Five years ago, Atlantic Monthly commissioned two academics, John Mearsheimer
of Chicago University and Stephen Walt of Harvard, to write a significant
article about the influence of the Israeli lobby on American foreign policy.
When the piece was at last completed, the magazine declined to publish,
deeming it too hot for delicate American palates. It eventually appeared in
2005, in the London Review of Books, provoking one of the most bitter media
and academic rows of recent times. The authors were accused of antisemitism,
and attacked with stunning venom by some prominent US commentators.
Mearsheimer and Walt obviously like a fight, however, for they have now
expanded their thesis into a book.
Its argument is readily summarised. The authors support Israel’s right to
exist. But they are dismayed by America’s unconditional support for its
governments’ policies, including vast sums of cash aid for which there is no
plausible accounting process. They reject the view articulated as a mantra
by all modern American presidents (and 2008 presidential candidates) that
Israel and America share common values, and their national interests march
hand in hand.
On the contrary, say the authors, America’s backing for Israel does grave
damage to its own foreign-policy interests. And many Israeli government
actions, including the expansion of West Bank settlements and the invasion
of Lebanon, reflect repressive policies that do not deserve Washington’s
endorsement: “While there is no question that the Jews were victims in
Europe, they were often the victimisers, not the victims, in the Middle
East, and their main victims were and continue to be the Palestinians.”
The authors argue that American policy towards Israel is decisively and
unhelpfully influenced by the power of a domestic lobby spearheaded by AIPAC
(the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee). This organisation wields
extraordinary power in raising funds for American political candidates whom
it favours, and bringing down wrath upon those whom it deems insufficiently
supportive.
They quote the experience of a Senate candidate who was invited to visit AIPAC
early in his campaign for “discussions”. Harry Lonsdale described what
followed as “an experience I will never forget. It wasn’t enough that I was
pro-Israel. I was given a list of vital topics and quizzed (read grilled)
for my specific opinion on each. Actually, I was told what my opinion must
be . . . Shortly after that . . . I was sent a list of American supporters
of Israel . . . that I was free to call for campaign contributions. I
called; they gave from Florida to Alaska”.
When congresswoman Betty McCollum, a liberal with a solid pro-Israel voting
record, opposed the AIPAC-backed Palestinian AntiTerrorism Act, which was
also opposed by the state department, an AIPAC lobbyist told McCollum’s
chief-of-staff that her “support for terrorists will not be tolerated”.
Former president Jimmy Carter incurred not merely criticism but vilification
when he published a book entitled Palestine Peace Not Apartheid, likening
Israel’s policy towards the Palestinians to that of the old white regime in
South Africa towards its black majority.
Whatever view Europeans take of Israel, most find it difficult to comprehend
the sheer ferocity of American sentiment. Ian Buruma wrote an article for
The New York Times entitled How to Talk About Israel. He said how difficult
it is to have an honest debate, and remarked that “even legitimate criticism
of Israel, or of Zionism, is often quickly denounced as antiSemitism by
various watchdogs”.
Such remarks brought down a storm on his head. The editor of The Jerusalem
Post, also a columnist for The Wall Street Journal, published an open letter
to Buruma that began: “Are you a Jew?” He argued that nonJews should discuss
these issues only in terms acceptable to Jews.
The American media, claim the authors, even such mighty organs as The New York
Times and The Washington Post, do less than justice to the Palestinians,
much more than justice to the Israelis. Robert Bartley, a former editor of
The Wall Street Journal, once said: “Shamir, Sharon, Bibi – whatever those
guys want is pretty much fine by me.” There is no American counterpart to
such notably Arabist British polemicists as Robert Fisk.
Mearsheimer and Walt’s book argues its points at such ponderous length that it
makes pretty leaden reading. But it is extraordinary that, in a free
society, the legitimacy of the expression of their opinions should be called
into question. “We show,” say the authors, “that although Israel may have
been an asset during the cold war it is increasingly a strategic liability
now that the cold war is over. Backing Israel so strongly helps fuel
America’s terrorism problem and makes it harder for the United States to
address the other problems it faces in the Middle East.”
