Debating The Pro- Israel Lobby's Influence On US Policy In The Mideast
By Joe American
08 April, 2006
Countercurrents.org
It is regrettably clear that the American and British governments are preparing for war, this time against Iran. It is equally clear that the American and British people believe neither that their governments should start another war, nor that this particular war would be in their nations' best interests. Moreover, the public hasn't heard any serious debate about the reasons for and against another war, so nothing like a national consensus exists. And it is unclear exactly who is pushing us into this ill-advised war.WHO IS DRIVING US TOWARD WAR WITH IRAN?
Nevertheless, we can surmise that five major causal factors are pushing the Anglo-Americans toward war against Iran: (a) Big Oil (e.g., Bush, Cheney and Rice are former oil-company executives who know that Iran holds 10% of the world's known oil reserves, and that any pipeline from the new Central Asian oilfields would have to run directly through Iran to be shipped from the Mediterranean Sea to England and the eastern USA); (b) the American military-industrial complex and its war-profiteering investors (e.g., Halliburton and the Carlyle Group); (c) the American Religious Right (e.g., to satisy their evangelical pro-war, end-times vision of a reconstituted "Greater Israel"); and (d) Israel and its pro-Israel lobby in America (e.g., AIPAC and JINSA, to satisfy their Zionist visions of Israeli dominance in the region without any real concessions).
Contrastingly, Iran's "nuclear weapons program" is NOT a major causal factor, but rather is a mere pretext, for war. Every serious Middle Eastern analyst knows that: Bush and Blair have presented no hard evidence whatsoever to prove that Iran is seeking nuclear weapons; and even if the Iranians were doing so, they would be at least 10 years away from producing a single nuke. In short, there's ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE that Iran intends to develop nuclear weapons anytime in the forseeable future, and Iran definitely does NOT posses any nuclear weapons right now, so it is UTTERLY INCAPABLE of using nukes to pose an imminent threat to the USA, the UK, or any Mideastern nation.
IS THE USA'S PRO-ISRAEL LOBBY A MAJOR CAUSAL FACTOR IN PROMOTING WAR?
Harvard University's JFK School Of Government recently published a directly relevant research paper by Professors Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer. Their 81-page study concludes: that the USA's pro-Israel lobby exercises grossly disproportionate influence on American foreign policy; and that the powerful pro-Israel lobby was a major causal factor in persuading the Bush administration to invade Iraq. Furthermore, there is substantial evidence that the pro-Israel
lobby is a significant causal factor that is pushing the USA toward another war against Iran.It is noteworthy that the "pro-Israel lobby" includes both causal factors (c) and (d) above (i.e., Christian fundamentalists as well as Jewish fundamentalists).
WHAT CAN WE DO ABOUT THIS ILL-ADVISED DRIVE TOWARD WAR WITH IRAN?
It's obvious that Americans need a free and fair-minded national debate that addresses at least three crucial questions (because they are NOT merely academic): (1) Is the pro-Israel lobby a major causal factor in persuading the US government to attack Iran; (2) If not, what are the major causal factors that are pushing the US government to attack Iran; and (3) In either case, is it truly in America's national interests - as opposed to Israel's national interests or the Corporatocracy's war-profiteering interests - to unnecessarily commence an unjust and illegal war of aggression against Iran?
Finally, you can hold your own "debate" by reading the articles that are listed in the endnotes. When you're done, you'll be capable of providing relatively well-informed answers to these important questions!
