Challenging the Israel Lobby
by
Murray Polner
by Murray Polner
Dan Fleshler,
an American Jewish "media and public affairs strategist"
I’ve never met and a dove on Israel and American foreign policy,
believes more and more American Jews have reached the conclusion
that the Jewish establishment’s old line organizations, the heart
of Israel’s American lobby, do not act or speak on their behalf.
In Transforming
America’s Israel Lobby (Potomac Books), Fleshler’s
incisive and thoughtful book I read during AIPAC’s recent annual
meeting, he asks why American Jews, overwhelmingly liberal to moderate
(e.g., 78% voted for Obama and at least 70% support a "two-state
solution"), have permitted right-wingers, hawks and neocons
to speak in their name on Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan and of course,
Israel. The hundreds of thousands who protested against an invasion
of Iraq in New York City on a frigid day in February 2003 included
many Jews yet the pro-Israel establishment ("pro-Israel"
is a bogus term so critics can be thought of as anti-Israel) remained
and remain mute.
"Precisely
where have all the Jewish doves been hiding all these years?"
Fleshler asks. "What accounts for their collective tongue-biting"?
This was never
more evident than in the nearly universal assault on a book, John
Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt’s The
Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy. Given the overwhelmingly
negative response it received one would think latter day Cossacks
had landed to pillage and rape Israel and its Jewish allies. Yet
the authors are scholars associated with the "realist"
school of foreign policy, Mearsheimer at the University of Chicago
and Walt at Harvard. Their sin was asking if unquestioned support
for Israel was always in the American national interest.
Oddly enough,
Mearsheimer and Walt would agree with much of Fleshler’s criticisms
save his contention that the power of the Israel Lobby is overrated.
Though hardly monolithic, it behaves much like every other lobby
in fighting for their client’s interests. AIPAC, for example, works
the Congress, not that most members require much persuasion. It
would be hard to find a national politician who dares tangle with
them. At every one of AIPAC’s annual meetings politicians rush to
declare their eternal love for Israel.
Transforming
America’s Israel Lobby contends that things may be changing
and points to several possible trends. Still, the election of Benjamin
Netanyahu and the naming of Avigdor Lieberman as his Foreign Minister
means that two authentic hardliners eager to attack Iran will never
allow "two states for two peoples" if that means a truly
independent Palestine, as U.S. policy allegedly favors. I wonder
if the U.S. will be able to resist Netanyahu’s call to arms when
the latter visits Washington this week. With the coming of Obama
it’s possible we may see a reduction of the lobby’s influence and
power but there is certainly no reason to be overconfident.
Fleshler, though,
thinks the lobby appears more powerful than it really is, and cites
an occasional denial of Israel’s requests, most recently Bush 2’s
refusal to allow Israeli bombers the right to fly over Iraq to attack
Iran. There are a few –very few – similar refusals, such as Bush
1’s insistence that either Israel cease building additional settlements
in the occupied West Bank or else forego American money. Infuriated,
more than one thousand lobbyists arrived in Washington and then-Israeli
Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir was "reassured by AIPAC and Likud
operatives in Washington that Israel could win a fight in Congress."
Bush 1 tried to fight back, but was overwhelmed, famously complaining
in one his memorable press conferences, "We’re got one little
guy [himself] over here. I think the American people will support
me." But following strong protests he did back down.
There are,
however, less publicized instances where efforts have been made
to silence critics. NYU historian Tony Judt’s scheduled lecture
(he’s Jewish and a critic of the lobby) at a Polish institute in
Manhattan was abruptly cancelled when local lobbyists protested.
Bishop Tutu’s talk at a Catholic college in Minnesota was called
off and only restored after outraged faculty and students vigorously
dissented. Fleshler mentions that Mearsheimer and Walt’s scheduled
talk at a Chicago meeting was cancelled. No surprise there. But
Jimmy Carter, who did more for Israel than any other President,
was condemned as anti-Israel because he dared use the forbidden
word "Apartheid" in the title of one of his books about
Israel. When Carter’s speech and Q&A at Brandeis University
ended, C-Span’s coverage showed the former President receiving a
huge ovation from his Jewish audience, lending some credence to
Fleshler’s belief that things are changing.