Americans ring-fence Israel from the normal sceptical proc-esses of democracy,
while arguments for the Palestinians are often denounced as pernicious as
well as antisemitic. All the 2008 presidential candidates, say Mearsheimer
and Walt, know that their campaign would be dead in the water if they hinted
that Israel would receive less than 100% backing if they win. They note that
many Israelis are much bolder in attacking their own governments than any
American politician would dare to be.
Part of the trouble is that AIPAC faces no significant opposition.
Palestinians, and indeed all Arabs, command negligible sympathy in America,
especially since 9/11. The authors think that the most helpful step towards
diminishing the Israel lobby’s grip would be for election campaigns to be
publicly financed, ending candidates’ dependence on private contributions:
“AIPAC’s success is due in large part to its ability to reward legislators
and congressional candidates who support its agenda, and to punish those who
do not.”
But the authors know reform will not happen. The Israel lobby is vastly
strengthened by the support of America’s Christian Zionists, an important
element of George W Bush’s constituency. Some may think these people are
lunatics, but there are an awful lot of them. They are even more strident in
their opposition to Arab rights in Palestine than the Israeli Likud party.
Mearsheimer and Walt conclude, weakly but inevitably, with a mere plea for
more open debate in the US about Israel. “Because most Americans are only
dimly aware of the crimes committed against the Palestinians,” they say,
“they see their continued resistance as an irrational desire for vengeance.
Or as evidence of unwarranted hatred of Jews akin to the antisemitism that
was endemic in old Europe.
“Although we deplore the Palestinians’ reliance on terrorism and are well
aware of their own contribution to prolonging the conflict, we believe their
grievances are genuine and must be addressed. We also believe that most
Americans would support a different approach . . . if they had a more
accurate understanding of past events and present conditions.”
For Europeans, all this adds up to a bleak picture. Only America might be
capable of inducing the government of Israel to moderate its behaviour, and
it will not try. Washington gives Jerusalem a blank cheque, and all of us in
some degree pay a price for Israel’s abuses of it.
After that remark, I shall be pleasantly surprised to escape an allegation
from somebody that I belong in the same stable of antisemites as Walt and
Mearsheimer. Yet otherwise intelligent Americans diminish themselves by
hurling charges of antisemitism with such recklessness. There will be no
peace in the Middle East until the United States faces its responsibilities
there in a much more convincing fashion than it does today, partly for
reasons given in this depressing book.
The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy by John J Mearsheimer and
Stephen M Walt
Allen Lane £25 pp496
Buy
the book here at the offer price of £22.50 (inc p&p)
Rob of Colchester,
No, you are correct. Palestine was not even mentioned until the Romans coined it. It is the Latin word for Philistine. As we all know, the Philistines and Canaanites occupied Palestine before the Hebrews. "Israel", came along waaay after Canaan.
But, what does this red herring really have to do with the unconditional support of "Israel" by the USA?
Dave, Seattle, WA
you people are missing the point, that the palestinians were forced out of their homes in 1948 and never allowed to return. the zionist [ ben gurion] wanted a decade earlier to ethnically cleanse the area of arabs. there was no secret in this and now we have 12 million palestinians in refugee camps all over the middle east. when is israel going to fess up and accept responisbility for their actions. as an american i am ashamed of my country after reading the book, i never knew the lobby was that strong.......color me naive
fred cross, stockton, california usa
The word "Palestine" is never featured in the Bible. The word Israel occurs over 700 times.
Interestingly "Palestine" does not feature in the Koran either, guess which country does though? Israel.
Probably because Israel has been a country for over 3,000 years, and the historical revisionism which has established the monstrous lie of "Palestine" is a only a recent invention.
Rob, Colchester,
It's nice to see the truth peeping through from time to time.
Alys Skel, Toronto,
...Palestinians were citizens of Turkey, Egypt, the British manadate, Jordan - you name it. Arafat essentially invented the Palestinian state and people in 1967. - Alan Kolnik, Washington, USA.
