–interesting development below–
During the July meeting, held in the Roosevelt Room, Malcolm Hoenlein, executive vice chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, told Obama that “public disharmony between Israel and the U.S. is beneficial to neither” and that differences “should be dealt with directly by the parties.” The president, according to Hoenlein, leaned back in his chair and said: “I disagree. We had eight years of no daylight” — between George W. Bush and successive Israeli governments — “and no progress.” – The New Israel Lobby
Call them the little Israeli lobby who has the audacity to think they can. Change what it means to be pro-Israel.
J Street does not accept the “public harmony” rule any more than Obama does. In a conversation a month before the White House session, Ben-Ami explained to me: “We’re trying to redefine what it means to be pro-Israel. You don’t have to be noncritical. You don’t have to adopt the party line. It’s not, ‘Israel, right or wrong.’ ” – The New Israel Lobby
They’re challenging the big guns, particularly AIPAC, who believe that George W. Bush is the model. Need I say more?
Blame John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, who basically started it all with their book The Israeli Lobby, which challenged conventional thinking that to criticize Israel is to basically be anti-Semite.
“The bottom line,” Mearsheimer and Walt wrote, “is that Aipac, a de facto agent for a foreign government, has a stranglehold on Congress, with the result that U.S. policy is not debated there, even though that policy has important consequences for the entire world.” Mearsheimer and Walt also wrote that Aipac and other groups succeeded in installing officials who were deemed “pro-Israel” into senior positions. This is, of course, what effective lobbies do. … .. And yet mainstream American Jewish groups had implicitly agreed to subordinate their own views to those of the government in Jerusalem. The watchword, says J. J. Goldberg, editorial director of The Forward, the Jewish weekly, was, “We stick with Israel regardless of our own judgment.”
And don’t stop with the New York Times Magazine piece, because Mother Jones profiles the power of AIPAC, the biggest challenge to changing the status quo between Israel and the Palestinians, mainly because their thinking is moored in the 20th century.
Now, if more traditional media would cover the new Israeli lobby force coming up, giving Congress members cover when they don’t have their own moral courage to do the right thing, because they sense an AIPAC backed challenger breathing down their neck, we’d really be somewhere. An example of what’s needed happened recently when Fareed Zakaria’s interviewed Michael Oren, when Zakaria pushed to clarify Israeli nuke numbers. This is an exception, which exists amidst a deafening silence from his colleagues who won’t dare broach the subject.
The only way to change Middle East policy is if Pres. Obama has back up in Congress, which he’s not going to get from the likes of Democratic Rep. Steny Hoyer, AIPAC’s man, though he’s got lots of company. With J Street and other players arriving on the scene to challenge this entrenched power, eventually we’ll see pro-Israeli anti-war politicians less afraid to stick their necks out for Israel, hoping for a progressive shift in thinking that includes holding Israel accountable as well, without worrying that any earned criticism or new idea will get their political heads lopped off.
UPDATE: Laura Rozen reports an interesting happening today when Dennis Ross spoke with Jewish leaders wanting a harder line from the Administration on Iran.
Reporters were escorted out of the room at Washington’s 6th and I Streets Historic synagogue this morning before NSC uber Middle East strategist Dennis Ross addressed some 300 Jewish leaders attending a conference on Iran today.
Also officially off the record were the remarks of the U.S. government’s point man on Iran nuclear negotiations, Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs William Burns.
But reporters could apparently hear their remarks over the public address system from the hallway (this reporter wasn’t there). …read on…
Comments are closed.