Who needs enemies?

Follow the link to download a copy of the pseudo academic piece of conspiracy theory that Greg Sheridan derides in today's Australian. From the Harvard Web site...

The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy
By John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt
Working Paper Number:RWP06-011 Submitted: 13/03/2006

Abstract
In this paper, John J. Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago's Department of Political Science and Stephen M.Walt of Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government contend that the centerpiece of U.S. Middle East policy is its intimate relationship with Israel. The authors argue that although often justified as reflecting shared strategic interests or compelling moral imperatives, the U.S. commitment to Israel is due primarily to the activities of the “Israel Lobby." This paper goes on to describe the various activities that pro-Israel groups have undertaken in order to shift U.S. foreign policy in a pro-Israel direction.

Here are some quotes directly from the paper (I've emboldened one of the quotes)....

• Even if Israel was a strategic asset during the Cold War, the first Gulf War (1990‐91) revealed that Israel was becoming a strategic burden.....Israel is in fact a liability in the war on terror and the broader effort to deal with rogue states.
• the United States has a terrorism problem in good part because it is so closely allied with Israel
• Viewed objectively, Israel’s past and present conduct offers no moral basis for privileging it over the Palestinians.... The United States has overthrown democratic governments in the past and supported dictators when this was thought to advance U.S. interests, and it has good relations with a number of dictatorships today. Thus, being democratic neither justifies nor explains America’s support for Israel.
• Israel’s 1.3 million Arabs are treated as second‐class citizens....Israel’s democratic status is also undermined by its refusal to grant the Palestinians a viable state of their own.
• The mainstream Zionist leadership was not interested in establishing a bi‐national state or accepting a permanent partition of Palestine....Israeli leaders have repeatedly sought to deny the Palestinians’ national ambitions......no Israeli government has been willing to offer the Palestinians a viable state of their own
• the tragic history of the Jewish people does not obligate the United States to help Israel no matter what it does today.
• In terms of actual behavior, Israel’s conduct is not morally distinguishable from the actions of its opponents. .....the creation of Israel in 1947‐48 involved explicit acts of ethnic cleansing, including executions, massacres, and rapes by Jews......Israeli personnel have tortured numerous Palestinian prisoners, systematically humiliated and inconvenienced Palestinian civilians, and used force indiscriminately against them on numerous occasions.
• Palestinians have used terrorism against their Israeli occupiers, and their willingness to attack innocent civilians is wrong. This behavior is not surprising, however, because the Palestinians believe they have no other way to force Israeli concessions.
• Were it not for the (Israel) Lobby’s ability to manipulate the American political system, the relationship between Israel and the United States would be far less intimate than it is today......Jewish‐Americans have formed an impressive array of organizations to influence American foreign policy.....The Israel Lobby’s power flows from its unmatched ability to play this game of interest group politics.....the Lobby strives to ensure that public discourse about Israel portrays it in a positive light, by repeating myths about Israel and its founding and by publicizing Israel’s side
• A key pillar of the Lobby’s effectiveness is its influence in the U.S. Congress, where Israel is virtually immune from criticism......The bottom line is that AIPAC, which is a de facto agent for a foreign government, has a stranglehold on the U.S. Congress......pro‐Israel forces make sure that critics of the Jewish state do not get important foreign‐policy appointments
• Manipulating the Media -In addition to influencing government policy directly, the Lobby strives to shape public perceptions about Israel and the Middle East. It does not want an open debate on issues involving Israel.... Accordingly, pro‐Israel organizations work hard to influence the media, think tanks, and academia, because these institutions are critical in shaping popular opinion.....pro‐Israel bias is reflected in the editorials of major newspapers.....To discourage unfavorable reporting on Israel, the Lobby organizes letter writing campaigns, demonstrations, and boycotts against news outlets whose content it considers anti‐Israel. .....Pro‐Israel forces predominate in U.S. think tanks, which play an important role in shaping public debate as well as actual policy.
• The Lobby has had the most difficulty stifling debate about Israel on college campuses.....the Lobby has gone to considerable lengths to insulate Israel from criticism on college campuses. It has not been as successful in academia as it has been on Capitol Hill
• Anyone who criticizes Israeli actions ... stands a good chance of getting labeled an anti‐Semite. In fact, anyone who says that there is an Israel Lobby runs the risk of being charged with anti‐Semitism .... This tactic is very effective, because anti‐Semitism is loathsome and no responsible person wants to be accused of it.
