It seems that the crown of the world's worst warmongering nation has been slipped from the head of the Bush and been planted firmly on the the head of Israel PM Olmert who seems to have a suicide wish for himself and his country. Israel desperately needs to have a decent PM who is not putting his country at desperate risk. The Israel lobby here in the USA is also fixated on a death wish by insisting on war forever both for Israel and the USA. It's the numbskulls leading the numbskulls into disaster. Both Bush and Olmart are such rabid warmongers that peace in the Middle East is impossible until both are out of power.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Dateline Aqaba 'All here today now share a goal: The Holy Land must be shared between the State of Palestine and the State of Israel,' US President George W. Bush said in Aqaba Wednesday, flanked by Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas.

"Sharon stood there, looking at the crowd, listening. His face betrayed none of the emotion that had to be stirring up inside.

"There were many elements of the ceremony on the western lawn of King Abdullah's palace that had to be difficult for Sharon to bear.

"First off, the very idea of embarking as the sides clearly did yesterday on a diplomatic plan not negotiated between the sides, but rather imposed upon them from an outside source, goes against what Sharon has been saying for decades. This is the case even if the outside source is as benevolent as the US."
-- Herb Keinon, “Analysis: Sharon meets the 'West Bank'” Jerusalem Post, June 5, 2003

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

“Key constituencies in both major parties -- traditional Jewish "Israel voters" for the Dems and evangelical "Christian Zionists" for the Republicans -- have pushed the debate in DC to such a degree that a balanced approach to the region is now impossible for the United States.”

That US-Israeli policy is suicidal is incontrovertible (not to mention a crime against humanity). However, that the support is DUE to “the lobby” is questionable. In fact no evidence has been offered to support this claim and there is able evidenced to the contrary. For one thing the lobby didn’t emerge until 1967 – i.e. AFTER Israel had already committed itself to being a US client-state. Israel as a pro-American mini superpower is of strategic importance to the US because the Middle East is a very important region (for obviously reasons) and it helps to have as many “cops on the beat” you can get. Turkey plays a similar role -- there US supplied apache helicopters are put to such noble uses as terrorizing the Kurds (e.g.) -- but we never here of the “Turkish Lobby”. In other words, support for Israel appears to be genuinely pragmatic. Besides – why would a minority group of no obvious importance be able to have so much political influence?

In my view the lobby is comprised of manly cynical opportunists like Alan Dershowitz who have realized they can exploit the pre-existing US support for the country for their own purposes -- not because they feel sentimental about Israel. Dershowiz, e.g., never made any noise about Israel until after 1967; and neither did anyone else as far as is known. It is a similar story in the case of the so-called “Holocaust Industry”.

Clearly there is a lobby. But as far as I can tell our policy has little or nothing to do with it. We need to control the Middle East and Israel plays a role. Sadly the lobby has been effective at silencing criticism of Israel, and has doubtless also done serious harm to the genuine struggle against anti-Semitism. For this reason it does indeed deserves contempt.

As to what we should do – we should withdraw support for Israel and stop interfering the “peace process”. In every case, propaganda aside, it has been the US and Israel rejecting the Palestinian’s “right to exist.” The danger is, if we do withdraw support, that Israel may well make good on its threat to use its nukes to blow up the world.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Jeff Halper is an American Israeli, the Founder and Coordinator of the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions/ICAHD and a Nobel Peace Prize Nominee for 2006.

In my soon to be released second book, Memoirs of a Nice Irish American 'Girl' in Occupied Territory


I have devoted a full chapter to him and his good works entitled: "Prophets, Persistence and a Home Made For Peace"

The following article by him was first published @ http://www.icahd.org

The Problem with Israel, by Jeff Halper

Let's be honest (for once): The problem in the Middle East is not the Palestinian people, not Hamas, not the Arabs, not Hezbollah or the Iranians or the entire Muslim world. It's us, the Israelis. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the single greatest cause of instability, extremism and violence in our region, is perhaps the simplest conflict in the world to resolve. For almost 20 years, since the PLO's recognition of Israel within the 1949 Armistice Lines (the "Green Line" separating Israel from the West Bank and Gaza), every Palestinian leader, backed by large majorities of the Palestinian population, has presented Israel with a most generous offer: A Jewish state on 78% of Israel/Palestine in return for a Palestinian state on just 22% – the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza. In fact, this is a proposition supported by a large majority of both the Palestinian and Israeli peoples. As reported in Ha'aretz (January 18, 2005):

