'Ok, here we go, the Israel Lobby
I have not commented thus far on the publication of the Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer book on the Israel lobby. The reason is simple – I agreed to review the book for Haaretz and so have waited for that to be published. Well the review came out yesterday in the monthly Haartetz book supplement and should be on the website any day (it is being delayed by the Succot holiday). I have though decided to post that review here below. (I will provide the Haaretz link once it’s available.)It is a long piece, but I hope that you stick with it. Allow me to set out my stall in this kind of pre-amble. While I certainly take issue with the specific recent policy examples in the book (Iraq and Syria in particular), I am convinced that the relationship between the US, Israel and the lobby that speaks in its name needs to change for everyone’s sake, that this book contributes to a re-think and that the authors are not driven by prejudice.A key distinction to draw for instance is that it is not Israel per se that has become a strategic liability for the US, but rather Israel as an occupier (which is indeed, a liability to itself). To quote Walt and Mearsheimer, “if the conflict were resolved, Israel might become the sort of strategic asset that its supporters often claim it is.”I am not an American Jew (despite the valiant and appreciated efforts of Matt Yglesias to enfranchise me as such). I can at best empathize with the sensitivities of American Jews and the raw nerves that the book and the debate surrounding it have touched. Some of the commentary, including from people I respect, admire and personally like – JJ Goldberg, Jeffrey Goldberg and Leonard Fein (I had to find a non-Goldberg) for example, pushes back powerfully against the book and comes from a place that is undoubtedly sincere and, I believe, often emotional. It is an emotive subject for me also, but my emotions are those of an Israeli (by choice admittedly) who has witnessed the devastating consequences of the lobby-mediated US policy towards Israel, on our ability to build an Israel of hope, peace, decency and dare I say, longevity.Without himself being an Israeli, my friend MJ Rosenberg probably captures the essence of this position best when he writes: “There is nothing pro-Israel about supporting policies that promise only that Israeli mothers will continue to dread their sons’ 18th birthdays for another generation.”'
1 opmerking:
Tegen terreur en internationaal recht? Dan ben jij een "criticus"!
Aldus een anonieme schrijver van een Volkskrantartikel vandaag. Zie Israël onteigent Palestijnse grond. Zo schrijft de anonieme bron:
"een beleid dat door critici een voorbeeld van apartheid wordt genoemd"
en
die het Palestijnse gebied verbrokkelen.
Verbrokkelen! Verder alleen een uitleg van het IDF. Geen echte informatie, bijvoorbeeld dat deze uitbreiding simpelweg illegaal is (4e Conventie Geneve, art. 49), maar ook druist het in tegen de afgesproken Roadmap.
Dat de "critici" zich louter beroepen op internationale akkoorden en internationale wetten is niet im frage. Sinds wanneer zijn tegenstanders van criminaliteit, terreur, bezetting en mensenrechtenschendingen "critici"? Sinds wanneer ben je een 'criticus' wanneer je voor handhaving van internationaal afgesproken wetten bent?
Volkskrant = Israël lobby
Een reactie posten