If you’ve been yearning to travel to Israel, please consider
joining FLAME’s exciting mission. Our small group of no more than 80 participants
will visit all the main tourist sites, but we’ll also visit political hot
spots, like the disputed territories, Sderot, the Lebanese border, and the
Golan Heights. We’ll also meet and talk with scholars, terror victims, settlers,
journalists and even a member of the PLO. Best of all, we’ll be in Jerusalem
for Yom Ha’atzmaut—Israel’s 60th Independence Day celebrations. In short,
this will be the trip of a lifetime. To see the complete itinerary and registration
specifics, go now to mission
details or print out our printer-friendly
brochure. Deadline for registration: November 30, 2007.
October 3, 2007
Dear
Friend of FLAME:
There
has been much ado and public discourse about the supposedly nefarious role
that pro-Israel Americans play in influencing American foreign policy. Those
who allege this assert that such influence is damaging for our country because
it tends to advance the interests of Israel in disregard of or even against
the interests of the United States.
This
proposition was recently advanced by two prominent academics, Stephen Walt
and John Mearsheimer, who published their views earlier this year in a magazine
article that generated great publicity, and in a scurrilous book by former
president Jimmy Carter. The article by the academics has now been released
in expanded form as a book and the two have been touring the talk-show circuit.
The
editorial page of The Wall Street Journal is one of the fairest and most
evenhanded commentators on Israel and matters of the Middle East. The article
that follows, by attorney Jeff Robbins, appeared in a recent issue of the
paper. This piece is of great value in countering the arguments of those
academics and of Jimmy Carter. It is also useful in clarifying the question
of whether those who single out Israel and the pro-Israel lobby are anti-Semitic.
Most
importantly, Robbins points out the often-hidden, but very aggressive pro-Palestinian
lobbying done by Arab regimes, none of which receives the boisterous criticism
reserved for supporters of Israel. Author Robbins was a U.S. delegate to
the U.N. Human Rights Commission during the Clinton administration and works
at the law firm Mintz, Levin in Boston. I think you’ll appreciate his cogent
and factual analysis.
Sincerely,
Gerardo
Joffe
President, FLAME
| P.S. |
FLAME
has long documented the immense value that U.S. investment in and financial aid to Israel
returns back to this country. Our powerful position paper---“Israel
and the United States
Is Israel an asset or a burden to our country?”---has
been published in dozens of mass media over recent years and has reached tens
of millions of Americans, including many members of Congress. I
encourage you to print this piece out and pass it on to others. Most
of all, if you agree that this kind of public relations---I call
it
“truth-telling”---on
Israel
’s behalf is critical, I urge you to support us. Remember: FLAME’s powerful
ability to influence public opinion comes from individuals like you,
one by one. I hope you’ll consider giving a donation now, as
you’re able---with $500, $250, $100, or even $18? (Remember,
your donation to FLAME is tax deductible.) To donate online, just go
to http://www.factsandlogic.org/make_a_donation.html.
Finally, I hope you’ll join us on our Truth in the Promised Land
mission, May 3-13. There you’ll make a personal connection to
this miraculous country and see for yourself why our support---yours,
mine and that of the U.S. government---is so vital. Get all the specifics at mission details or
print out our printer-friendly
brochure. Thanks for continuing to help us keep the
flame alive: Am Yisrael Chai! (Israel Lives!) |
 |
Anti-Semitism and the
Anti-Israel Lobby
by Jeff Robbins
Wall Street Journal, September 9, 2007
A crop of Israel's critics—most prominently Jimmy Carter and now Stephen
Walt and John Mearsheimer, the authors of "The
Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy"—have managed something of
a feat: They express no concerns about the massive pro-Arab effort, funded
in significant measure by foreign oil money, taking American Jews to task
for participating in the American
political process; meanwhile, they inoculate themselves against charges of
anti-Jewish bias by preemptively predicting that "the Jewish lobby"
will accuse them of it.
Messrs. Walt and Mearsheimer, in particular, have been heralded by
Israel's critics for their "courage" in attacking American Jews, who
have allegedly "strangled" criticism of Israel
. Their case seems one part laughable, and one part eyebrow-raising.
An anecdote from my own experience with the anti-Israel lobby may
shed some light on the absurdity of the Walt-Mearsheimer offensive. Not long after Sept. 11, 2001,
I received a call from a major defense contractor asking for a favor. I was
serving as president of the Boston chapter of the World Affairs Council, a national organization that
debates foreign policy, and the defense contractor was one of the Council's
principal sponsors.
The Saudi Arabian government was sponsoring a national public relations campaign
to cultivate American public opinion, and was sending Saudi emissaries around
the country to make the case that Saudi Arabia
was a tolerant, moderate nation worthy of American support. Would the Council
organize a forum of Boston's community leaders so that the Saudis could make their case?
While this was patently no more than a Saudi lobbying effort, we organized
the forum, and it was well-attended by precisely the slice of
Boston's political and corporate elite that the Saudis and their defense
contractor benefactor had hoped for. The Saudis maintained that their kingdom
should be
regarded as a promoter of Middle East peace, and that the abundant evidence
that Saudi Arabia was in fact promoting a virulent brand of extremist Islam should be discounted.
Saudi Arabia paid for the trip of its emissaries to Boston, for the
Washington-based public relations and lobbying company that organized the
trip, and for the Boston public relations and lobbying company that handled the
Boston part of the visit. And it drew upon the resources and relationships
of the defense contractor, which sells hundreds of millions of dollars of
military equipment to Saudi Arabia, to support and orchestrate its public relations effort.
