I was watching John Brennan’s Senate hearing and suddenly the words to the John Lennon song Imagine came into my head, with a slight twist.
Imagine there’s no lobby
It’s easy if you try
No memorized talking points
No need to lie.
I’m in good company when I contemplate a world without AIPAC. Upon his election as prime minister in 1992, Yitzhak Rabin told the lobby that Israel would be better off without it and that it did more harm than good. He wanted AIPAC out of the way because he was planning a peace initiative with the Palestinians and knew that AIPAC would try (as it did) to thwart his efforts.
Of course, Rabin’s effort to eliminate AIPAC failed. He was, after all, only the prime minister of Israel. And AIPAC is AIPAC, an institution dedicated to preserving its own power, not Israel’s security. Rabin was dedicated to working with the United States government to advance peace not to organizing billionaires to thwart US goals.
The reason I was contemplating an alternate universe without the Israel lobby was that I was struck by the contrast between a Congressional hearing (Brennan’s) in which Israel was not an issue, hence no lobby involvement, and one in which there seemed to be no other issue, Chuck Hagel’s.
In fact, neither hearing should have been about Israel. Although both the heads of the Department of Defense and the CIA have some involvement with Israel (the CIA director actually more), Israel is not a major concern of either one. Nonetheless, the Hagel hearing was almost entirely about Israel while Brennan’s was about actual CIA policies, largely drone strikes and interrogation practices.
I admit that I am overstating my case when I say that absent the Israel lobby there is no need for a public official to lie. I believe that most public officials lie when they consider it necessary to defend themselves, the bad policies they have implemented or their superiors. For some, lying is an autonomic response to pretty much any question.
One small example: did you ever see an executive or legislative branch official refuse to answer a question by saying that he hasn’t read a particular report. That is almost always a lie. If a reporter knows about it, the official in question has almost surely does too. And just because the lobby was not looking over Brennan’s shoulder when he testified about drones and torture, there is no way he was always telling the complete truth.
But most of the time Brennan and the senators were free to engage in a serious discussion of the issues based on what both the nominee and the legislators believe is best for the United States. Although, depending on one’s view, either Brennan or the senators (or both) were terribly wrong, it would be hard to argue that their positions were dictated by a lobby and that lobby’s ability to deliver campaign funding.
The Hagel hearing, on the other hand, wasn’t really a hearing at all. For the senators it was just an opportunity to audition in front of current or potential donors.
It was like getting a speaking role at the AIPAC annual conference, an opportunity to demonstrate that a legislator was 100% for whatever the lobby is for.
The worst thing was that a hearing about leading the Pentagon barely touched on any of the issues that affect America’s military. So eager were the senators to suck up to the lobby by proclaiming undying devotion to Israel that they barely mentioned the 1.5 million Americans on active duty and all the problems they face. Nor was there much interest expressed in the current war in Afghanistan or our continuing role in Iraq. Or about when the use of military force is warranted and when it isn’t.
No, it was all about Israel, actually not so much Israel as the Israel lobby. What, other than the desire to please the lobby, could have made Sen. Kristen Gillibrand (D-NY) ask for Hagel’s commitment that Israel’s aid package would be exempt from sequestration cuts, unlike all the programs that actually affect her constituents?
But her pandering to AIPAC was typical, replicated by such other lobby devotees as Lindsey Graham (R-SC) who histrionically read from a lobby script attesting to the lobby’s non-existence – and demanded that Hagel apologize for ever suggesting that there is such a thing as the (gasp) “Jewish lobby.” Graham, no special fan of Israel, is concerned about a challenge from a Tea Party candidate in 2014 and is eager to raise money from AIPAC-associated donors to help him withstand the challenge
Of course, Gillibrand is from New York but that barely matters any more. She, like her Republican colleagues — Graham, Ted Cruz of Texas, Roy Blunt of Missouri, David Vitter of Louisiana and Mike Lee of Utah, — was playing for money not votes, national money. Although the Republicans know that that lobby donors are unlikely to support right-wing Republicans, they also know (as Jesse Helms discovered) that enthusiastic pandering to AIPAC will make it harder for their Democratic opponents to raise money. Not when, to use AIPAC’s term, the Republican incumbent is a “staunch supporter” of Netanyahu.
In short, the Hagel hearing was a nauseating spectacle.
By comparison, but only by comparison, the Brennan hearing was a textbook example of American democracy at its best. Sure, there were lobbyists in the room but they didn’t write the script. Yes, some of the positions Brennan and some of the senators took are truly appalling. And some senators made no sense at all.
Nonetheless, the Brennan hearing was not a fundraiser. It was about issues, even principles and morality. The difference, of course, was the absence of the lobby.
Imagine.