• Europeans have been more willing than Americans to criticize Israeli policy in recent years, which some attribute to a resurgence of anti‐Semitism in Europe.
• criticize Israeli policy and you are by definition an anti‐Semite
• THE TAIL WAGGING THE DOG - ... the Lobby has ... sought to shape the core elements of U.S. Middle East policy. In particular, it has worked successfully to convince American leaders to back Israel’s continued repression of the Palestinians and to take im at Israel’s primary regional adversaries: Iran, Iraq, and Syria.
• in the fall of 2001, and especially in the spring of 2002, the Bush Administration tried to reduce anti‐American sentiment in the Arab world and undermine support for terrorist groups like al Qaeda, by halting Israel’s expansionist policies in the occupied territories and advocating the creation of a Palestinian state. ....Yet the Bush Administration failed to change Israel’s policies, and Washington ended up backing Israel’s hard‐line approach instead. ...The main reason for this switch is the Lobby.....In short, Sharon and the Lobby took on the President of the United States and triumphed.
• Pressure from Israel and the Lobby was not the only factor behind the U.S. decision to attack Iraq in March 2003, but it was a critical element......Within the United States, the main driving force behind the Iraq war was a small band of neoconservatives, many with close ties to Israel’s Likud Party...... there is little doubt that Israel and the Lobby were key factors in shaping the decision for war.
  Without the Lobby’s efforts, the United States would have been far less likely to have gone to war in March 2003.
• Pro‐Israel forces have long been interested in getting the U.S. military more directly involved in the Middle East, so it could help protect Israel.
• Gunning for Syria - Israeli leaders did not push the Bush Administration to put its crosshairs on Syria before March 2003, because they were too busy pushing for war against Iraq. But once Baghdad fell in mid‐April, Sharon and his lieutenants began urging Washington to target Damascus....Congress insisted on putting the screws to Damascus, largely in response to pressure from Israel officials and pro‐Israel groups like AIPAC.
• Putting Iran in the Crosshairs - Israelis tend to describe every threat in the starkest terms, but Iran is widely seen as their most dangerous enemy because it is the most likely adversary to acquire nuclear weapons .....The neoconservatives also lost no time in making the case for regime change in Tehran.The Bush Administration has responded to the Lobby’s pressure by working overtime to shut down Iran’s nuclear program......the United States has its own reasons to keep Iran from going nuclear...but Iran’s nuclear ambitions do not pose an existential threat to the United States. If Washington could live with a nuclear Soviet Union, a nuclear China, or even a nuclear North Korea, then it can live with a nuclear Iran.... if the Lobby did not exist...U.S. policy would be more temperate and preventive war would not be a serious option.
• Summary - It is not surprising that Israel and its American supporters want the United States to deal with any and all threats to Israel’ security. If their efforts to shape U.S. policy succeed, then Israel’s enemies get weakened or overthrown, Israel gets a free hand with the Palestinians, and the United States does most of the fighting, dying, rebuilding, and paying.
• Can the Lobby’s power be curtailed? One would like to think so....But that is not going to happen anytime soon. AIPAC and its allies (including Christian Zionists) have no serious opponents in the lobbying world......This situation is deeply worrisome, because the Lobby's influence causes trouble on several fronts......Thanks to the Lobby, the United States has become the de facto enabler of Israeli expansion in the occupied territories, making it complicit in the crimes perpetrated against the Palestinians.....the Lobby’s campaign to squelch debate about Israel is unhealthy for democracy. Silencing skeptics by organizing blacklists and boycotts—or by suggesting that critics are anti‐Semites—violates the principle of open debate upon which democracy depends.
• Finally, the Lobby’s influence has been bad for Israel. Its ability to persuade Washington to support an expansionist agenda has discouraged Israel from seizing opportunities ‐‐ including a peace treaty with Syria and a prompt and full implementation of the Oslo Accords ‐‐ that would have saved Israeli lives and shrunk the ranks of Palestinian extremists. Denying the Palestinians their legitimate political rights certainly has not made Israel more secure, and the long campaign to kill or marginalize a generation of Palestinian leaders has empowered extremist groups like Hamas, and reduced the number of Palestinian leaders who would be both willing to accept a fair settlement and able to make it work. This course raises the awful specter of Israel one day occupying the pariah status once reserved for apartheid states like South Africa. Ironically, Israel itself would probably be better off if the Lobby were less powerful and U.S. policy were more evenhanded.

....wow !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! with "friends" like these, we don't need enemies....