An outright lie! We call them Palestinians because they ARE from Palestine. This is the same Palestine that is listed in the Jewish Encyclopedia published 1901-1906 (and available online). This is the same Palestine mentioned in the Bible, by the Romans, by the UN before the creation of Israel. The same Palestine that the Palestinians have been continuously living in for more than 2000 years. The original inhabitants of Palestine were the Caananites, whom the Israelites slaughtered. The Caananites were affiliated to the Pharoahs as can be seen from the Tel- El Amarna tablets. The Jews have lived in and controlled Palestine for a lot less time than the Palestinians!
Name Withheld, Houston, TX, USA
In America, we always here the politIcians talking about "how difficult it is to achieve peace in the Middle East..." I guarantee that if the president or congress stopped the flow of cash into Israel today, tomorrow the wall would come down, the settlements would be dismantled, and the Palestinians would have their country back in no time. As long as the U.S. continues to bankroll this occupation, the Palestinian people will never achieve statehood. Mersheimer and Walt should be congradulated for exposing AIPAC and other Israeli lobby groups.
Mike Enrico, New York, New York
This is an issue I think only Ron Paul will be able to address through a rebirth of the American Constitution.
Chad, Prince George, British Columbia
No, this book does not explain the problems in the Middle East: reading the Koran and the ahadith does that. Islam's hatred of Jews is rooted in that mistermed 'holy' book (more a terrorist training manual with its call to 'holy' war of Jihad until all the world is moslem). The Jews were the first people to reject Mohamed's claim as the 'prophet'; his response was to wage war against them and after the defeat of the Jewish Quaraysh tribe he personally beheaded 400-600 men and boy prisoners. Every Moslem knows that:it's in Hadith Bukhari. The Christians were next on his hate list. The entire Middle East was once Christian. It's now occupied by 350million people, mainly Moslems, and Islam has failed to provide them with any socially, economically, politically, educationally viable infrastructures. Tiny Israel manages quite well and gets far less money from the US than the Moslem lands combined. Israel's continued existence is judgement upon Islam and Moslems.
William, london,
Michael: Have you heard what Abe Foxman said about this book? Evidently not.
The best way to change Israel's policies vis a vis the Palestininans is to hit them in the pocket book.
A boycott organized by private citizens would be a good start.
It is of course against Federal law for US Corporations to take part in such a boycott. The Lobby has seen to that.
Mannstein, Cambridge, Ma.
None of the other 14 members of the UN Security Council ever voted in support of any of the approx. 40 US vetoes of proposed resolutions aimed at Israel in the period 1972-2006. There was an unbroken string of 14-1 votes against such US vetoes -- with no abstentions -- in the period 1988-1997. And we wonder why they call us "The Great Satan." See --
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/usvetoes.html
Direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians have been a failure. The only solution is to have a settlement imposed by the UN acting alone or by the "road map quartet" consisting of the UN, US, Russia, and the EU.
Larry Fafarman, Los Angeles,
Four times the cost of the entire Apollo mission for what? Israel is nothing more to the US strategically than a Lok-it-up storage box for arms to deal with pesky Arabs who want to control their own oil. Criticizing the authors for not focusing on the Saudis is pretty stupid, the book is not about them. One sided reporting is fine, as long as it's the right side apparently. You end times idiots who think you will be raptured are a hoot, what makes you so sure it hasn't already happened? Maybe there weren't enough eligible for the trip for you notice them leaving, and you are stuck here as a self loathing heathen without even knowing it. If Israel wants to kill and maim thats their business, just leave my forced monetary support out of it, they can pay for their own genocides. The very fact that our politicians can be bought and sold says everything about us, getting rid of AIPAC's influence won't stop it, someone else will fill the void left behind.
