Political Crossfire Forums

[jher]

Sharon and the Lobby took on the President of the United States and triumphed. I am shocked.

But trouble erupted again in April 2002, after the IDF launched Operation Defensive Shield and resumed control of virtually all of the major Palestinian areas on the Wst Bank.Bush knew that Israel’s action would damage America’s image in the Arab and Islamic world and undermine the war on terrorim, so he demanded on April 4 that Sharon “halt the incursions and begin withdrawal.” He underscored this message two days later, saying this meant “withdrawal without delay.” On April 7, Bush’s national security advisor, Condoleezza Rice, told reporters that, “‘without delay’ means without delay. It means now.” That same day Secretary of State Colin Powell set out for the Middle East to pressure all sides to stop fighting and start neotiating.

Israel and the Lobby swung into action. A key target was Powell, who began feeling intense heat from pro‐Israel officials in Vice President Cheney’s office and the Pentagon, as well as from neoconservative pundits like Robert Kagan and William Kristol, who accused him of having “virtually obliterated the distinction between terrorists and those fighting terrorists.” A second target was Bush himself, who was being pressed by Jewish leaders and Christian evangelicals, the latter a key component of his political base. Tom DeLay and Dick Armey were especially outspoken about the need to support Israel, and DeLay and Senate Minority Leader Trent Lott visited the White House and personally warned Bush to back off.128

The first sign that Bush was caving came on April 11—only one week after he told Sharon to withdraw his forces—when Ari Fleischer said the President believes Sharon is “a man of peace.”129 Bush repeated this statement publicly upon Powell’s return from his abortive mission, and he told reporters that Sharon had responded satisfactorily to his call for a full and immediate withdrawal.130 Sharon had done no such thing, but the President of the United States was no longer willing to make an issue of it.


Meanwhile, Congress was also moving to back Sharon. On May 2, it overrode the Administration’s objections and passed two resolutions reaffirming support for Israel. (The Senate vote was 94 to 2; the House version passed 352‐21). Both resolutions emphasized that the United States “stands in solidarity with Israel” and that the two countries are, to quote the House resolution, “now engaged in a common struggle against terrorism.” The House version also condemned “the ongoing support of terror by Yasir Arafat,” who was portrayed as a central element of the terrorism problem.131 A few days later, a bipartisan congressional delegation on a fact‐finding mission in Israel publicly proclaimed that Sharon should resist U.S. pressure to negotiate with Arafat.On May 9, a House appropriations subcommittee met to consider giving Israel an extra $200 million to fight terrorism. Secretary of State Powell opposed the package, but the Lobby backed it, just as it had helped author the two congressional resolutions.133 Powell lost.


In short, Sharon and the Lobby took on the President of the United States and triumphed. Hemi Shalev, a journalist for the Israel newspaper Ma’ariv, reported that Sharon’s aides “could not hide their satisfaction in view of Powell’s failure. Sharon saw the white in President Bush’s eyes, they bragged, and the President blinked first.”But it was the pro‐Israel forces in the United States, not Sharon or Israel, that played the key role in defeating Bush.

[jher]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/12/AR2006071201627_pf.html

A Beautiful Friendship?
In search of the truth about the Israel lobby's influence on Washington

By Glenn Frankel
Sunday, July 16, 2006; W13
.............................

Or, as Morris Amitay put it when our interview ended: "It's been nice talking to you, and I look forward to sending a very critical letter to the editor after your article appears."




Morris Amitay, a longtime legislative assistant in Congress and lobbyist for the influential American Israeli Public Affairs Committee, is an adviser to Frank Gaffney's Center for Security Policy and the vice chairman of the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA), a U.S.-based pro-Likud advocacy outfit that specializes in connecting U.S. military brass to their counterparts in the Israeli armed forces. JINSA associates include Dick Cheney, John Bolton, Douglas Feith, Michael Leeden, David Steinmann, James Woolsey, Stephen Bryen, and Richard Perle, among other leading U.S. neoconservatives and retired U.S. military officials.

According to a profile prepared by the American Enterprise Institute, Amitay "has helped in the contribution of more than two million dollars to congressional candidates on a bipartisan basis over the past two decades." (8) In an article in The Jewish Week following the 2002 defeat of Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-Georgia) and Rep. Earl Hilliard (D-Alabama), Amitay, the founder of the hardline pro-Israel Washington PAC, noted that both incumbents were particularly vulnerable because of their criticism of Israeli policies. The article led with the line: "The score is now Jewish activists 2, anti-Israel members of Congress 0." (7)
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/1007

[jher]

Not since Foreign Affairs magazine published Samuel Huntington's "The Clash of Civilizations?" in 1993 has an academic essay detonated with such force as "The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy," by professors John J. Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago and Stephen M. Walt of Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government. Published in the March 23, 2006, issue of the London Review of Books
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/19062