ENDNOTES[1] Linda S. Heard's 4-5-06 CC/Online Journal essay, "Bush And Neocons Beating Drums For Attack On Iran" [This essay: (a) explains why every American citizen should be debating whether it's truly in our national interests for the Bush administration to commence a war against Iran, as recommended by the pro-Israeli lobby (e.g., AIPAC and JINSA); (b) provides evidence that the neocon "Israel-firsters" on the Bush national-security team have prevailed, so the US and UK are preparing for an "inevitable" strike against Iran using conventional and nuclear weapons (i.e., so-called "mini-nukes").]:
http://www.countercurents.org/iran-heard050406.htm[2] Bill Berkowitz's 4-6-06 CC/Inter Press Service essay, "Evangelicals Rally Their Flocks Behind Israel" [The American Religious Right's pro-war evangelicals have their own pro-Israel lobby with strong ties to the Republican Party: Christians United For Israel ("CUFI"). George W. Bush is an evangelical Republican, so it is likely that CUFI's end-timers have influenced his thinking about US policy in the Mideast.]:
http://www.countercurrents.org/berkowitz060406.htm[3] Michael Neumann's 4-5-06 CC/Counterpunch essay, "The Israel Lobby And Beyond" [A Canadian Philosophy Professor argues that: (a) the pro-Israel lobby in America isn't the ONLY causal factor that shapes US policy in the Mideast (undeniably true); therefore (b) the pro-Israel lobby isn't a causal factor (clearly false). Of course, his syllogism fails the test of logic because it's based on a false premise: even if several causal factors shape US policy in the Mideast, it's nonetheless true that the pro-Israel lobby is one of those causal factors. He then falsely asserts that we cannot know why America repeatedly acts against its own national interests to support Israel's policies (i.e., as if it's an unascertainable mystery). Hence, his red-herring arguments rest on obscurantist illogic, which adds nothing to the debate.]:
http://countercurrents.org/neumann050406.htm[4] Ghali Hassan's 4-5-06 CC essay, "Protecting Israel: Chomsky's Way" [The author: (a) contends that MIT Linguistics Professor Noam Chomsky has unfairly criticized the Mearsheimer-Walt research paper about the pro-Israel lobby's disproportionate influence on US policy; (b) rejects Chomsky's reputation as the left's most intellectually-honest critic of US foreign policy; and (c) quotes Chomsky's writings to prove that he's an intellectually-dishonest apologist for Israel whose modus operandi is to shift the blame onto its chief ally: "Chomsky blames all Israeli crimes on the US."]:
http://www.countercurrents.org/hassan050406.htm[5] Hannah K. Strange's 4-5-06 SW article, "Alarm At UK Call To Change International Law" [In a chillingly fascistic move that is calculated to justify the commencement of an Anglo-American attack on Iran, British Defense Secretary John Reid has proposed major alterations to international law which would eliminate the Geneva Conventions' prisoner-rights provisions and legitimate the "doctrine of preemptive war," despite the UK's erroneous use of that doctrine against Iraq in the absence of any imminent threat.]:
http://www.spacewars.com/reports/
Alarm_At_UK_Call_On_International_Law.html[6] Tom Regan's 4-3-06 CSM article, "British Consider Consequences Of Attack On Iran: Blair Government, Military, Will Examine Posssible Role, If Any, In 'Inevitable' US-Led Attack" [It's déjà vu: on Monday, the British government met in secret to discuss a US attack on Iran, which it regards as "inevitable" if Tehran doesn't agree to demands that it freeze its civilian nuclear-energy program's alleged plans to enrich uranium. However, the British government
acknowledges that serious terrorist blowback will occur if the US does attack Iran, and the British public appears to be strongly opposed to any such attack.]:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0403/dailyUpdate.html[7] Ted Lang's 3-31-06 Rense.com essay, "Israel Rules America" [A withering response to several writers who predictably smeared Profs. Mearsheimer and Walt with the unjustified charge of "anti-Semitism" because their level-headed study concluded that the pro-Israel lobby exerts a powerful influence upon US foreign policy that runs counter to American national interests.]:
http://www.rense.com/general70/rules.htm[8] Joseph Massad's 3-25-06 Counterpunch essay, "Blaming The Israel Lobby: It's US Policy That Inflames The Arab World" [Columbia U. Professor of Politics and History understands the Middle Eastern mentality well and thus provides a well-balanced perspective. Nevertheless, his insightful essay was targeted for some unmerited criticism in Michael Neumann's 4-5-06 essay.]:
http://www.counterpunch.org/massad03252006.html[9] Tom Regan's 3-22-06 ICH/CSM article, "Study Alleges That Pro-Israel Lobby Not Good For US Interests" [Provides a useful link to Mearsheimer and Walt's Harvard research paper, then helpfully summarizes some of the first reactions - pro and con - to their study.]:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article12435.htm