Some 63 percent of the Palestinians support the proposal that after the establishment of the state of Palestine and a solution to all the outstanding issues - including the refugees and Jerusalem - a declaration will be issued recognizing the state of Israel as the state of the Jewish people and the Palestinian state as the state of the Palestinian people...On the Israeli side, 70 percent supported the proposal for mutual recognition.

And if Taba and the Geneva Initiative are indicators, the Palestinians are even willing to "swap" some of the richest and most strategic land around Jerusalem and up through Modi'in for barren tracts of the Negev.

And what about the refugees, supposedly the hardest issue of all to tackle? It's true that the Palestinians want their right of return acknowledged. After all, it is their right under international law. They also want Israel to acknowledge its role in driving the refugees from the country in order that a healing process may begin:

I don't have to remind anyone how important it is for us Jews that our suffering be acknowledged.......

.......The question then is, will the international community, the only force capable of putting an end to the superfluous destabilization of the global system caused by Israel’s Occupation, step in and finally impose a settlement agreeable to all the parties?.......

.......A meta-campaign in which progressive forces throughout the world articulate a truly new world order founded on inclusiveness, justice, peace and reconciliation. If, in the end, Israel sparks such a reframing, if it generates a movement of global inclusiveness and dialogue, then it might, in spite of itself, yet be the “light unto the nations” it has always aspired to be.


Read the Rest:
http://www.crossleft.org/?q=node/2559

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We need to rid the political planet of Bush and Olmert ASAP before these dangerous fools start World War III. I'm not sure of how we do that?

Dr. Rick Lippin
Southampton, Pa

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Tony Blair said recently that "resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is at the core of bringing peace to the Middle East" -- and it would give the United States a golden bargaining chip to entice Iraq's neighbors to help clean up the mess we've made there."

Is this really the lynchpin to peace though? I have no doubt that the Israeli/Palestinian conflict has done much to bring unrest to the wider ME, but do you really think that given the war in Iraq, Iran's nukular pretensions, Syrian meddling in Lebanon, apparent Saudi willingness to throw its own weight around along with other problems too numerous to list here, that the situation will improve dramatically?

The US most certainly needs to rein in the Israelis and stop supporting them militarily, but at the same time the EU and Russia need to be seen pressuring the various Palestinian factions to knock off the foolishness and present a united front at negotiations. It wouldn't hurt if the Israelis sensed that the Syrians and Iranians were being pressured to stop meddling as well. Although I have to admit, it is rather encouraging to see that Ahmadijenad's deranged behavior is not having the desired effect at home and perhaps with a little luck, he will be nothing more than a bump in the road come the next elections.

The French and Russians were recently overheard bickering about sanctions aimed at halting Iran's nuclear program. Assuming that war does not break out, and the Israelis and Palestinians gather at Camp David and come away with a settlement amenable to both sides, what exactly are we going to expect regarding Iran's pursuit of "the bomb" and apparent European and American agreement on this issue? It gets a little more complicated when the Europeans and Americans are actually in agreement. Only then are the inherent weaknesses of the UN exposed, because once a general concensus is reached between the world's two biggest players (USA, EU), someone actually has to appear to be doing something instead of quarreling like a bitter couple who had absolutely no intention of reaching an agreement to begin with. Of course the Chinese and Russians will stall as they are doing now, and as the former has it's paw on Europe's gas spiget and the latter now holds sway over America's financial well-being, the situation is settled. Nothing will be accomplished.

