Obama's "interference" in Israeli politics: "AIPAC is a very powerful force against President Obama"

[Better Believe It]

Obama's "interference" in Israeli politics
Updated
by Glenn Greenwald

Both Likud Party members in Israel as well as their Americans supporters – including members of both parties in the U.S. Congress – are beginning to complain that the Obama administration is unduly "interfering" in Israeli politics by insisting on a full cessation of settlement growth. The Jerusalem Post today reports: "US President Barack Obama's administration's criticism of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's policies has crossed the line into interfering in Israeli politics, top Likud ministers and MKs said Tuesday." Yesterday, Politico's Ben Smith similarly documented that "the administration’s escalating pressure on Israel to freeze all growth of its settlements on Palestinian land has begun to stir concern among Israel’s numerous allies in both parties on Capitol Hill."

.... if Israel wants to be free of what it and some of its U.S. supporters call "interference" from the Obama administration, that’s very easy to achieve: Israel can stop asking for tens of billions of dollars of American taxpayer money, huge amounts of military and weapons supplies for its various wars, and unyielding American diplomatic protection at the U.N. But as long as Israel remains dependent on the U.S. in countless ways, then Obama not only has the right -- but he has the obligation -- to demand that Israel cease activities which harm U.S. interests.

How serious Obama is about applying real pressure to Israel remains to be seen, but it’s hard to deny that these initial steps are encouraging. When is the last time there were public rifts of this sort between the American and Israeli governments? Obviously, Israelis are taking Obama’s pressure quite seriously, as are many of his Israel-centric supporters in the U.S. Those who want Obama to continue to depart from the Bush administration’s blind support for Israeli actions should continue to make themselves heard, since those who desire a continuation of that blind Israeli support certainly intend to. As Politico’s Smith reported:

The pro-Israel lobby AIPAC last week got the signatures of 329 members of Congress, including key figures in both parties, on a letter calling on the administration to work "closely and privately" with Israel — in contrast to the current public pressure.

As Andrew Sullivan said about this: “What Obama faces in the Middle East, if he is to move the peace process forward, is a very powerful force against him. It's called AIPAC."

Whatever Obama’s ultimate intentions are, the early change in tenor, the recent actions of the last several weeks, and his reliance on George Mitchell (praised by Jimmy Carter, J Street and even Noam Chomsky) as his envoy all signal that he is serious at least about making the public case that Israeli settlement expansions are wrong and counter-productive. If he is to do more of that, he will need political support at least as vigorous and vocal as the opposition already emerging from the bipartisan AIPAC faction that has dictated U.S. actions in this area for decades.

Please read the complete article at:

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/06/03/israel/

[PFunk]

1. Oboy. I got the feeling AIPAC is about to become a political football in US politics

And not in a good way once americans began to see (and be PO'd) by how much influence it has.

[rvablue]

9. "about to become"????? n/t

[Howardx]

2. obama will break aipac

about damn time too

[Better Believe It]

3. AIPAC will try to break President Obama

And I hope that everyone here supports me in defending President Obama if such a massive propaganda offensive is started by Israeli agents in the United States.

[Howardx]

5. they may try

they wont succeed.

[Jennicut]

14. He is going to need public support big time.

Actually I think the public does support him but AIPAC is so powerful, almost dangerous.

[Hippo_Tron]

10. I'd say AIPAC will be more responsible than Obama for its own demise

They did themselves in when they became a front for the neocons and the far right thus alienating a lot of moderates. They still are well funded and thus they hold a lot of sway in Congress but not so much on the White House anymore. It used to be that they could credibly threaten a Democratic president or presidential candidate by threatening to help deliver New Jersey and Florida to the GOP candidate in the next election should the Democrats not tow the Likud line.

But considering how radical they've become I don't think they hold the kind of sway over voters that they once did. You can't credibly threaten to help deliver a state for the Republicans when it's known that your organization is pretty much already a front for the Republicans.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

15. very well said.

you got it exactly on point.

[bdamomma]

4. AIPAC almost as bad as the NRA.

AIPAC like the NRA can go to hell.

[Sebastian Doyle]

7. They're actually worse

At least the NRA lobbies on behalf of American right wing wackjobs. AIPAC is the propaganda arm of Israeli right wing wackjobs.

[Hippo_Tron]

11. Not quite, Israeli right wingers and US right wingers are partners in crime

The neocons aren't super friendly toward the Israeli right just out of ideology. The Israeli right has been known to do the US right's dirty work on many occasions. Iran-Contra is a great example of this. US neocons thus naturally have a self interest to make sure that the Israeli right wingers stay in power.

[bdamomma]

13. AIPAC, it seems like each President has to pledge its allegiance to it.

[Recursion]

28. NRA at least does very good gun safety classes NT

[karynnj]

6. It is interesting that they negelcted to mention that

Senator Kerry and VP Joe Biden gave speeches at AIPAC where both firmly spoke against expanding settlements (and for a 2 state solution).