Dean, Toledo, Ohio
Has Max Hastings reflected on how Europeans are infuenced by pro-Arab interests, and by fear of upsetting the growing number of Muslims in their countries? Perhaps rather than tut-tutting about America (a automatic and endless response) Europeans should consider whether they are biased, and whether they have a responsibility to tell Arabs, and especially Palestinians, that they have to face reality and compromise?
Martin Wiener, historian, houston, texas
This book shows the real hidden realities of Israel lobby dominating the US foreign policy, I don’t know why “US†being a super power, is not taking care of these issues, why there is an imbalance of US foreign policies with middle east after having all of this information.
syed Faheemullah, karachi, Pakistan
Does the writer really believe that an Arab, last reported dying in a Mid East hospital of kidney failure, shut down the half trillion dollar US Air Defences with his laptop, from a cave in Afghan. so that his incompetents would not be intercepted?. The penta pilot, who couldnt solo a Cessna 172 with 600 hours in his log book, flew a 180 ton airliner at 500mph to precisely hit the Naval Intel section, not touching the lawn with his low slung engines yet put the jet thru a 10 foot hole at GROUND LEVEL. Does the writer believe that these incompetents boarded the airliners without being on the pass. lists (CNN) therefore no tickets or boarding passes, that they ovewrpowered burly flight crew with box cutters, found the secret air corridor between US and Canada that has no NORAD nor FAA radar cover, flew like super-topguns for the precise high speed strikes ?..BBC . half still alive after the antics! . In my opinion his comment that Arabs no longer have credibility loses HIS credibility
ThomasT, Vienna, Austria
What are the missing words in the 4th paragraph beginning: 'The authors argue that American policy towards Israel is decisively and '?
Neil Baldwin, Broxburn, Scotland
The American sheeple need to wake up and see what is being done in their name and with their tax-dollars in Palestine and all over the Middle East. Israel gets more "aid" than Africa (excluding Egypt), Latin America and the Caribbean combined. Shameful! When half a trillion dollars has been wasted in Iraq, achieved nothing and 50 million Americans are without healthcare. You have people like Chertoff in charge of Homeland Security who is a dual national with loyalty only to Israel. More people are killed in road traffic accidents in every country in the world (with the exception of Iraq) than by terrorists. The US spends as much as the rest of the world put together on weapons. I wonder how much gets spent on education. The US now has bases in 130 out of 190 countries around the globe. Castro exports doctors to the 3rd world, Bush exports death, destruction and depleted Uranium. There is only one hope left for America and his name is RON PAUL!
John Smith, Maidstone, UK
Things like this do need exposing, most people in the UK will be unaware that the pro Israel lobby is even stronger in the UK than the US.
Check out these web sites if you are sceptical;
www.cfoi.co.uk
www.lfi.org.uk
www.ldfi.org.uk/
Just one quote from the first site;
"Conservative Friends of Israel (CFI) is one of the largest political groups in the UK. Over two thirds of the Conservative Members of Parliament (MPs) are members and CFI has activists all over the UK. CFI regularly lobbies Conservative MPs, Lords, MEPs and advisors to make the case for Israel. At CFI, we ensure Conservative politicians make Israel 's case in Parliament, in the UK and Europe."
If you are an MP and not a "friend of Israel" your chance of getting a Ministers job your chances are slim to zero.
bob, Bradford, Yorkshire
The one sidedness of this article is essential. It makes a change from constant pro-israel bias in the UK and US media. Maybe brien and Adam should read this book. Of course, they wont. Go israel, etc!
dan anderson, london,
Whatever the power of --- The Lobby ---, W&M had their book published. So did James Earl Carter, Jr. Chomsky and Finkelstein have had no problems finding publishers.
The same cannot be said for J. Millard Burr and Robert O Collins, authors of "Alms for Jihad: Charity And Terrorism in the Islamic World." Their book was stopped due to a lawsuit by Saudi Sheikh Khalid bin Mahfouz.
There may be worse things for the U.S. than Israel and its lobby but bashing Israel is far safer than confronting them.