There are many wider, ME issues that will not be solved merely by settling the Palestinian issue (although it is admittedly a big start) so how will the UN (assuming that clearly impotent organization is the instrument of choice) enforce resolutions of any kind, when taken from a geo-political, "Grand Chessboard" standpoint, it makes no sense for Russia or China to stop playing a successful, proxy game of intimidation intended to weaken not only the US, but the EU as well.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

aside from the fact that there IS a state of Israel... is that you can't hang it upside down and make it look like a statement of distress, resistance, subversion, etc. I guess sideways will have to do for the one I just bought for my car window. Can't wait to piss off the hordes of Amero-Israeli triumphalists, or the 'chosen victims' if you will. (trademarked)

-Zionist-slamming Jew

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"...and the American foreign policy establishment needs to let go of its long-standing biases to prevent these conflicts."

And maybe Santa is finally going to bring me the pony that I asked for in the third grade...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

i doubt israel will go back to fighting hez after so recently losing against them. I don't think israel can afford to prove any more clearly than they have that they can no longer fight an occupational war.
40,000+ boots on the ground and they couldn't hang on. Tank killers that could easily penetrate their most sophisticated armor, and general public support all mean Israel is more vulnerable than ever before regarding their threatening and aggressive behaviours towards their neighbors.
Israel ain't goin back (whatever happened to those soldiers anyways?), and america ain't goin to iran for the same reasons (the test of iranian hardware and hez resolve vs US/israeli hardware and israeli resolve): America would fare just as poorly as israel did, and the casualties would be more in the war with korea range (just not politically or militarily possible).
Welcome to the new world order...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Unfortunately, many have a blind spot when it comes to Israel. Perhaps it stems from the belief, held by some, that the State should never have been created. If that is the basis for their comments, the comments are understandable. However, if one takes the position that it was proper to establish a Jewish State, then the comments to the Holland article look more like hate speak.
If one starts with the proposition that Israel was rightfully created (just as one might for the USA who displaced Native Americans, Mexicans, etc.) then the viewpoint of the Jimmy Carters, Joshua Hollands and the self-hating Jews and non-Jews is without basis.

Of course, we all want a peaceful Middle East, as we do for all parts of the World, Africa, the Sudan, Darfur and on and on. Pointing the finger at Israel as a force that seeks Middle East domination is as foolish and ridiculous as the position of many that Jews control the Media, the financial world, World politics,etc. ( 13 million Worldwide controls nothing.) Respectfully, Middle East peace rests with the Arab states and an Islamic population of over 1 billion that surround the tiniest of entities. It appears that Islamic extremists, of which there are many, cannot stand the fact that a Western democracy and Jewish State, no matter how insignificant in size or population, exists in what they consider their holy right and territory.

If Israel is the tyrant? If Israel is the aggressor, the perpetrator of high crimes against humanity, what is the reason for their actions? What is Israel's goal? Is the goal to dominate the Arab countries, the Middle East? Good luck, if you think that!! Is it to intentionally cause distress and misery for the "Palestinians"? If so, why? Are Jews inherently bad? Has it been the history of the Jew to subjugate other peoples? Has it been the history of the Jew to make victims of people who do not believe as a Jew does? Perhaps it is the blood libel. What do you think?

Respectfully, no one I have read looks at the question of the goal. Perhaps, just perhaps, could it be that the Jew has stood up to victimization, the murder of the Jewish people and the threat of advocates of their destruction like Hamas (have you read the Hamas covenant that seeks only the destruction of Israel and Jews as its goal and accuses Rotary Clubs, Lions Clubs of being the tools of the Jew) and said No More. Perhaps, just perhaps, Israeli actions are taken to protect and defend itself from attack.
Is it Land for Peace? The Israeli's tried that over and over. Even though it is a country less than 12 miles wide, it gave away land to Egypt, to Jordan and the entire Gaza to the "Palestinians" without the promise of peace or recognition. What did Israel get in return? The Palestinians were left an entire economy in Gaza. All of the greenhouses and construction done by Israeli Jews were left for them. What happened? Was Israel thanked or acknowledged?
If there is to be blame, let us not be blinded by hatred or self hatred of Jews. I know that one who holds a different view is not always an anti-semite. However, to ask Israel to give and give without acknowledgement from Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah etc., that it has the right to exist and within protective boundaries and the right to protect Jewish worship at the most holy sites is not right nor fair. Remember, when the Western Wall was within the Jordanian territory, Jews were prohibited. Now, no one is denied the right to visit their most holy sites. As an aside, why is it prohibited for a Jew to live in "Palestinian" territories or in a Palestinian State? Why does the Jew Have to leave?

