This nation is currently debating the extent to which the pro-Israel lobby is
responsible for distorting U.S. Mideast policy by pressuring our Washington
decisionmakers to commence wars of aggression against Iraq and Iran.
Accordingly, here are 25 recent essays which offer different perspectives on that debate:
[1] H.D.S. Greenway's 5-9-06 Boston Globe essay, "Playing Ethnic Politics" [
"In America, diaspora politics has long played a role, and it's not just about
Israel. Some call AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) the
National Rifle Association of foreign policy." Trundles out the disingenuous defense
that "everybody's doing it," so it's as "American as apple pie." However, that
argument is a red herring because everybody isn't lobbying to start another
unprovoked war of aggression in the Middle East.]:
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/
05/09/playing_ethnic_politics/
[2] Amr
Ismail's
5-9-06 CounterCurrents essay, "Washington's Next Military
Crusade Is Beckoning" [Contends that the contradictions of American capitalism are
getting sharper, and that the language of force and total destruction is
rarely absent from statements delivered by White House officials and some members
of Congress. Provides a somewhat conclusory analysis of whether we can
justifiably accuse Israel of using the US as its proxy for war and of manipulating
the American public.]:
http://www.countercurrents.org/us-ismail090506.htm
[3] Alexander Cockburn's 5-8-06 Counterpunch essay, "The Row Over The Israel
Lobby" [Critics of the Mearsheimer-Walt report contend that there is no such
thing as the Israel lobby, and that those asserting its existence are by
definition "anti-Semitic." This method of assault at least has the advantage of
being funny. The Israel lobby is very real, and the Harvard report is neither the
first nor the best analysis of its operations.]: http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn05082006.html
[4] Normon Solomon's 5-8-06 Counterpunch essay, "Gag And Smear: The Misuses
Of 'Anti-Semitism'" [A well-argued analysis that criticizes the Israel Lobby's
tactics and goals, and defends the Harvard study by Professors John
Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt for having started a long-overdue debate about about the
Lobby's distorting influence on U.S. policy in the Mideast.]:
http://www.counterpunch.org/solomon05082006.html
[5] Trish Schuh's 5-6-06 Counterpunch essay, "Islamophobia: A Retrospective"
[Much overheated rhetoric has been published in the West about the
scapegoating of Jewish peoples, or "anti-Semitism," but virtually nothing has been
published in the West about the scapegoating of Islamic peoples, or "Islamophobia."
This essay focuses on American Islamophobia.]:
http://www.counterpunch.org/schuch05062006.html
[6] Haviv Rettig's 5-5-06 Jerusalem Post article, "Bush: U.S. Must Ensure
Israel's Security" [Mr. Bush spoke before the American Jewish Committee's
conference in Washington on 5-4-06. The audience applauded enthusiastically when he
declared, in the context of Iran, that "the United States has a strong and
inalienable obligation to ensure the security of Israel." However, Mr. Bush is
conflating U.S. national-security interests with Israel's. Realistically, Israel
has the obligation to ensure the security of Israel. And Israel can do so
because it has a first-rate military with 400+ nukes.]:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1145961282236&pagename=JPost/JPArti
cle/ShowFull
[7] William Pfaff's 5-5-06 CD/International Herald Tribune essay, "Israel's
Personal Superpower" [Explains that Israel has been depending on the USA to be
its "personal superpower" since 1967. However, Israeli and American interests
in the Middle East have diverged. Therefore, the USA cannot - and will not -
continue to be the proxy for the implementation of Israeli strategy, which is
to either weaken or destroy the regimes in Iraq, Iran and Syria.]:
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0505-27.htm
[8] Professors John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt's 5-5-06 Counterpunch essay,
"The Storm Over 'The Israel Lobby': Is It Possible To Have A Civilized
Discussion About The Role Of Israel In American Foreign Policy?" [The Harvard
study'd authors briefly respond to some criticisms (e.g., historical inaccuracies,
monocausative analysis), then express dismay at the fractious and
non-substantive nature of the national debate.]:
http://www.counterpunch.org/walt05052006.html
[9] Vijay Prashad's 5-4-06 ZNet essay, "The Lobby" [Notes that the "Israel
Lobby" is one of several powerful lobbies that control the Washington
establishment. Two more are the "Ares Lobby" for the military-industrial complex war
profiteers, and the "American Lobby" for predatory global capitalism's
corporatocracy.]: http://www.zmag.org/sustainers/content/2006-05/04prashad.cfm
[10] Norman Finkelstein's 5-1-06 Counterpunch essay, "The Lobby: It's Not
Either/Or" [Unpersuasively contends that the pro-Israel lobby is not a case of
"the tail wagging the dog." His most salient points are buried in the last two
paragraphs: (a) "without the Lobby and in the face of widespread Arab
resentment, the U.S. would perhaps have ordered Israel to end the occupation by now,
sparing Palestinians much suffering"; and (b) a crucial dimension of this debate
should be the Lobby's use of extreme intimidation tactics inside the U.S.A.