The billions in petrodollars Arab states spend in the U.S.
for defense, construction, engineering and consulting contracts position
them nicely to win friends in high places, and friends are what they have.
That is true all over the world, is true in this country, and has been true
for quite some
time. As Secretary of State Cordell Hull noted 60 years ago, "The oil
of Saudi Arabia constitutes one of the world's great prizes." His successor,
Edward Stettinius, opposed the creation of a Jewish state in the
Middle East, stating, "It would seriously prejudice our ability to afford
protection to American interests, economic and commercial. . . throughout the area."
The Saudis and their allies have not been shy about supplementing their considerable
leverage in the U.S. by targeting expenditures to affect the debate over Middle East policy by
funding think tanks, Middle East studies programs, advocacy groups, community centers and other
institutions.
To take one obvious example, just last year Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal donated
$20 million each to Harvard and Georgetown Universities for programs in Islamic studies. Prince Alwaleed,
chairman of a Riyadh-based conglomerate, is the fellow whose $10 million
donation to the Twin Towers Fund following the Sept. 11 attacks was rejected
by then-Mayor Rudolph Giuliani after the Saudi Prince suggested that the
U.S. "re-examine its policies in the Middle East and adopt a more balanced
stance toward the Palestinians."
Georgetown and Harvard had no apparent qualms about accepting
Prince Alwaleed's money. The director of Georgetown's newly-renamed Prince Alwaleed bin
Talal Center rejected any suggestion that the Saudi magnate was attempting to use
Saudi oil wealth to influence American policy in the Middle East. "There is nothing wrong with [Prince Alwaleed]
expressing his opinion on American foreign policy," he said. "Clearly,
it was done in a constructive way."
In other words, for those who accept the Arab line on the Israel-Arab conflict—namely,
that it is the product of Israeli intransigence in some form or another—the
increasing proliferation of Middle East-funded enterprises all across the
country aimed at advancing the Arab view of the conflict constitute "nothing
wrong." Nor are those hewing to the anti-Israel line troubled by the
way in which the massive Islamic bloc of nations, by dint both of their number
and their economic leverage over the rest of the world, are able to guarantee
an incessantly anti-Israel agenda at the United Nations and other international
forums.
Although the aggressive deployment of petrodollars and oil-based influence
from foreign sources aimed at advancing a pro-Arab line constitutes "nothing
wrong" as far as Israel's critics are concerned, a new political fashion
holds that there is something very wrong indeed about American Jews and other
American backers of Israel expressing their support for Israel, and urging
their political leaders to join them in that support.
Our major newspapers and networks, with correspondents in Israel able
to take advantage of an Israeli political system that is a free-for-all and
an astonishingly vibrant and self-critical Israeli press, report daily on
every twist and turn of the conflict and are very frequently critical of
Israel
. As for American campuses, most objective observers would have little difficulty
concluding that far from being criticism-free, they are in fact dominated
by critics of Israel. Clearly, as strangleholds on criticism go, whatever stranglehold the pro-Israel
community has on debate in the U.S. is a very loose one indeed.
If the charge that American Jews are able to stifle criticism of
Israel is simply silly, the leveling of the charge that there is something nefarious
about Jews urging support for the Jewish state raises questions about whether
Messrs. Walt and Mearsheimer have descended into a certain ugliness. And the tactic of trying to neutralize
those questions by loudly predicting that they will be asked, however clever
a tactic it may be, does not neutralize them.
It is apparently the authors' position that, even in the face of the overwhelming
leverage of an Arab world swimming in petrodollars, with a lock on the U.N.
and an unlimited ability to pay for pro-Arab public relations, American Jews
are obliged to stay silent. In essence, Messrs. Walt and Mearsheimer have
repackaged the "the-Jews-run-the-country" stuff which has long
been the bread and butter of anti-Semites.
Messrs. Walt and Mearsheimer deny that they
are anti-Semitic, and that is certainly good news. But where they are
apparently content with foreign oil money being used to advance a pro-Arab
position on the Middle East, but devote themselves to criticizing
American Jews for lobbying their public officials in support of the Jewish
state, one may legitimately wonder what phrase would apply. Surely, one's
denial that he is anti-Semitic, while welcome, is hardly dispositive;
after all, the marked increase in anti-Semitism around the world is well-documented,
and yet one rarely hears
anyone actually announce that they are anti-Semitic, or that their views
are anti-Semitic.
But if anti-Semitism is too harsh a term, and if the word "bigoted"
is also taken off the table, perhaps one can be forgiven for concluding that
"anti-Jewish bias" fits the bill here. After all, where there is
nothing wrong with foreign money from Arab countries advancing a pro-Arab
agenda in
Messrs. Walt's and Mearsheimer's world—but
there is something very wrong with American citizens who are Jewish exercising
their civic right to speak out on behalf of Israel and taking issue with
the pro-Arab agenda—even the most vehement disclaimers of any bias
against Jews lack a certain credibility.
The potency of the Middle East-funded anti-Israel lobby around the
world and in the
U.S.
is difficult to ignore. Yet, Messrs. Walt and Mearsheimer and
others who adhere to an anti-Israel line ignore it. In and of itself, this
is not surprising. When at the same time they portray American Jews' efforts
to make the case for Israel as morally suspect, however, they open themselves up to reasonable charges
of something far more troublesome than mere hypocrisy, and that is anti-Jewish
bias, by whatever name.
|