I trust that deep down, Jimmy Carter knows that if the Jews were simply left alone, not daily threatened with the murder of its people nor the subject of missile and bombardment, the Middle East would easily be at peace- and so do you.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Recognition as a people is a demand for which Palestinians have struggled for generations, going back to a time when Israel completely denied the existence of Palestinians as a separate nation with exclusive rights and demands, itself a continuation of Golda Maier’s denial of Palestinians altogether in her June 15, 1969 interview with the Sunday Times, when she ominously stated: "There was no such thing as Palestinians; they never existed."

The tumultuous road starting from the Madrid talks of 1991, then the infamous Oslo accord in 1993 all the way to the disastrous Camp David II talks under the auspices of US President Bill Clinton in 2000 all attest to one predictable pattern, one which continuation will predictably reinvent failure: Summit after summit, negotiation after negotiation, Israelis wished to unilaterally dictate the terms of peace, circumvent international law and any meaningful interpretation of it, using blackmail and arm twisting — with the tacit support or active participation of the US. They succeeded in extracting Palestinian concessions, without halting its settlement buildups or easing its military restrictions, let alone ending the occupation altogether.

Most relevant to the Second Uprising, a few months preceding the ensuing violence, Israeli politicians were locking horns, ironically, for using too soft an approach with Palestinians. A widening chasm between Israel’s prime minister at the time, Ehud Barak, and the leading opposition leader, Ariel Sharon, was turning into a major political dispute. Barak was accused of being politically indecisive and feeble, and unlike Sharon, didn’t know how to handle greedy Palestinians who were paradoxically merely negotiating the remaining 22 percent of historic Palestine. Barak too agreed that Palestinians were overly greedy: "The Palestinians are like crocodiles, the more you give them meat, they want more," as it was reported in the Jerusalem Post on Aug. 30, 2000.

But Sharon had his own way of dealing with "ungrateful" Palestinians. Addressing a meeting of militants from the extreme right-wing Tsomet Party less than two years earlier, Sharon highlighted his peace strategy on Nov. 15, 1998, by saying: "Everybody has to move, run and grab as many hilltops as they can to enlarge the settlements because everything we can take now will stay ours...everything we don’t grab will go to them."

It must also be noted that the ideological composition of the Palestinian leadership is truly irrelevant as far as Israel’s colonial policies are concerned, for Israel’s policy was altered little before Hamas’ advent to power in the legislative elections of January 2006, if compared to its decidedly colonial approach under Arafat or Abbas. There is always a reason to brand Palestinians, always a reason of why Israel’s favored status quo must not be disturbed.

And it’s this same status quo that continues to pervade and suffocate any attempts to negotiate a just settlement to this violent and increasingly global conflict.

Amid this deliberate stagnation, the Palestinian people are left with no option but to revolt, as costly and uncertain as it has been throughout the years. Thus, it must be stated that Palestinian resistance, which for the most part has been a nonviolent and popular movement, shall continue as long as the circumstances that contributed to its commencement remain in place. In fact, Israeli oppression has crossed the traditional boundaries of daily murders and small-scale land confiscation. Under the deceptive "disengagement" from Gaza smokescreen, West Bank lands are being vigorously expropriated while Israel’s Imprisonment Wall, illegal according to the International Court of Justice decision of July 2004, is swallowing up whole towns and villages.

Ramzy Baroud

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

He is making it harder and harder for Arab "liberals" to explain to their own people that we actually value Arab lives. Yeah, right. Palestine? Lebanon?

That illusion has been the most destructive illusion in the ME for about 60 years. Kill the illusion. Until they do, Arabs don't stand a chance.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I would like to make a suggestion to all readers of the Propaganda Media and Press. Go outside the Box.

