Door de macht van de joodse en christelijke pro-Israel kunnen Amerikaanse congresleden nooit stemmen zoals ze zouden willen. Het zou het einde van hun loopbaan betekenen.Hoewel de Amerikaanse inlichtingendiensten naderhand verklaarden dat Iran al in 2003 was gestopt met het ontwikkelen van een atoombom, verklaarde de toenmalige senator en huidige minister van Buitenlandse Zaken, Hillary Clinton, in 2007 in een toespraak voor AIPAC dat het ‘in deze moeilijke periode voor Israël, waarin het land in groot gevaar verkeert, […] van levensbelang is dat we onze vriend en bondgenoot trouw blijven, en dat we onze eigen waarden trouw blijven. Israël is een toonbeeld van wat juist is, in een omgeving die wordt overschaduwd door kwalijke zaken als radicalisme, extremisme, despotisme en terrorisme.’ Lovende woorden door een beleidsbepaler over een land dat al veertig jaar lang VN-resoluties negeert, het internationaal recht weigert te respecteren en de mensenrechten op grote schaal schendt. Het is niet verrassend dat de Israëllobby mevrouw Clintons presidentscampagne steunde. Haar echtgenoot Bill sprak uit ervaring toen hij verklaarde dat AIPAC 'beter dan wie dan ook in deze stad lobbyt… U bent verbluffend effectief geweest.’ Niemand verbaasde zich over de woorden van de vroegere president, wiens verkiezingscampagnes mede door de Israëllobby werden gefinancierd en wiens Midden-Oostenpolitiek door de lobby sterk beïnvloed was. In 2003 omschreef Condoleezza Rice AIPAC als ‘een grote aanwinst voor ons land’, en de hoofdredacteur van het goed geïnformeerde joodse dagblad The Forward, J.J. Goldberg, concludeerde dat ‘Israël vooral geluk heeft dat AIPAC in dit land bestaat om Israëls zaak te vertegenwoordigen. AIPAC werkt hard om er zeker van te zijn dat Amerika in grote lijnen Israëls kijk op de wereld en het Midden-Oosten bekrachtigt… AIPAC heeft veel invloed op de buitenlandse politiek.’ Martin Sieff, die een hoge functie bekleedt bij het persbureau UPC, constateerde in 1999 dat de ‘macht van AIPAC om financiële steun te mobiliseren voor pro-Israëlkandidaten… zo groot is dat dit jaar, zoals gebruikelijk, ongeveer de helft van de leden van de Senaat en een een derde van het Huis van Afgevaardigden verwacht worden… bij het politieke banket van AIPAC’s jaarlijkse conferentie’. In 1992 moest David Steiner als president van AIPAC terugtreden nadat was uitgelekt dat er geluidsopnamen bestonden waarop hij vrijmoedig spreekt over zijn grote politieke invloed. Zo had hij verklaard dat hij ‘een deal had gesloten’ met de regering-Bush senior om meer geld aan Israël te geven. Hij had gezorgd voor ‘bijna een miljard dollar aan spullen’, en ‘onderhandelde’ met de aantredende regering-Clinton over de benoeming van een pro-Israëlminister van Buitenlandse Zaken. ‘Wij hebben een tiental mensen in zijn [Clintons] hoofdkwartier en ze gaan allemaal hoge posten krijgen.’ De goed geïnformeerde journalist Michael Massing schreef in The New York Review of Books dat een staflid uit het Congres hem verteld had dat ‘we op meer dan de helft van het Huis van Afgevaardigden kunnen rekenen – 250 tot 300 leden – om voor elkaar te krijgen wat AIPAC wil’. Steven Rosen, de voormalige AIPAC-medewerker die is aangeklaagd wegens het - naar verluidt - doorspelen van geheime Amerikaanse staatsdocumenten aan Israël, zei tijdens een diner met een journalist van The New Yorker: ‘Binnen 24 uur hebben wij de handtekeningen van 70 senatoren (van de in totaal 100, SvH) op dit servet staan als dat zou moeten.’ De voormalige Democratische senator Ernest Hollings vatte het als volgt samen: ‘Er is geen andere Israël politiek mogelijk dan die welke AIPAC hier bepaalt.’ Het zijn al deze feiten die ertoe leidden dat Ehud Olmert als premier publiekelijk verklaarde: ‘Dank God dat wij AIPAC hebben, de grootste verdediger en vriend die we in de hele wereld hebben.’
En ook in Nederland heeft de joodse en christelijke pro-Israellobby nauwe banden met de politici.