Israel tried twice in the 80′s to gradually reduce the amount of the US military aid to Israel, but the US governments held Israel back from that idea! U.S. government persuaded Israel to continue the military aid arrangement because it is benefit the U.S. strategical interests. Israel can stop receiving this aid which constitutes about 1.6% of annual Israeli budget (as was in 2011 budget). But the U.S. interest is probably to continue to fund Israeli military purchases in American Industries and also to ensure the jobs of tens of thousands US workers. Therefore, I would say that the continued U.S. military aid to Israel is more of a strategic American interest. Whether the U.S. should impose an embargo on Israel than Israel will begin to produce more weapons by herself, and thus be the U.S. rival in global market competition. In that case Israel will link strategic to other alliances, with other powers like Russia, France or China. The U.S. current interest is to keep special relationship and close ties between both countries is undoubtedly right and favor the US strategically, military, technology, economy goals. At the same time the United States enjoys Israeli advanced technology, science and inventions; Israeli military experience; intelligence, and more. Israel gives or sells almost 2,000 security items to the US, from unmanned drones, technology breaking missiles, rockets, pilot helmets and armored safe military vehicles (which saved the lives of hundreds if not thousands of American soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan), until medical and dressing equipments for soldiers. These all means that Israel returns at least the volume of money that the U.S. “gives” to her, if not more!
Curious, your comment, are you a P.R. person from the Israeli machine? If I understand, the Israelis sell everything it exports to any and all that will pay the price, even those on the so-called restricted list. As for saving 100′s if not 1,000′s of American lives, that sounds rather egotistical. Perhaps the most important issue, is the idea of location, if the U.S. stopped being a shield, what would Israel do? I don’t believe that there’s any fear that the arms producers would go bust in the U.S., without being able to sell to Israel, as that’s one of the requisites of the “aid” in the first place. Taking it all in context, it seems that the U.S. so far has prevented the Israeli hard liners who run the government from using the nuclear bombs on their neighbors, call it “blackmail”, for that’s what it is. In desperation, just what will those who run the government do? Use the Nuclear bombs, damn be the consequences? This is the 21st century, not the old slow past. More and more, the face Israel leadership today is showing to the rest of the world, is that it doesn’t care about anyone, not even its own people.
As I guessed your kind doesn’t know and understand Israel. But this doesn’t interfere you to post non-facts and unreasonable thoughts on Israel. You are free to do so, but don’t expect sane people to believe your smears.
Yes I’m Israel P.R. person and have many reasons for that, as any other sane people on the world should be. If you see yourself as devoted to justice and true you have to support Israel against another organized wave of hatred, Jealousy and misinformation against Israel/Jews. The fact that there are Israel’s haters Jews is not new in history. In the 30’s-40’s there were few Jews that for their own interests and mind served the Nazis. Now days there are few Jews that serve the Islamo-Fascists from their own special motives. It is quite the same in nature as were before, but with one big difference: now the Jews ability to defend themselves is quite enormous. And that what enrage them. I want to make it clear to you that despite the hatred sponsored by some few noises, Israel will defeat her enemies.
Why do you think that being a P.R. person for the extreme Islamic forces that smell of oil is better? Chuck Hagel is greased with Saudi dollars. Is that why you are supporting lazy Conservative Chuck Hagel for office?
Israel sells to fewer countries than the US? Is that mean that the US is much greedy than Israel? If it is so why don’t you say that? Or you think that only the nature of the “global Jew” is to be greedy? Israel has a very strict and selective policy of arms sales, so you can relax.
Don’t take yourself too seriously. The US is not Israel’s “shield”. The US supports Israel to defend herself from vicious enemies, but Israel can tackle them without the US support were given, as she did until 1968 (Israel won 1967 war without any US made weapons). The US has never been asked to intervene in Israeli wars, and Israel doesn’t want it to intervene. America has too many wars of itself.
As for the US military industries, you can ask them by yourself. •
The US didn’t and couldn’t prevent Israel from defending herself. Israel doesn’t need American confirmation to shoot at the season’s hot gun which is pointed at her. Even Obama understands that, and he even said so couple of times. One of the reasons he is coming to Israel, after 4 years of ignoring her and her PM, is that he understood that he should consider Israel interests too while trying to convince Israel to agree to a mutual agreed policy on the Iranian and Palestinians issues.
Your suggestion that Israel didn’t use the alleged nuclear bombs she has is quite pathetic. Why Israel should use that kind of bomb, if she really has, when she wins every war forced on her by her army usual ability?
The US used nuclear bombs and not Israel. As things going on today, most probably that America will be also the second country to use it. The US in quite a modern style colonialist state, which has never had peace in her 220 years of existence while at the same time the US doesn’t fight for her very existence. So you have to play more More balanced and realistic in your claims.
Israel leadership shows to sane democratic states that they should not ignore the circled waves of Islamic rages that hit the world day after day. If you want to ignore the threat that is being built around you, it’s your privilege, but you have no privilege to tell Israel to ignore it too.