Try at this time in history to explore different sources, and approch the unknown with a open mind. I suggest some WEB sites to start your journey to the TRUTH. It will require an effort on your part to not let denial and your brain programing of the last 100 years.

www.articbeacon.com has a article writen by Greg Szymanski that explores a new avenue of thought and exploration on your part. If you care about this world and the future of all our children please take the time to research the truth.

Only when we destroy our FEAR can anyone be trutly FREE.

www.lawfulpath.com `Silent Weapons For Quiet Wars'

Search Google under title `War Is A Racket'

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

No aid, no trade, no diplomatic recognition. Certainly no military assistance.

Until they cease their war crimes against the Palestinians and get their house in order we should let them twist in the wind. Putting Israel on the list of rogue nations and adding AIPAC to the list of no-go organizations (give them money or join and go to jail) should tamp down the hawks.

Israel needs to be clearly told to sit down with the Palestinians, take down the walls and restrictions, give them a day in court to seek restitution and treat them as humans for once- or else. The US is the enabler for all of the evil Israel does and can put an end to it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Of course there's a zionist lobby: not only did the Harvard profs expose it but Larry Franklin and other hacks at AIPAC have been under federal investigation for their outright spying for Israel.

Thousands of "Americans" also hold dual citizenship with Israel, an disgraceful condition that will become outrageous should this country have to come to Israel's assistance.

Israel works day and night to provoke a general Middle East War with Iran as the supposed evil empire. Americans are supposed to do the zionists' dirty work.

We know the dim Duke of Crawford and his sidekick Dying Dick Cheney are bought and paid for by the zionists. The question is whether the "Democrats" who prattle about redeployment of occupation forces from Iraq would ever support redeployment of Israeli forces out of all territories occupied by Israel in the 1967 conflict. Of course not. Pelosi and Reid like the contributions to the Democrats by Zionists, who are the largest segment in dollars of Democrat contributors.

The anti-Iraq War movement must also be the anti-Zionist movement. The article by Mr. Holland quite rightly warns that Israel is in preparation for another attack, perhaps on Iran.

The recklessness and cruelty of the zionists must be the focus of the anti-imperialist movement. If Israel were neutralized, the US would come to a peaceful accord in both Iraq and Iran far quicker than most might think.

Now why would that be?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The plans changed in time.
First Zionists planned to create Israel
and move jews to promised land.
So, Hitler was helped to power to drive
Eropean Jews to Israel. As usually, nothing suspecting Jews
suffered and Zionists prospered.
Later, as their powers grew, from just creating Israel they came to idea to expand Israel to its historic borders
and drive arabs out.
American Zionists were very helpful in
plundering US of endless billions of dollars and sending
them to Israel.
Now they want to plunder whole Word not just US.
War criminal Volfowitz is placed as a head of Word bank
and others placed in different key positions
with the help of Wall Street
The task number 1, is pull US in war with Iran
and very important task is performed by Cristolls,
Krauthammers and others of this kind,
they trying hard that every Jew will identify
himself with Zionism. Result, in these elections 80% of jews, even life time democrats,
voted for republicans and for continuation of war

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

People of three linked religions consider the neighborhood a religious place. Will anything we do ever make a bit of difference?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Dear Joshua Holland:

Just take a look at the vitriol in the comments to your article and the misrepresentations of fact by Jimmy Carter. If the comments in support of your article and the Carter position do not awaken you to the underpinning of anti-semitism that runs through most of them, you are truly blind. It does not take much to scratch the surface.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Many needs to improve their knowledge! From Information Clearing House;
NEWS YOU WON'T FIND ON CNN
Truman and Israel
How It All Began
By Harry Clark
06/03/06 "Counterpunch" -- -- The Truman Administration's policy on Palestine challenges at its start the "strategic asset" view of the US-Israel relationship, and reinforces the "Israel lobby" view, as argued in the recent article by John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt Truman's support for the creation of a Jewish state was due entirely to the US Jewish community, without whose influence Zionist achievements in Palestine would have been for nought. Long before any strategic argument was made, indeed, while a Jewish state was considered a strategic liability, long before Israel's fundamentalist Christian supporters of today were on the map, the nascent Israel lobby deployed its manifold resources with consummate skill and ruthlessness.