Brad Brzezinski, Ottawa, Canada
Once I thought M & W were simply ignorant. There are ready ways to measure a lobby's influence, after all. One can count how many times it (or its research) is cited in the Congressional Record, how often it donates (especially in close races), whether it is able to get people to phone and write in on issues, etc. And one can compare whether this influence (which can be quantitively measured) is greater or lesser than that of other lobbies (whose influence can likewise be measured). M & W have done none of this in their article or in their book.
They never even troubled to define what the "Israel lobby" is. Am I a member of this lobby (despite not belonging to a single political affiliation save the Democratic Party) by virtue of being 1) Jewish and 2) writing this post in The Times? I suspect the answer is "yes". And if so, the objection is not to the Israel lobby's (which is never defined) but to the participation of Jews in US' political life. That is not ignorance.
Inna, Sacramento, USA
Arrgh! only seven comments in and Hitler has been mentioned as well as 'God' and 'prophecy'. Use your heads and not your spleens!
Kennog, You'd vapourise if I typed it,
The key question is why has the UK fallen into line? Are we fighting a proxy war for Israel in Iraq? This important issue is never debated.
Graeme, Edinburgh, UK
I've never heard some good words towards Israel either in British media,non European,unfortunatelly.
Tella, London, London
The question, in my mind, is why the US and the ROW (rest of the West) support the Palestinians! The whole roadmap thing has become so much the common wisdom that we are missing a unique window to put an end to the Palestinian problem once and for all. The concept of "returning to the 1967 borders (or 1948, or 1947, or whenever) overlooks the fact that at any of those times, the Palestinians were citizens of Turkey, Egypt, the British manadate, Jordan - you name it. Arafat essentially invented the Palestinian state and people in 1967.
Given the split between Hamas and Fatah, now really is the time to return to the '67 borders - give Gaza back to Egypt, and most of the West Bank (less a couple fo really large Israeli settlements like Ariel and Alon Moreh) to the Jordanians, confer Egyptian and Jordanian citizenship on the Palestinians, and that's the end of it.
Alan Kolnik, Washington, USA
If Israel need this kind of unconditional support, then there is something seriously wrong with it's philosophy. It looks like the product of joint Zionist and CIA interests; perhaps going back as far as the cause of World War I.
H. Grattan, Johannesburg, South Africa
Open Letter to Sir Max,
Dear Sir, as a Scottish-born Israeli, I disgree profoundly with some of your views, as expressed in your review of "The Israel Lobby..." I support your right to your opinion and would never allege that you are an anti-semite.
The problem with consistently accusing Israel of oppression of the Palestinians is that there is some truth in the accusation, but is simplistic and ignores the context. The plain fact is that most of the Arab and Islamic world has always sought Israel's total destruction. Israel accepted the 1947 UN partition plan that gave the Israels tiny enclaves. Even that was too much for the Arabs who embarked on a war of annihilation. When Nasrallah says "the Jews are the enemy of God. We shall not rest till the last Jew has disappeared from the earth", when Ahmenidajab calls for Israel's destruction, we are right to believe them. No appeasement bwill ever be enough. What would you do?
Amiel Schotz, Metar, Israel
A lot of anti- Zionist criticism becomes Antisemitic by being the sort of interference and assumption that would never be visited on other countries and nationalisms. For a start Pakistan was the first state established on a purely religious basis & purpose. List the reasons for Pakistan's or [Arab]Palestine's independence; and the reasons for Israeli independence jump off the paper. So why are Arab statements or moves to get rid of Israel still accepted as legitimate scenery in Middle East politicking ?
We all did a dozen years of literature at school - and do not patronise one sided film and theatre that break the dramatic requirement to set up an engageing conflict of interests and characters. The M & W paper, it is a remarkably one sided "charge sheet" by not giving the Arab actions and policies to which Israel was responding. Besides it offers no guarantee that relations would be any better with the Arab World if we let them devour Israel.