Still, there’s
the more recent example of the lobby’s strength: The nomination
of Charles Freeman, a thirty-year veteran of the diplomatic corps
and the Pentagon to the National Intelligence Council which manages
the National Intelligence Estimates (it infuriated Israel and its
friends in November 2007 when it claimed Iran was not in the nuclear
weapon business) was promptly shot down by the lobby and its allies
and Freeman’s name was withdrawn by the new (and intimidated?) Obama
administration.
The late Reform
Rabbi and WWII veteran Alexander Schindler (he was awarded the Purple
Heart and Bronze Star), one of the last fearless and liberal national
Jewish leaders, once portrayed his generation’s loyalty as grounded
on a "kidney machine," which he defined as the Holocaust
and Israel. Newer generations are now more acculturated, more assimilated,
and public anti-Semitism is at its lowest ebb in U.S. history. "Why
should we care about all those old institutions? We need our own
institutions" an anonymous (why anonymous?) young activist
told Fleshler. And Tom Dine, an early leader of AIPAC who now rejects
its approach and consults for the Israel Policy Forum, told Fleshler
he rejects the leadership of the traditional organizations, "These
people have to go. These people have stayed too long."
Technology
has spawned a trickier challenge to the supporters of the status
quo. A growing number of outspoken bloggers and websites like Jeremiah
Haber’s "Magnes Zionist," Richard Silverstein’s "Tikkun
Olam," Bernard Avishai.com, Philip Weiss’ "Mondoweiss,"
Shammai Leibowitz’s "Pursuing Justice," Tony Karon’s "Rootless
Cosmopolitan," and the magazine Tikkun, columnists M.
J. Rosenberg and Rabbi Henry Siegman, once head of the American
Jewish Congress and the Synagogue Council of America, offer alternative
views and sharp critiques. New American Jewish dissenting organizations
such as J Street, which supports political candidates, Brit Tzedek
v’Shalom, a grassroots group which claims 35,000 members including
1500 rabbis and ran a full-page ad in a recent New York Times,
the think tank Israel Policy Forum, American Friends of Peace
Now, Jewish Voices for Peace, and other challengers have emerged.
Where their
predecessors Beira, New Jewish Agenda, and the Jewish Peace Lobby
were excoriated as anti-Israel and driven to cover, the new groups
are able to raise money (though not nearly as much as the older
ones), lobby Congress, become involved in political races (as J
Street does) and use the Internet to spread their messages. Their
members tend to be younger, better educated and more secure than
their parents and grandparents. They are the people who can build
a different American Jewish community which can help shape a more
realistic policy in the Middle East, oppose settlements, work for
a sovereign Palestine alongside Israel, and avoid a war with Iran
with its unpredictable consequences.
The last word
is by M.J. Rosenberg in his Foreword. Rosenberg is an acute onetime
congressional aide, a former editor of AIPAC’s "Near East Report"
and is now working for the nonconformist Israel Policy Forum. Given
the will and determination, he argues, "any president can pursue
Middle East peace without fear of the lobby, because the overwhelming
majority of American Jews are not hardliners, advocates of the lobby’s
line, or single issue voters. American Jews are Americans and treating
us as if our only concern were sustaining the status quo in Israel
is both insulting and wrong. Few of us take our cue from the lobby."
If Fleshler,
Rosenberg and the newcomers are right, then change may be coming.
But – and it’s a real But – it’s a huge "if."
A version
of this article originally appeared on George Mason University’s
History News Network.org.
May
19, 2009
Murray
Polner [send
him mail] was
editor of Present Tense, published by the American Jewish
Committee from 1973–90. He wrote Rabbi:
The American Experience; co-edited (with Stefan Merken) Peace
Justice Jews: Reclaiming Our Tradition, as well as No
Victory Parades: The Return of the Vietnam Veteran and, with
Jim O’Grady, Disarmed
& Dangerous, a biography of Daniel and Philip Berrigan.
His most recent book is We
Who Dared to Say No to War: American Antiwar Writing From 1812 to
Now, co-authored with Thomas Woods.
Copyright
© 2009 History News Network
Murray
Polner Archives
|