Rabbi Abba Silver, a Cleveland Zionist with Republican contacts, and Zionist official Emmanuel Neumann, initiated "Democratic and Republican competition for the Jewish vote." In 1944 they "wrung support from the conventions of both parties for the Taft-Wagner [Senate] resolution" supporting abrogation of the Palestine immigration limits in the 1939 British white paper, and the establishment of Palestine as a Jewish commonwealth. Ensuring the traditional loyalty of Jewish voters was a paramount concern of Democratic politicians, up to the president himself, in the New York mayoral election of 1945, the 1946 congressional elections, and the 1948 presidential election.

Gentile opinion was also courted in non-electoral ways, through the American Palestine Committee of notables, constituted in 1941 by Emmanuel Neumann of the American Zionist Emergency Committee. By 1946 it included "sixty-eight senators, two hundred congressmen and several state governors" with "seventy-five local chapters." It became "'the preeminent symbol of pro-Zionist sentiment among the non-Jewish American public.'" It was entirely a Zionist front.

Zionist control was discreet but tight. The Committee's correspondence was drafted in the AZEC headquarters and sent to [chairman New York Senator Robert] Wagner for his signature. Mail addressed to Wagner as head of the American Palestine Committee, even if it came from the White House or the State Department, was opened and kept in Zionist headquarters; Wagner received a copy. The AZEC placed ads in the press under the committee's name without bothering to consult or advise it in advance, until one of its members meekly requested advance notice.

Dewey Stone, a Zionist businessman, had financed Truman's vice-presidential campaign in 1944, and businessman Abraham Feinberg, with jewelry magnate Edmund Kauffman, led fundraising for the otherwise penniless 1948 presidential campaign. "If not for my friend Abe, I couldn't have made the [whistle-stop train] trip and I wouldn't have been elected," Truman stated. "Feinberg's activities began a process that made the Jews into 'the most conspicuous fundraisers and contributors to the Democratic Party.'"

Key White House advisors ensured the domination of Zionist viewpoints in the highest circles of the Truman Administration. Jewish aides David Niles, administrative assistant to Truman, and Max Lowenthal, special assistant on Palestine to Clark Clifford, himself "Truman's key advisor on Palestine at the White House," were especially crucial. Niles was one of two presidential aides retained from the Roosevelt Administration, the other being Samuel Rosenman. Niles was Truman's chief political liaison with the Jewish community. Lowenthal was the Harvard-trained former counsel to the Senate Interstate Commerce Committee on which Truman had served, who specialized in drafting Zionist memoranda. In 1952 Truman stated in a letter to Lowenthal, "I don't know who has done more for Israel than you..

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Israeli lobby in America is under pressure these days. It seems they crossed so many red lines that some hot-blooded Americans felt obliged to protest.

The 2002 Nobel Peace Prize winner, former US President Jimmy Carter, is not alone with his recent book “Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid” and LA Times and Guardian article, “How I See Palestine.” A recent Harvard study entitled “The Israel Lobby” by Professors John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt details the ways of the lobby and its victims. Tellingly, they later joined the victim list. There are similar studies and books exposing the lobby, like “They Dare to Speak Out: People and Institutions Confront Israel’s Lobby” by 22-year veteran Congressman Paul Findley whose stand cost him dearly, and “Jewish Power: Inside the American Jewish Establishment” by American-Jewish insider, J. J. Goldberg.

Some still think this is a lobby like any. An American friend argued that the tobacco and gun lobbies are among the strongest in the US. They use similar aggressive methods to advance their agenda and influence decision makers in Congress and the Administration — what is the difference? I explained that these groups are working on an American platform, claiming to represent and defend the interests of the American public and businesses. In the Israeli lobby case, it is Americans for Israel. They fight and pressure not for the good of the American nation, but for that of a foreign country. They even dare to say it loud and clear, like former House Majority Leader Dick Armey who pronounced in September 2002: “My No. 1 priority in foreign policy is to protect Israel.” (Not America!)