Fraank Adam, Prestwich, Gtr Manchester, UK
It is appalling for me to hear any criticism of Israel or AIPAC called anti-semetic. Since when is criticism of a Nation State or an obviously pro Israel lobby not allowed because that State happens to be Jewish.
madeline wood, grafton, massachusetts
A fair analysis from Max Hastings, the power of the Israel lobby has reduced Washington to a puppet government. The behaviour of this lobby which extends further than AIPAC is pernicious and destructive. If more Jews realised what this will actually mean to them eventually, that shrill accusations of anti semitism as a way of subjugation is actually an account which will eventually have to be settled, more would speak out.
You are not anti semitic, Max, nor am I a self hating Jew. Hold on to that when the usual suspects email their vitriol.
Closer scrutiny of PNAC and JINSA, so called think tanks and policy groups, and of the lobbying system, AIPAC et al, now, will save us further bloodshed, and assist the sweeping away of much of the corruption of due democratic process in the US and yes, here in Europe. If we do not stand against these people now then G-d help us all.
JS, London, England
there is open debate in the US. W-M are publishing a book, and several eamples in this article point to articles published in newspapers such as the New York TImes. That others disagree with these opinions and epress their oppinions is part of the debate, not a censure of it. this review does not deal with the real problems of the book. for example it blames the Israel lobby, which is a code word for Jews in general for starting the Iraq war. Jews make up 2% of the US pop. in this book they are portrayed as running the country, and bush cheney, rice are just pupets with not agency. a real review would deal with this issue.
sam, tel aviv,
I recently bought this book . I will say that I is well written and extremly detailed. If it can be said that an author goes too far to explain both sides of a story this would be a good example. I will warn you if you are fiscally conservative in your judgments of how money should be spent in our government the readings might turn your stomach. It's amazing how Israel has this hold over our leaders, both sides. I have already recommended this book to everyone that I think reads political. I don't understand why we support Isreal finacially so continually through the decades, it's like they have a blackmailed thing on every leader.
Jake Wade, Fort Mohave, Arizona
Come now Mr Elliott A Green, the idea that the "As to settlements, US policy opposes them" has any real merit is beyond absurd. That Israel faces no consequences for such actions, and can rely on the continued unquestioned granting of "loans" which will always be followed by forgiveness of debt, no matter what they do. This little trick assures Israel faces none of the accountability that nations receiving outright grants must be held to. The White paper? Please spare us this nonsense. What of UN 194, that grants the right of return to the ethnically cleansed forced out of their ancestral home to make way for a nation that is to be dominated by one ethnicity as if such a thing had some divine purpose? Interested readers would do well to consult Israeli Historian Ilan Pappe's "The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine". Americans will recognize their own sordid history of forced marches, murder and mayhem, all raised to the level of glorious victory, the vanquished indiginous people vilified.
M Burke, Boston, MA
Most favorable reviews of M&W disregard the most important aspect of their work: their shoddy scholarship. All the evidence they claim for their hypothesis and foregone conclusion is based on secondary, superficial, unreliable sources, which does not validate their claims. This is exactly what was done here: their claims are taken at face value.
In fact, anybody familiar with the political reality in the US and in Israel can readily demonstrate that because of their unscholarly approach, their conclusions are the opposite of that reality. It turns out that american politicians pressure Israel to dance to the tune of american interests, very often against its own interests.
That is why it is appropriate to accuse M&W of anti-semitism, because, being scholars, they must KNOW how bad their work is, yet they still accuse Israel. Neither do they pay any attention to lobbies who had much more influence on the US government, like Bush's Saudi friends and the corporations.
oao, san francisco, CA/USA
Hastings endorses the ridiculous falsehoods of Walt-Mearsheimer. He summarizes their position as saying, inter alia, that America gives Israel's governments "unconditional support." This is simply a lie. For instance, on Jewish settlements in Judea-Samaria. These areas were part of the Jewish National Home set up by the San Remo Conference in 1920, and endorsed by the League of Nations in 1922. It is not the settlements that are illegal. What was illegal --according to the League's Permanent Mandates Commission-- was the British White Paper policy starting in 1939 that prevented Jews from buying real estate in most of the National Home despite the clear principles enunciated by the Mandate issued to Britain in 1922. As to settlements, US policy opposes them, although the US is not so ready to declare them illegal as the UK is. Hastings mentions anti-Israel propagandist Robert Fisk who has an aversion to facts that don't fit his anti-Israel arguments. Fisk shames the UK .