to suppress free and open public discussion of the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict.]: http://www.counterpunch.org/finkelstein05012006.html
[11] Benny Morris' 4-28-06 New Republic essay, "The Ignorance At The Heart Of
An Innuendo: And Now For Some Facts" [Concedes that there is some truth to
Professors John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt's Harvard study, "The Israel Lobby
and U.S. Foreign Policy," but then rather unconvincingly argues that it is a
"nasty piece of work." The New Republic requires a paid subscription to read
this essay.]: http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=20060508&s=morris050806
[12] Phillip Weiss' 4-28-06 CD/TN essay, "Ferment Over 'The Israel Lobby'"
[Thoughtfully analyzes the shrill debate that emerged in reaction to Professors
John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt's study of the pro-Israel lobby's distorting
influence on Washington's policymakers.]:
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0428-29.htm
[13] Arnaud De Borchgrave's 4-28-06 Washington Times essay, "Touching The
Third Rail" [Over the years, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee
("AIPAC") has maneuvered to make Israel the third rail of American foreign policy.]:
http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20060428-083819-7632r.htm
[14] Robert Fisk's 4-27-06 Counterpunch essay, "The United States Of Israel?"
[Interviews Harvard's Kennedy School of Government Dean Stephen Walt. In so
doing, challenges the pro-Israel lobby's tactic of smearing anyone who dares to
disagree with their attempt to hijack U.S. foreign policy so they can use the
U.S. military as Israel's proxy to fight wars against Iraq and Iran.]:
http://www.counterpunch.org./fisk04272006.html
[15] William Hughes' 4-25-06 MP essay, "Kevin Zeese: 'Hawkish Israel Lobby
Wants War With Iran'" [Provides probative evidence that the American Jewish
Committee, JINSA and AIPAC are pressuring the USA to commence yet another illegal
war of aggression, this time against Iran.]:
http://mparent7777.livejournal.com/8004980.html
[16] Linda Heard's 4-25-06 Counterpunch essay, "Is The US Fighting Israel's
Wars? The Prophecy Of Oded Yinon" [The answer to her titular question is "yes."
Describes an Israeli journalist's 26-year-old strategy for Israel's
domination of the Middle East that is nearly identical to the neocons' plans for the
conquest and fragmentation of Iraq, Iran and Syria.]:
http://www.counterpunch.org/heard04252006.html
[17] Molly Ivins' 4-25-06 CD/TruthDig essay, "Pro-Israel 'Nut Jobs' On The
Attack" [Explains why the pro-Israel right-wingers generally, and Alan
Dershowitz specifically, lack credibility in their wildly off-the-mark allegations that
distinguished Professors Mearsheimer and Walt are "anti-Semitic" just because
they've produced an objective study of the pro-Israel Lobby's influence on
U.S. foreign policy. (It concludes, among
other things, that the Lobby was a major factor in promoting war with Iraq.)
Notes that she's not so much afraid of these right-wing smear tactics as she
is sick-and-tired of them.]: http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0425-27.htm
[18] Joe American's 4-25-06 ThePeoplesVoice essay, "Another McCarthyite Smear
Job: Middle East Scholar Juan Cole Is Falsely Accused Of Being Anti-Semitic
To Stop Yale From Hiring Him" [Right-wing WSJ columnist John Fund has falsely
accused U. Michigan History Professor Juan Cole of being a "notorious
anti-Semite" because Cole agrees with the Mearsheimer-Walt study's conclusions (e.g.,
that the pro-Israel lobby was a major factor in causing the US to invade Iraq).
However, Fund's "anti-Semitism" charge is just another McCarthyite smear job.