Olmert's claims revive specter of "Israel Lobby"
Daniel Luban, The Electronic Intifada, 14 January 2009 WASHINGTON (IPS) -
The US State Department fiercely denied claims made by Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert about his influence over President George W. Bush, in an incident that has stirred up old debates about the role of the Israeli government and the so-called "Israel lobby" in formulating Middle East policy in Washington. On Monday, Olmert claimed that he demanded and received an immediate conversation with President Bush, during which he convinced the president to overrule the wishes of US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and abstain from a United Nations resolution calling for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza. In response, State Department spokesman Sean McCormack on Tuesday called Olmert's claims "wholly inaccurate as to describing the situation, just 100-percent, totally, completely not true." The State Department did not respond to an IPS request for further elaboration. Olmert's comments were made in Ashkelon, a southern Israeli city that has been the target of rocket attacks from the Gaza Strip. According to Olmert, he called the White House upon hearing of the upcoming UN Security Council resolution. "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," Olmert said, according to multiple media reports. As a result of his conversation with President Bush, Olmert claimed, the president called Rice and forced her to abstain from voting on the measure, which she herself had helped author. "He gave an order to the secretary of state and she did not vote in favor of it -- a resolution she cooked up, phrased, organized and maneuvered for. She was left pretty shamed and abstained on a resolution she arranged," Olmert said. The Security Council resolution passed by a vote of 14 to 0, with the US the only abstention. The US government was quick to counter Olmert's remarks. In addition to the State Department's rebuttal, a White House spokesman also denounced "inaccuracies" in the story. Regardless of the truth of Olmert's claims, the story comes as an embarrassment to the Bush administration, which has faced criticism for its alleged unquestioning support for Israeli positions. While most US allies in Europe and elsewhere have called for an immediate ceasefire since the Israeli bombardment of Gaza began on 27 December, the Bush administration has been unwavering in its refusal to condemn the campaign or suggest a timeline for its conclusion. The US Congress has also expressed its strong support for Israel's actions in Gaza. Last week, both the House and Senate overwhelmingly passed non-binding resolutions in support of the military campaign. But polls indicate that both members of Congress and the public at large may be more skeptical of the Israeli offensive than the official positions of the US government would indicate. An anonymous poll of 68 congressmen conducted by National Journal found that 39 percent of Democrats and 12 percent of Republicans felt that Israel had used "too much" force in Gaza. Nevertheless, over 90 percent of representatives voted in favor of the House resolution, which placed all blame for civilian casualties in Gaza upon Hamas.'
Zie: http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article10189.shtml
Olmert's claims revive specter of "Israel Lobby"
Daniel Luban, The Electronic Intifada, 14 January 2009 WASHINGTON (IPS) -
The US State Department fiercely denied claims made by Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert about his influence over President George W. Bush, in an incident that has stirred up old debates about the role of the Israeli government and the so-called "Israel lobby" in formulating Middle East policy in Washington. On Monday, Olmert claimed that he demanded and received an immediate conversation with President Bush, during which he convinced the president to overrule the wishes of US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and abstain from a United Nations resolution calling for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza. In response, State Department spokesman Sean McCormack on Tuesday called Olmert's claims "wholly inaccurate as to describing the situation, just 100-percent, totally, completely not true." The State Department did not respond to an IPS request for further elaboration. Olmert's comments were made in Ashkelon, a southern Israeli city that has been the target of rocket attacks from the Gaza Strip. According to Olmert, he called the White House upon hearing of the upcoming UN Security Council resolution. "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," Olmert said, according to multiple media reports. As a result of his conversation with President Bush, Olmert claimed, the president called Rice and forced her to abstain from voting on the measure, which she herself had helped author. "He gave an order to the secretary of state and she did not vote in favor of it -- a resolution she cooked up, phrased, organized and maneuvered for. She was left pretty shamed and abstained on a resolution she arranged," Olmert said. The Security Council resolution passed by a vote of 14 to 0, with the US the only abstention. The US government was quick to counter Olmert's remarks. In addition to the State Department's rebuttal, a White House spokesman also denounced "inaccuracies" in the story. Regardless of the truth of Olmert's claims, the story comes as an embarrassment to the Bush administration, which has faced criticism for its alleged unquestioning support for Israeli positions. While most US allies in Europe and elsewhere have called for an immediate ceasefire since the Israeli bombardment of Gaza began on 27 December, the Bush administration has been unwavering in its refusal to condemn the campaign or suggest a timeline for its conclusion. The US Congress has also expressed its strong support for Israel's actions in Gaza. Last week, both the House and Senate overwhelmingly passed non-binding resolutions in support of the military campaign. But polls indicate that both members of Congress and the public at large may be more skeptical of the Israeli offensive than the official positions of the US government would indicate. An anonymous poll of 68 congressmen conducted by National Journal found that 39 percent of Democrats and 12 percent of Republicans felt that Israel had used "too much" force in Gaza. Nevertheless, over 90 percent of representatives voted in favor of the House resolution, which placed all blame for civilian casualties in Gaza upon Hamas.'
Zie: http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article10189.shtml
