[WCUSP] Iraq, Iran and the Lobby
KATHARLOW at aol.com
KATHARLOW at aol.com
Tue Mar 20 00:20:38 CDT 2007
Iraq, Iran, and the Lobby
Four years after the invasion of Iraq, and the War Party
is still in the driver's seat
by Justin Raimondo
March 19, 2007
_http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=10697_
(http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=10697)
It wasn't supposed to be like this: we weren't supposed to be "_celebrating_
(http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1600357,00.html) " the fourth
anniversary of the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq. It was going to be
a "_cakewalk_
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A1996-2002Feb12?language=printer) ," the Iraqis would rise up and _shower us with rose petals_
(http://www.nyti
mes.com/2007/02/15/washington/15military.html?ex=1329195600&en=ab52e1ac39c1c717&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss) , and Johnny would come
marching home in no time. Remember? Besides that, the whole deal would be
cost-free, you see, because the revived Iraqi oil industry, no longer under
sanctions, would pay the costs of the war. Or so Paul Wolfowitz _assured us_
(http://www.house.gov/schakowsky/iraqquotes_web.htm) .
Well, we know all too well _what happened instead_
(http://www.counterpunch.org/patrick03152007.html) , yet one can't help wondering: how it is that _the
very people_
(http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/03/whitehouse200703) who got us into this war in the first place are _still_
(http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Intelligence_officials_doubt_Iran_uranium_claims_0818.ht
ml) in a _position_
(http://www.boston.com/news/world/middleeast/articles/2007/01/02/us_unit_works_quietly_to_counter_irans_sway/) to get us into
another – and are rapidly proceeding to do so?
In most democratic countries, a government that had birthed such a disaster
as the Iraq war would have fallen long ago, but this one endures, and, in any
case, its probable successor is not going to have a very different approach
to foreign policy. This was _brought home_
(http://antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=10674) by the recent action of the Democratic congressional leadership in
_stripping_ (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070312/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_iraq) the
military appropriations bill of a provision that would have required the
president to seek _congressional approval_ (http://tinyurl.com/2zhekh) before
attacking Iran. Speaker Pelosi _had just been booed_
(http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/pelosi-hears-boos-at-aipac-2007-03-13.html) at _the AIPAC
conference_ (http://fairuse.100webcustomers.com/fairenough/salon061.html) for
criticizing the Iraq war when she rushed back to her office and struck the Iran
provision from the bill – just as the powerful pro-Israel lobbying group _had
been insisting_ (http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat?pid=174804) , albeit
not too loudly.
After all, the AIPAC conference was supposed to be toning down the ongoing
campaign to get us into a shooting war with Iran, but, as the Jerusalem Post
_pointed out_
(http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1173879095364&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull) , "the effort was laid to waste once Israeli Prime
Minister Ehud Olmert addressed the audience at the gala dinner Monday
night." There is supposedly a taboo against Israeli government officials intruding
too aggressively in their efforts to influence American politics, although
that never stopped Ariel Sharon from _openly calling_
(http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/1105-02.htm) for the U.S. to invade Iraq – _as a prelude_
(http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=263941) to taking on
Syria and Iran. Olmert went beyond anything Sharon ever attempted, however, in
his AIPAC _speech_
(http://in.today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=worldNews&storyID=2007-03-13T103346Z_01_NOOTR_RTRJONC_0_India-290720-1.xml) :
"I know that… all of you who are concerned about the security and the future
of the State of Israel understand the importance of strong American
leadership addressing the Iranian threat, and I am sure you will not hamper or
restrain that strong leadership unnecessarily."
As we have seen, he was right to be "sure" – Nancy must have _skedaddled_
(http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2007/mar/09/pro_israel_lobbyists_push_to
_eliminate_anti_iran_war_language_from_pelosi_iraq_bill?page=1) right back
to her office pretty darn fast to excise the offending passage from her bill.
But Olmert didn't stop there:
"Those who are concerned for Israel's security, for the security of the Gulf
States, and for the stability of the entire Middle East should recognize the
need for American success in Iraq and responsible exit. Any outcome that
will not help America's strength and would, in the eyes of the people in the
region, undercut America's ability to deal effectively with the threat posed by
the Iranian regime will be very negative."
With the Democrats in control of Congress – and, in my view at least, more
than likely to regain the White House – the Israelis are rightly concerned
that their future is not so bright. Israel is finally getting its fair share of
criticism of late, and a new _boldness_
(http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=12394) in Democratic Party circles – as
well as among Republican "realists" – in calling the "special relationship"
into question does not augur well for Tel Aviv. This kind of open intervention
in U.S. politics by the Israeli leadership can be read as an act of
desperation. Faced with what _they believe_
(http://www.nysec.org/2006/10/16/seymour-hersh-and-scott-ritter-october-16-06/) is an "existential" threat from Iran, the
Israelis apparently believe they can no longer afford the luxury of
subtlety.
