Feb. 6, 2009 (World News Trust) -- One
cannot emphasize enough the stranglehold Israel’s lobbying
infrastructure has on U.S. foreign policy. The events of recent weeks
undoubtedly attest to this.
“The special relationship” that has been
historically fostered between the United States and Israel is, in fact, often a
relationship of leverage, manipulation and intimidation, and often
leads to the United States supporting actions or resolutions that stand at
complete odds with the interests of the American people.
The
promise of change echoed the world over as people from all corners
anticipated the magic moment President Barack Obama could actually change the
devastating reality in which we live today. But just weeks before his
inauguration, Israel unleashed the most barbaric attacks on defenseless
Palestinian civilians since 1948. Civil societies expressed outrage and
called for Israeli leaders to be tried for war crimes and genocide.
Other nations cut diplomatic ties completely with the Jewish state.
But
the man of change did absolutely nothing. For weeks he was completely
silent. Even in his first days in office, Obama made no mention of the
Israeli genocide in Gaza. So, what of this change that he promised?
What kind of hold does Israel have to silence the President of the
United States?
Authors
and professors, John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, of the University of
Chicago and Harvard University, respectively, defined the Israel Lobby in
their volume: The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy as a “loose
coalition of individuals and organizations who actively work to steer
U.S. foreign policy in a pro-Israel direction.” What has been revealed
in their work is that “The Lobby” is not a unitary organization, of a
few, or many paid lobbyists who are pushing for a specific foreign
policy agenda. Sure, you have that too, manifested in the American
Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) -- an organization that boasts
of 60,000 active members, and which showers U.S. congressmen with many
millions of dollars in campaign contributions, all with one aim in
mind, a pro-Israel, right or wrong, agenda. But it’s much more complex
than that.
The
Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, less
known than AIPAC, is a powerful lobby conduit, for it supposedly
represents 52 major Jewish organizations. Based in New York, the
organization simply represents an uncompromisingly pro-Israel stance,
which tends to advocate Israel’s suppression of Palestinians (as
Israel’s right to defend itself), and advocates a pro-war agenda (as
was the case before the Iraq war, and later against Syria and Iran.)
These
are but mere examples. What Mearsheimer and Walt describe as a “loose
coalition of individuals and organizations” is in fact a vast
infrastructure that has penetrated every major organization and
institution, governmental and otherwise, that could in some way
influence, push for, or advocate Israel’s interests.
When
AIPAC holds its annual conferences, countless members of the House and
the Senate, the executive branch, top representatives of both parties,
as well as hundreds of U.S. ambassadors flock from all over the world in
an unprecedented manner to vow their allegiance to Israel.
With
the passing of time, the strength of the lobby, and the level of
influence of Israel’s “friends” in the Congress has grown immensely to
the point that U.S. allegiances actually jeopardize the interests of
their own citizens. Even from an imperialistic viewpoint, the United States has no
particular interest in supporting Israel’s genocidal policies in Gaza,
for example, considering the fact that the United States is struggling to find any
semblance of ‘stability’ in the region that is saturated with
anti-American sentiment.
Consider
what outgoing Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said in a speech in
the Israeli southern town of Ashkelon Jan 12, regarding how he
influenced the U.S. vote in the UN on a resolution pertaining to the Gaza
war:
"In
the night between Thursday and Friday, when the Secretary of State
wanted to lead the vote on a ceasefire at the Security Council, we did
not want her to vote in favor," Olmert said.
"I
said 'get me President Bush on the phone.' They said he was in the
middle of giving a speech in Philadelphia. I said I didn't care. 'I
need to talk to him now'. He got off the podium and spoke to me.
"I
told him the United States could not vote in favor. It cannot vote in
favor of such a resolution. He immediately called the secretary of
state and told her not to vote in favor."
"She was left shamed. A resolution that she prepared and arranged, and in the end she did not vote in favor."
Imagine,
Olmert is boasting how he, with one telephone call, managed to
completely turn around the entire U.S. foreign policy agenda, no
questions asked. This tells us that it’s not a give-and-take
relationship.
One
can learn a valuable lesson in all of this. Within the United States
there is a great apparatus that has been in motion for generations. It
is beyond civil society, beyond individual citizens and citizen groups,
it is perhaps even more powerful than ‘the man of change’ himself. And
if we are truly to see some transformation in the way the United States now rules
the world, then this war-mongering machine must be dismantled.
Ramzy Baroud (www.ramzybaroud.net)
is an author and editor of PalestineChronicle.com. His work has been
published in many newspapers, journals and anthologies around the
world. His latest book is, "The Second Palestinian Intifada: A
Chronicle of a People's Struggle" (Pluto Press, London).