MICHAEL NEUMANN: unprincipled attack on ANSWER

M. Junaid Alam redjaguar at attbi.com
Sun Nov 10 09:25:58 MST 2002


"I disagree with M. Junaid Alam that the top ranks of the U.S. government
are riddled with "Zionists and Likudniks", which would mean that they put
the interests of the Israeli state, the Israeli bourgeoisie, the
settlements, etc., FIRST,  and the interests of U.S. imperialism SECOND.  I
don't believe this is true of Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz,  -- not to
mention Bush -- or any of the other
top government warhawks..They back Israel as a key fortress and weapon
against liberation struggles in the Arab countries. They act from the
standpoint of the U.S. empire, and support Israeli
expansionism as a defense of that empire."

This is Chomsky's line, and I don't buy it. It is mechanistic and one-sided.
Israel is not a puppet on strings remote-controlled from the United States.
Jewish neo-conservatives within the administration are placing the agenda of
the American empire at its own behest by turning its trajectory in such a
way that the US fight's Israel's wars. There is no "first" or "second"
involved; it is a question of pushing U.S. policy in such a way that its
line of action most benefits Israel. I link here two documents that show the
massive influence of Zionists within the war-planning divisions of the
administration as well as the Christian fundamentalist-Zionist alliance.

"The Men from JINSA and CSP":
http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20020902&c=1&s=vest

"Will fundamentalist Christians and Jews ignite apocalypse? ":
http://www.natcath.com/NCR_Online/archives/101102/101102a.htm

My analysis falls more along the lines of James Petras, who considers the
U.S.-Israeli "unique relationship" as a function of Jewish influence and
power within the United States.
(http://www.nodo50.org/csca/english/petras-eng_21-01-02.html) This factor,
to say the least, is impossible to ignore given the massive Israeli spy ring
that was undercovered--and swept under the bed--in the aftermath of
September 11th. What men like Dershowitz, who want to import Israeli tactics
into the US fold, want to see above all is for America to be under constant
threat of suicide/terrorist attacks and thus drawn into the same circle and
field of interests as the Israelis--but with massively superior resources.

Logistically, one has to step back and think why US support for Israel makes
sense. In reality, it is suicide. Why support one tiny state against five or
six others with 50 times the population and in possession of the actual oil
supplies? What "liberation struggles" do you speak of? The Arab world has
seen no grass-roots struggle in decades; it has witnessed only coup after
coup. There has been nothing here approaching what happened in Shiite Iran
in '79. The U.S.-backed dictators have been more than enough to quell any
attempts at "liberation struggles", and frankly that task would be made much
easier if the U.S. did not concurrently support Israel to the hilt. The
initial solution has now become the problem: the U.S. backed Israel to smash
Arab socialism, and now the new Arab threat (Islamism) is a direct reaction
to Israel itself.

I do not doubt that the influence of the pro-Israel lobby etc. was initially
a function of Israel serving as a watchdog for the US after proving its
ability to stamp out nationalism in '67. But this relationship is
dialectical; the subjective lobby is not some inert mass suspended in motion
for the last forty years, it has had a very real impact on the way American
foreign policy operates. Anyone who doubts this should read Paul Findley's
(a decade-long US Congressman) account of AIPAC power in Congress, "They
Dare to Speak Out".

Granted, Neumman's piece takes flights of fancy about who will intervene on
behalf of the Palestinians, but I never even spoke on this account. I am
speaking of the weakness in strength and confidence of the pro-Palestinian
US movement as a whole, its inability and unwillingness to seriously
challenge underlying Zionist positions in the sphere of so-called morality.
It is also entirely incorrect--ENTIRELY--to pretend that this divestment
movement is, in degree and calibre, the same as the anti-S.A. movement.
South Africa was dispensable for imperialism. Israel is not. In fact the
U.S. has just announced it will severely punish any company that boycotts
Israel. Moreover the university heads will never even consider this
proposal. They will invent shit written on bathroom walls, as they already
have, as some impending sign of a new Kristallnacht.

 Until and unless we, ie. the Left, can point out dynamically and quickly
when the U.S. becomes tangled into an Iraqi occupation and further
adventurism, and casualties and blowback results, that these policies not
only are the products of Bush's monstrous cabal but the result of a
fundamentalist Zionist push, U.S. support for Israel will not be challenged
at a mass-base level.


~~~~~~~
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.



More information about the Marxism mailing list