheimer and Walt state
that they are not claiming that Israel is any worse than other nation,
only that they should not be considered any better. But by the time
a reader finishes the chapter “A Dwindling Moral Case” s/he
may find the “not any worse than” qualifier hard to accept,
at least if you factor in Israel’s size and youth. The arguments
the book make which undermine the case of Israeli’s moral superiority
are compelling, even overwhelming and only briefly explored here. For
the reader fed the false notion that Israel is the heroic Hollywood
fantasy of the movie Exodus, all this may come as a shock. It is the
elephant in the closets of all pro-Israel advocates. In my mind, the
authors’ articulation of the dwindling, perhaps expired, moral
case for Israel is at the heart of Mearsheimer and Walt’s success.
Without it there would have been no controversy and no book.
The second part of The Israel
Lobby concerns recent events and a section of not very original recommendations.
It is more a work of journalism than political science and suffers because
the authors are not journalists nor Middle East specialists. The strongest
chapter in this part concerns arguments which demonstrate how members
of the lobby were instrumental in taking America into Iraq. But overall,
the writing and analysis is weaker than in the first part and does contain
some important errors.
Some of these errors are
due to the false premise that the Bush administration occasionally has
worked to achieve a balanced Middle East peace. For example, the authors
portray Condoleezza Rice’s February trip to Israel/Palestine incorrectly
as an attempt to restart the peace process. She actually went to pressure
Mahmoud Abbas to withdraw from the national unity agreement and to thus
isolate the democratically elected Hamas government. The chapter on
the lobby and the Palestinians portrays the duo of Dick Cheney and George
Bush as initially interested in helping formulate a peace treaty between
the Israelis and Palestinians and makes much of their being the first
to endorse the idea of a future Palestinian State. But as former Treasury
Secretary Paul O’Neill reports in his memoir The Price of Loyalty,
President Bush made it clear at his initial full cabinet meeting that
US policy would change radically in favor of Israel during his administration.
In their book Boomerang, the respected journalists Raviv Drucker and
Ofer Shelah report that Bush and Cheney knew so little about the politics
of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict that when they agreed to the request
of the Saudi Ambassador and close friend of the Bush family Bandar Bin
Sultan’s request for a letter confirming that the US support the
idea of a Palestinian state, neither the President nor Vice President
were aware that this would set an important precedent.
Almost two weeks after its
publication the criticism of The Israel Lobby has been markedly muted.
The Jerusalem Post reported that both AIPAC and the Israeli government
had recommended that pro-Israel advocates “ignore the book”
and not call attention to what may be pernicious to their cause. Not
everyone has followed this advice, but the overall restrained reaction
as compared to when the original article appeared is quite extraordinary.
Despite some errors of analysis including possibly overemphasizing the
role of the lobby in the decision to attack Iraq, this book is extraordinarily
important. John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt have not only brought the
debate over Israel and its supporters into the open, but they have forced
the lobby and their media allies into a tactical retreat. For this they
have my sincere admiration.
Ira Glunts first visited the Middle East in 1972, where
he taught English and physical education in a small rural community
in Israel. He was a volunteer in the Israeli Defense Forces in 1992.
He lives in Madison, New York where he writes and operates a used and
rare book business.
Leave
A Comment
&
Share Your Insights
Comment
Policy
Digg
it! And spread the word!
Here is a unique chance to help this article to be read by thousands
of people more. You just Digg it, and it will appear in the home page
of Digg.com and thousands more will read it. Digg is nothing but an
vote, the article with most votes will go to the top of the page. So,
as you read just give a digg and help thousands more to read this article.