Not that there has ever been anything too subtle about AIPAC's hold over
Congress. As _John J. Mearsheimer_ (http://mearsheimer.uchicago.edu/) and
_Stephen Walt_ (http://ksghome.harvard.edu/~swalt/) put it in _their study_
(http://www.antiwar.com/orig/mearwalt.php?articleid=9573) of the Israel lobby's
decisive influence on American foreign policy:
"A key pillar of the Lobby's effectiveness is its influence in Congress,
where Israel is virtually immune from criticism. This in itself is remarkable,
because Congress rarely shies away from contentious issues. Where Israel is
concerned, however, potential critics fall silent. One reason is that some key
members are Christian Zionists like Dick Armey, who said in September 2002:
'My No. 1 priority in foreign policy is to protect Israel.' One might think
that the No. 1 priority for any congressman would be to protect America."
A frightening example of the Christian Zionist-AIPAC alliance in action was
_this speech_ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDRxmqOn7x4) at the AIPAC
conference by _John Hagee_ (http://www.sacornerstone.com/) , a born-again
evangelical and head of _Christians for Israel_ (http://www.c4israel.org/) , wherein
biblical prophecy is cited – _amid images of Armageddon_
(http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewPrint&articleId=11541) – to _justify_
(http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/living/15584612.htm) unconditional
support to the Jewish state. (I'll bet this is one manifestation of
"_Christianism_ (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1191826,00.html) "
that Andrew Sullivan will never notice.)
Congress, as _Pat Buchanan_ (http://antiwar.com/pat/?articleid=10429)
trenchantly put it way back before _Gulf War I_
(http://www.alternet.org/story/14633/) , is "Israeli-occupied territory," so it doesn't matter that a war with
Iran isn't in American interests. To the politicians who cater to the Israel
lobby, there is no daylight between Israeli and American interests; but of
course there are significant differences, which have only been exacerbated in
the post-9/11 era. We desperately need to stave off the rising influence of
extremism in the Muslim world, and yet our government insists on unconditionally
taking Tel Aviv's side no matter what the issue or how _blatantly unjust_
(http://oznik.com/art/030531img/Apartheid_Wall.jpg) Israeli behavior is – due
to the unrivaled power of the Israel lobby as a force in American politics.
In 1997, legislators were asked to rate lobbies, and they put AIPAC in the
number two spot, just below the AARP but ahead of the National Rifle Association
and the AFL-CIO. Yes, the Israel lobby has just as much _clout_
(http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,53785,00.html) in the Democratic Party as the labor
unions – if not more – which means that we'll never see a foreign policy
that puts _America first_ (http://www.antiwar.com/justin/j042103.html) coming
from that side of the aisle.
While the Lobby is _quick_ (http://www.nysun.com/article/29741) to accuse
its opponents of anti-Semitism, what is striking is the _complete disconnect_
(http://www.forward.com/articles/groups-mum-on-iraq-despite-antiwar-tide/)
between the politics of AIPAC and the politics of American Jews. Pelosi was
booed for her stance on Iraq at the AIPAC conference, but her critique of that
misadventure is shared by the _overwhelming_
(http://www.juancole.com/2007/02/american-jews-blacks-fiercest-opponents.html) majority of Jews in this
country. And that doesn't seem to matter to most politicians – _including Pelosi_
(http://www.nysun.com/article/50391) , who bowed, after all, to Olmert's
diktat.
Just as this war, as I've been saying _since Day One_
(http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2003-03-17-oppose_x.htm) , was fought to advance
Israel's interests, not America's. The next war – yes, I mean the _looming
conflict with Iran_ (http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?F=2572013&C=mideast) –
will be fought for the same reason. American foreign policy has long since
ceased pursuing the genuine national interests of this country, and instead is
being held hostage by a coalition of _neoconservative_
(http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=11423) _ideologues_
(http://www.aei.org/) and foreign lobbyists, who have no compunctions about leading
us into an abyss as long as their no-longer-quite-so-hidden agenda is served.
The big problem for the Lobby is that their power, and willingness to wield
it, is _no longer_ (http://amconmag.com/2007/2007_03_12/article.html) a
forbidden subject. Increasingly, there is an _open discussion_
(http://www.forward.com/articles/book-israel-lobby-pushing-iran-war/) of AIPAC's role as the War
Party's nerve center and its effective control over the foreign policy
agendas of _both parties_ (http://www.counterpunch.org/carmichael05302006.html) .