The right-wing's real agenda here is to destroy the careers of anti-war
professors and to strangle academic freedom inside the USA. (At the website, you'll
find this essay by moving your horizontal scroll-bar to the right.)]:
http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/cgi-bin/blogs/voices.php/2006/04/25/p7821
[19] Richard Cohen's 4-24-06 Washington Post essay, "No, It's Not
Anti-Semitic" [Contends that Israel's special place in U.S. foreign policy is deserved,
and not entirely the product of lobbying.]:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/24/AR2006042401396.html
[20] Juan Cole's 4-24-06 Informed Comment essay, "Blogger David Versus WSJ
Goliath" [“This is day three since John Fund of the Wall Street Journal did a
nationally-read hatchet job (see essay #21 below) on me in which he made up
quotes and falsely attributed them to me. He has still not retracted, and has not
apologized. Neither has The Wall Street Journal. Hint: I wouldn't want my
business news or investment advice from a newspaper that just makes things up. I
have complained directly to the Opinion Journal. But still nothing. The lies
are still out there, online, damaging my reputation. Those readers who wish to
help might write politely to OpJournal.help@dowjones.com ”.]:
http://www.juancole.com/
[21] John Fund's 4-24-06 Opinion Journal essay, "Cole Fire: Yale Is Set To
Ditch Taliban Man And Hire A Notorious Anti-Semite" [Skip to this essay's second
section, where Fund commences his defamatory diatribe against U. Michigan
History ProfessorJuan Cole.]: http://www.opinionjournal.com/diary/?id=110008282
[22] Tony Judt's 4-19-06 CommonDreams/New York Times essay, "A Lobby, Not a
Conspiracy" [Americans must not be afraid to debate this issue: does the
pro-Israel lobby's pressure to support Israel distort the decisions of our
Washington policymakers? Explains why this issue has been prominently debated and
dissected overseas, but has received virtual silence from the USA's mainstream
media: (a) fear of legitimizing the notion of a "Jewish conspiracy"; and (b) fear
of being smeared as "anti-Semitic." Quite rightly concludes that we must not
conflate "anti-Zionism" with "anti-Semitism," because it is grossly inaccurate
to equate those who merely disagree with Israel's policies with those who
phobically dislike the Jewish people per se.]:
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0419-27.htm
[23] Juan Cole's 4-18-06 Salon essay, "Breaking The Silence: The Overwrought
Response To John Mearsheimer And Stephen Walt's Brave Paper Only Confirms Its
Thesis" [This U. Michigan History Professor is one of the nation's leading
experts on the history, culture and mentality of the Middle East. Hence, he is in
a position to offer a knowledgeable perspective about the impact of the
pro-Israel lobby on U.S. foreign policy. Perhaps this is the real reason why
right-wingers consider him to be a threat to their pro-Israel lobby.]:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2006/04/18/taboo/index_np.html
[24] Normon Solomon's 4-13-06 CommonDreams essay, "The Lobby And The
Bulldozer: Mearsheimer, Walt and Corrie" [Correctly contends the Mearsheimer-Walt
study is NOT anti-Semitic, despite shrill protestations to the contrary in the
mainstream media. Concludes that: (a) they are level-headed scholars whose study
deserves serious consideration for its objective assessment of the destructive
aspects of the pro-Israel lobby's influence on U.S. foreign policy; (b) Americans
must be allowed to debate this topic openly and fairly; and (c) the
pro-Israel lobby must stop using intimidation tactics to suppress our freedoms of
speech and press.]: http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0413-20.htm
[25] U. Chicago Professor John J. Mearsheimer and Harvard U. Kennedy School
of Government Dean Stephen M. Walt's 3-23-06 London Review of Books essay, "The
Israel Lobby And U.S. Foreign Policy" [This is a shortened version of the
famous 81-page Harvard research paper that launched our national debate about the
pro-Israel lobby.]: http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n06/mear01_.html
________________________________________________________________
THE MORAL OF THE STORY: We can't get to much higher moral ground than the
American progressive position, which steadfastly maintains that U.S. foreign
policy must altogether cease to scapegoat people, and thus be neither
anti-Semitic nor Islamophobic. Furthermore, American progressives maintain that it is
equally unacceptable: (1) for the Israeli-aligned parties to oppress, or seek the
destruction of, the Islamic parties; and (2) for the Palestinian-aligned
parties to oppress, or seek the destruction of, the Jewish parties. Instead, the
partisans must STOP using counterproductive intimidation tactics to coerce
third parties into adopting their position in the conflict, RENOUNCE their
escalatory cycles of tit-for-tat violence, SEEK mutual forgiveness in their common
humanity, and FIND a civilized diplomatic solution.
* * * * *