• Israeli Plasan factory helped protect American soldiers serving in Iraq and Afghanistan when they were able to surge the production of M-ATV armor kits to Oshkosh’s Humvees and for mine-resistant vehicles. These armor kits were critical in saving the lives of thousands of US soldiers when they faced the threat of IEDs and RPG attacks. 1000 armor vehicles were fixed in Israel and other 7000 vehicles were fixed on joint Israeli-American new firm built in Bennington, Vermont. As US ambassador to Israel said last year: “say, “When you look at the burgeoning economic relationship we have, particularly in the high-tech sector, if we didn’t have the start-up nation here in Israel, we would have to invent it – for the sake of our own economy.”
http://www.plasansasa.com/news/press-releases/plasan-welcomes-brig-gen-brogans
RE: “The Hagel hearing . . . wasn’t really a hearing at all. For the senators it was just an opportunity to audition in front of current or potential donors. It was like getting a speaking role at the AIPAC annual conference, an opportunity to demonstrate that a legislator was 100% for whatever the lobby is for.” ~ MJ Rosenberg
IT’S ALL ABOUT “CORN PONE”:
. . . He [Mark Twain] quotes his childhood friend as saying, “You tell me where a man gets his corn pone (bread), and I’ll tell you what his opinions are.” Meaning that one’s opinions can be told based on where that person got their bread. . .
P.S. ANOTHER RELEVANT QUOTATION: “You can’t use tact with a Congressman! A Congressman is a hog! You must take a stick and hit him on the snout!” ~ From ‘The Education of Henry Adams’, By Henry Brooks Adams (American journalist, historian, academic and novelist, 1838-1918)
P.P.S. Henry Brooks Adams’ paternal grandfather was President John Quincy Adams, and his great grandfather was President John Adams.
Its not so much lobbying that’s the problem, as its the accursed, treasonous some citizens harbor for another foreign power to the disadvantage, strategic harm or ruin of their own country. This is an old problem that haunted George Washington’s regency regarding national Francophile sentiments that nearly drove the young republic into war supporting the French Revolution.
The republic’s 2nd president, John Adams, fought a vicious, 2nd term destroying battle against Anglophile High Federalists led by Alexander Hamilton. He not only wanted war supporting the British, he lobbied vigorously to be its CINC, many believing once he had an army he would use it to conquer Spanish colonies transforming the republic into an empire.
Passions were so red hot on these and other issues in the early republic, that when Hamilton was killed by Burr in a duel in 1804, Adams remarked that “…was the best shot of the revolution…”
Right from the very dawn of the republic, Washington in his Farewell Address advised:
“…nothing is more essential, than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular Nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded; and that, in place of them, just and amicable feelings towards all should be cultivated. The Nation, which indulges towards another an habitual hatred, or an habitual fondness, is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest…”
Treasonous affections for Zionism will ultimately fade as had Francophile and Anglophile passions faltered and withered away. Though many loathe and despise the morally reprehensible behavior of politicians preening for favor, its the very structures and operative principles of American republican governance that will inevitably lead to the undoing of Zionist front groups. Madison labored hard on checking the evils of faction, and the constitution he fathered has worked more or less reasonably well these 200 plus years.
Wherefore Israel is a whole different matter.
The first sentence should have read:
“Its not so much lobbying that’s the problem, as its the accursed, treasonous AFFECTIONS some citizens…”
I will not argue with you on your interpretation of American history, though I find your positions quite bias. But you can relax on Americans’ towards Israel. Americans Support for Israel won’t be hurt, as long as American society will be democratic, open and even minded. There is concern that that support will be decreased, as far as Obama will lead America to socialism at the expense of democracy and freedom of opinions. But I believe that most of Americans, Democrats as Republicans, will not let that happened and won’t let change their democratic nature of society. Most Democrats understand that, although as yet they do not realize they need to set clear the dividing line between democracy and socialism, so as not to be drawn helplessly toward totalitarianism at a dangerous, slow and deceptive erosion process!
As long as America will keep it democratic and progressive nature it will keep supporting Israel, Zionists and Jews. The fact that the upper cover of the “liberal” column had been oxidized because of the too close brushing and contact with the spirits and totalitarian socialist and Islamist powers and societies, doesn’t mean that all the American democratic left circles think the way you think. You have to accept that fact that at least half of the Democrats are fond of Israel. The problem of the Democrats is that the far left column is sticking itself to them, and yet being considered as Democrats while they are obviously not.
Refreshing to read this. I wonder how many other Americans feel on this subject? Also, I’ve found much to my surprise, that quite a few other blogs, especially ones that allow comments such as yours, take issue with any comment[s] that don’t toe the line, so to speak. There is no shame to what depths a politician will stoop, in order to gain a donation, even it it means wearing a corrupt label in the process, even approaching that of a turncoat, IMO.