It is therefore necessary for the Lobby to ratchet up the rhetoric, whip
dissidents into line, and keep any potential waverers from breaking ranks. What
Olmert said about the alleged mentality of the "people of the region" (the
Arabs and Persians) – that any show of "weakness" will only embolden them to
resist – applies equally to the Americans. If the Lobby lets a few politicians
get away with "Israel-bashing" (i.e., _expressing some sympathy_
(http://www.antiwar.com/frank/?articleid=10683) for the Palestinians, or questioning why it
is that American foreign policy only tilts one way when it comes to the
Middle East), then the floodgates will be opened. They can't afford to lose
control, or so they seem to think.
It is absolutely astonishing that all of the _major_
(http://www.rawstory.com/news/2007/Edwards_Iran_must_know_world_wont_0123.html) _Democratic_
(http://www.dscc.org/news/latest/20060119_hillary/) _candidates_
(http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/printedition/chi-0409250111sep25,1,4555304.story) for the
White House proclaim their willingness to go to war with Iran if "diplomacy,"
meaning a relentless barrage of threats, fails to work. Not a single one
dares critique our Israel-centered foreign policy. On the question of Iraq,
however, Olmert has made a major mistake in intervening, because in doing so he
has set himself against _almost two-thirds_
(http://edition.cnn.com/2007/US/03/13/iraq.poll/) of the American people, who want us out as soon as possible.
This puts the politicians, too, in a difficult position: do they obey
Olmert's marching orders, or listen to the polls – and their own constituents?
That it is even possible to ask such a question is a dramatic indication
that something is very wrong with our political system, and desperately requires
fixing. I wonder, however, if there is any single reform that would do any
good. This, after all, is democracy in action – operating not in accordance
with majority rule, as is commonly assumed, but on the principle of "the
squeaky wheel gets the grease." Using the mechanisms of democracy,a small but
passionate minority can successfully impose its will on the largely apathetic
majority – and it doesn't hurt, as Wesley Clark _pointed out_
(http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/dc-notes-wes-clark-is-_b_37837.html) , that
many of the Democratic Party's major donors have made fealty to Israeli
interests a litmus test for candidates.
Speaker Pelosi, who was a Democratic _fundraiser_
(http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0DEED7153BF932A25755C0A961948260&n=Top/Reference/Times%2
0Topics/People/P/Pelosi,%20Nancy) long before she was promoted to Congress,
knows this all too well, as her actions on the Iran matter dramatically
confirm. After all, George W. Bush _will veto_
(http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-warfunds15mar15,1,2780516,print.story?coll=la-headlines-politics)
the appropriations bill if it comes with what he considers extraneous and
unacceptable riders, such as restrictions on funding that impede the surge – so
why not submit it to the floor with the Iran provision intact just to make a
point?
The Democrats backed down, and fast, so our future is all mapped out for us.
It took only four years for this administration to get the _Middle East
escalator_ (http://www.antiwar.com/paul/?articleid=10327) going and gin up
another war on the heels of the last one. An even greater regional cataclysm –
this time, in Iran – seems _all but inevitable_
(http://antiwar.com/horton/?articleid=10595) .
I wish I saw a way out of this, but I don't. Short of firing Congress, as
well as impeaching the president and vice president, we will be at war with
Iran just as surely as we are now stuck in the Iraqi quicksand – and that war
will be brought to you by the same _crew_ (http://www.aei.org/) that started
the previous one. It's like we're caught in a recurring nightmare, in which
the same ghouls rise up and taunt us with their banshee screams, singing a
chorus of war-cries, drowning out all sense until our eardrums nearly burst. As I
put it in _a column_ (http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=3822)
published in 2004:
"This war has benefited only two actors in the Middle East drama: bin Laden
and Ariel Sharon. The extremists are empowered, instead of isolated, and the
future is war, war, and more war, as far as the eye can see…."
Events have, unfortunately, only confirmed my prognosis, but there is reason
for optimism in the long run, even if short-term pessimism is our lot. The
American people don't like foreigners interfering in their politics, and
Olmert may have gone too far. Aside from that, the trial of longtime AIPAC honcho
_Steve Rosen_
(http://www.forward.com/articles/fbi-affair-costs-lobby-dynamic-director-rosen/) , and the group's Iran expert, _Keith Weissman_
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A6059-2005Apr20.html) , on charges of
giving Israel top-secret information gleaned from former Pentagon official _Larry
Franklin_
(http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/library/reports/2005/franklin_indictment_04aug2005.htm) , is scheduled to finally begin this summer. The
Lobby is increasingly buffeted by blowback stemming from its own arrogance,
and the day of reckoning approaches. Whether that day comes before or after we
go to war with Iran is, largely, a matter of chance…
____________________________________
AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from
AOL at _AOL.com_ (http://www.aol.com/?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000339) .
************************************** AOL now offers free email to everyone.
Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://wilpf.org/pipermail/wcusp_wilpf.org/attachments/20070320/065388ed/attachment-0001.html
More information about the Wcusp
mailing list