I hope that the more liberal Jewish groups push people contacting their Senators and Congressmen, so they see that the majority of US Jews do not agree with AIPAC.

Is there any irony in AIPAC complaining of a US President "interfering with Israeli affairs, when their stated goal is influencing American legislators.

[Better Believe It]

8. Jewish organizations/leaders that don't support AIPAC don't get much press

Especially those organizations that operate within Israel!

We only hear about the right-wing elements in Israel.

[karynnj]

21. True

I learned of Brit Tzedek v'Shalom (Jewish alliance for justice and peace) from my rabbi, who has often referenced them. They are becoming a bigger US grassroots organization, but get little coverage in the regular of the Jewish press (though I read very little of that - so I could be wrong).

There is an enormous discontinuity between the power of AIPAC and the number of Jews in this country that agree with their more right wing policies. AIPAC is supported by many very wealthy powerful Jews - but you still have 75% of Jews voting as Democrats - and most as liberal Democrats.

[quiller4]

25. That is very true. We never hear about those in Israel who

demonstrate against settlements. Neither do we evver hear an interview with a member of Israeil's Labor Party. We are fed only the news from the hard right.

[PretzelWarrior]

12. OHHH REALLLYYY!!!! well, good bye foreign aid, you stupid mother fuckers.

REMEMBER! It was a conservative JEWISH extremist who assassinated Yitzak Rabin. Not all who fight against peace are Islamic.

[Political Heretic]

26. You really think we will suspend foreign aid?

That's what it will probably take.

But I think that will happen when pigs fly.

[DrToast]

27. It won't happen because Israel will back down before it gets to that.

[Political Heretic]

30. Please. You're not real familiar with Israel are you?

Back down.... that was funny.

[DrToast]

32. Have you been following this at all?

Doesn't sound like it.

[Political Heretic]

33. Yep. Very closely.

[Hippo_Tron]

34. We will never suspend it entirely but we could suspend certain aspects

Or... threaten to actually make the Israelis pay for some of the arms we send them.

[Blue Meany]

16. Interference in "internal affairs"?

Hugh? We are not talking about something that is going on within Israel's borders. I don't think Israel would like it much if the Palestinian state started creating settlements within Israel's borders and then insisted that no one should interfere in their affairs.

[november3rd]

17. The Sun Also Rises

Wasn't the last word something like,
"Isn't it pretty to think so?"

[Thrill]

18. I give it two days and watch Democrats in Congress start questioning Obama in Public on Israel

AIPAC dollars at work.

Watch and See. Save this Post

[Howardx]

19. already happened n/t

[karynnj]

23. Kerry and Biden both spoke of a 2 state solution and no settlements and

freedom of movement on the West Bank in their back to back speeches before AIPAC itself. The dynamic that might help is that Kerry and others have spoken of the fact that the window of opportunity for a two state solution is closing. Demographics will make it less an option as time goes on. It may well now be Israel's only chance to survive as a Jewish state and a democracy.

[DrToast]

29. Obama isn't one to blindly jump into a fight

He has support on this one. I'm sure of it.

[Thrill]

35. I knew it. HERE YOU GO

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0609/23380.html

[MadBadger]

36. Most of the critics in that story are Republicans

Eliot Engel barely criticizes the President.

[randr]

20. Zionist right wingers and AIPAC are as dependent on their

Industrial Military Complex as their counterparts are here in America.
Fear of terrorism and an Islamic enemy fuels their pocketbooks as they sell arms to any third world insurgents that show up at their arms sales.
Time has come to put an end to the escalation of military rule around the world.

[cali]

22. excellent article by Greenwald.

AIPAC is revving up to oppose Obama. There is a counter to AIPAC- J Street.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J_Street_Political_Action_Committee

[Joe Chi Minh]

24. Who pays the piper calls the tune. But didn't they interfere in US affairs

by spying, indeed, subverting US citizens for the prupose? That's a bit more serious than withdrawing ex gratia financial largesse, isn't it?

[ChimpersMcSmirkers]

31. AIPAC can suck it.

[backscatter712]

37. If Israel sends AIPAC to interfere in our politics,

why should we not interfere in Israeli politics?

[OneBlueSky]

38. hasn't Secretary of State Clinton been a solid AIPAC backer for years? . . .

if so, then that sets up a pretty interesting situation inside the Obama administration -- a president moving away from blind support for Israel and a Secretary of State whose beliefs are quite different . . . should be intriguing, to say the least . . .

[BlooInBloo]

40. (shrug) She either does what he tells her to do, or she's gone...

I'm failing to see the issue.

[BlooInBloo]

39. Damn apartheid supporters.