A lot of people are up-in-arms about a paper recently published by John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt.
Walt, a professor at Harvard, and Mearsheimer, a professor at the University of Chicago, argue that "a vast network of journalists, think tanks, lobbyists, and largely Jewish officials have seized the foreign policy debate and manipulated America to invade Iraq." They explain that
...the thrust of US policy in the region derives almost entirely from domestic politics, and especially the activities of the ‘Israel Lobby’. Other special-interest groups have managed to skew foreign policy, but no lobby has managed to divert it as far from what the national interest would suggest, while simultaneously convincing Americans that US interests and those of the other country - in this case, Israel - are essentially identical.
Since the publication of the paper, it has drawn praise from David Duke and the ire of the pro-Israel lobby, who are understandably defensive in response to an attack on their very existence. Harvard, possibly under pressure from donors, has cautiously backed away from the paper.
Having read the paper, I think their main point isn't totally off-base (I agree that AIPAC is a bit too vocal), but I also think they make some problematic assumptions. Of these, the most bothersome is their continued reference to "the Lobby," a mostly unconnected group of organizations and individuals that work tirelessly to represent Jewish/Israeli causes in American politics and within the American national conscience. Their characterization of this group sounds a lot like a thinly-veiled attack on par with The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Mearsheimer and Walt address this critique early on:
There is nothing improper about American Jews and their Christian allies attempting to sway US policy: the Lobby’s activities are not a conspiracy of the sort depicted in tracts like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. For the most part, the individuals and groups that comprise it are only doing what other special interest groups do, but doing it very much better.
Then they spend the rest of the paper disproving themselves, making vast generalizations about "the Lobby," discussing "the Lobby's" goals and citing unnamed "prominent Lobby figures."
The best response I've read thus far is Christopher Hitchens' piece in Slate, entitled "Overstating Jewish Power."
Hitchens dismantles Mearsheimer and Walt's piece on a number of levels. He points out a number of their false assumptions, takes them to task for ignoring evidence that doesn't support their claims, and explains how many of their conclusions are based on fallacious logic. He doesn't call them anti-Semitic, accuse them of "having an axe to grind," or suggest that their work is on par with that of neo-Nazis. Rather, he takes them on point-by-point and explains why they're wrong. It's an inspired piece of writing.
In the middle of it, Hitchens makes an interesting point. He writes,
Almost everybody also concedes that the Israeli occupation has been a moral and political catastrophe and has implicated the United States in a sordid and costly morass. I would have gone further than Mearsheimer and Walt and pointed up the role of Israel in supporting apartheid in South Africa, in providing arms and training for dictators in Congo and Guatemala, and helping reactionary circles in America do their dirty work—most notably during the Iran-Contra assault on the Constitution and in the emergence of the alliance between Likud and the Christian right. Counterarguments concerning Israel's help in the Cold War and in the region do not really outweigh these points.
Remember, this is Hitchens talking. He's taking Mearsheimer and Walt to task for being unfair and overly critical of Israel and the American pro-Israel lobby.
It's about time for American Jews to remember that reasonable people (who are not anti-Israel) accept as a given that Israel has done some crappy things. To these people -- the very thoughtful types whose opinions matter -- ardent defenses of Israel that paint the country as one that can, and has, done no wrong must sound totally ridiculous. Instead of insisting on Israel's innocence in everything it has ever been accused of, maybe its time to admit, "Hey, Israel has done some things wrong. But it's ready to move forward, and America needs to continue to be at its side."
And that's the real reason AIPAC is so dangerous.