According to the Harvard study, the lobby also includes prominent Christian evangelicals like Gary Bauer, Jerry Falwell, Ralph Reed and Pat Robertson, as well as Tom DeLay, and Trent . All of whom believe Israel’s rebirth is the fulfillment of biblical prophecy and support its expansionist agenda; to do otherwise, they believe, would be contrary to God’s will. Neo-conservative gentiles such as John Bolton; Robert Bartley, William Bennett, Jeane Kirkpatrick, and the influential columnist George Will are also steadfast supporters.

You can’t argue with success. For decades, the centerpiece of US Middle Eastern policy has been its relationship with Israel. The combination of unwavering support for Israel has inflamed Arab and Islamic opinion and jeopardized not only US security but that of much of the rest of the world.

According to the Harvard study, Washington has provided Israel with a level of support dwarfing that given to any other state. It has been the largest annual recipient of direct economic and military assistance since 1976, and is the largest recipient in total since World War II, to the tune of well over $140 billion (in 2004 dollars). This largesse is especially striking since Israel is now a wealthy industrial state with a budget surplus and a per capita income roughly equal to that of South Korea or Spain.

Since 1982, the US has vetoed 32 Security Council resolutions critical of Israel. It blocks the efforts of Arab states to put Israel’s nuclear arsenal on the International Atomic Energy Agency’s agenda.

Israel knows it could rely on the lobby and its friends in the American power structure. They never fail even if it means sacrificing their own country’s best interests. Whatever Israel wants Israel gets.

That is why Israeli former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said to Shimon Peres “Every time we do something you tell me America will do this and will do that...I want to tell you something very clear: Don’t worry about American pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it.”

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Palestine: Peace Not Apartheidt seems to be pretty much a synopsis of the situation from the perspective of Carter's own public involvement, to which there is constant reference. He describes his role as conciliator between two often intransigent entities: the modern, sophisticated, justifiably security conscious, increasingly ruthless Israelis on the one hand and the primitive, provincial, religious, tunnel visioned Palestinians (and other Arabs) on the other. Very like the cowboys and Indians of the American frontier. Over time the Palestinians, party as a result of his own efforts, have become if not totally "good Indians," better enough Indians to deserve being cut some slack. Israelis are not so inclined, motivated less by ethnocentrism, however, than by the quest for more land.

Carter's key assumption, upon which the entire book rests, I feel, is stated on page 208: "The overriding problem is that, for more than a quarter of a century, the actions of some Israeli leaders have been in direct conflict with the official policies of the United States, the international community and their own negotiated agreements." On page 209 he adds that "condoning of illegal Israeli activities from a submissive
White House and U.S. congress..." have been contributing factors.

If one accepts the assumption that Israel has operated against U.S. policy, and that the White House has been submissive, then the facts he presents when compared with the facts he leaves out concerning how events in the Middle East have unfolded are probably not very relevant. If you reject these premises, or even consider them to be
problematic, on the other hand, then the gaps in his overview and critique might bear some scrutiny.

I'm certainly not a recognized expert on these matters, and I can't refer to a single great study documenting how manipulated and pressured Israel has been toward adherence to a policy precisely theopposite of that which Carter calls "official"; and how un-"submissive" agencies of the White House have been, including during Carter's own administration, toward insuring that Israel shall fully understand the consequences of honoring Carter's words rather than U.S. intentions; yet I am convinced that this has been the true nature of the situation.

Which hardly exonerates Israel, in my view. Israel has made bad choices. And is now in a hellofa fix. And is harming others. But change in Israel implies a good deal more than the loss of standard of living. It implies potential annihilation and utter impoverishment if Israel should be abandoned by the U.S. Which, as I perceive things, is more likely than not should Israel actually follow Carter's advice to the letter.

Should Israel do it anyhow? Yes, and there's the rub. Carter is right. But is he right in the interest of doing good? Or is this the kind of two-faced manipulative exercise that has been typical of US foreign policy, and which Carter pulled off brilliantly during his own presidence?

If Carter is serious about promoting healthy