Elliott A Green, Jerusalem, Israel
Instead of branding everyone an anti something, let's look at the issues. The Israelis are pushing the Palestinians out of their land and demolishing their homes. All done with US approval and tax dollars. An Israeli firster is just that "Israel" first. Time to stop this charade.
S. Fox, Baltimore,
The creation of the State of Israel ,like that of the USA are at best dubious and arbitrary.In both cases,The natives have lost their land,their lives and shed their blood.Clearly,the two state solutions will not work in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.The solution must be the formation of a Greater Palestine,under one government.The Jewish community if they so wish may be granted the right to a 'Principalty' as part of Greater Palestine.The whole Middle East region should be de- mlitarised or at least be made nuclear free.The model of Monaco , being a principality,but part of France,is the system to be emulated here.The solution for a long lasting peace,benefiting both communities and the whole region.
navin p, Quatre Bornes , Mauritius
There will be no peace in the Middle East until God says so. Nothing man can do will change that. History is on a collission course with prophecy and the crossroads are increasingly today.
Eric Standlee, Houston, Texas
Didn't take long for GIYUS.org to jump in here and call the reviewer a Nazi, did it? Oh well, I guess it's useful to have someone so eager to prove Mearsheimer and Walt's thesis.
d. ruhe, biggar, canada
Lobbies are an integral part of the American democratic political system.
Lobbies exist in Britain as well, though they are more insidious and pernicious…and pro-Arab.
Thankfully it affects more the corrupt Anglo-Arab business scene than politics, as Britain does not play any significant role in the world anylonger.
But if it did, I should ask Mr Hasting whether we, Europeans, should pay for Britain’s reckless policy in Iraq!
de Laval, Paris,
Israel is America's best, most reliable ally. They do share common values and strategic interests. Israel, a fellow democracy, is on the front lines in defending western civilization from the Muslim supremacists who want to take the world back to the time when Muslims ruled and could treat non-Muslims as third-class citizens.
It's absurd that pro-Israel Americans are seen as a threat, while the powerful Saudi Oil Lobby is ignored. Saudi Arabia doesn't even let women drive!!! They fund schools and mosques worldwide that turn moderate Muslims into Muslim supremacist extremists. For Walt & Mearsheimer to ignore the negative influence of Saudi Arabia and OIL on U.S. foreign policy is revealing.
To think that the Muslim extremists would like the U.S. better if we abandoned our democratic Israel is absurd. They hate Israel for the same reason they hate the U.S.. Because we are non-Muslim. Abandoning Israel would just embolden and escalate their extremism.
Gail, Redwood City, CA
Has it ever occurred to anyone in America that stifling honest debate on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is diametrically opposed to the supposed freedoms that the American nation exhibits? Or that the base accusation of antisemitism as a riposte to criticism of Israel might be an indication that the criticism is warranted?
This is a timely dissection of American attitudes to Israel, but I fear it may be vitiated by the very lobby it seeks to expose.
H Longton, Guildford, UK
The Nazis were equally convinced they were just and right, and equally determined to spread such untruthful propaganda. The total one-sidedness here is highly revealing.
Adam, Sheffield,
I have no problem with United States' foreign policy possibly having a pro-Israel bias. America is a very Christian Nation and Christianity directly emanates from Judaism. Israel is a Democracy and a civilized Nation. I wish America would also become more pro-India because India is the world's largest Democracy and the spiritual homeland of peaceful Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism.
Brien Comerford, Glenview, United States
The claim that critics of Israeli policy are smeared as anti semites is simply untrue. Where have any mainstream Israeli or Jewish leaders called critics of Israeli policies "Anti Semites" solely because of such critisism?
Michael, Far Rockaway, New York