Have you followed the controversy over SWF’s–sovereign wealth funds–investing in the U.S.? They might change our foreign policy! Globalism bites back. And Lawrence Summers–who once held the line against divestment efforts at Harvard–justifies "xenophobia" toward the SWF’s because we don’t know what their agenda is. And you thought I was the only one worried about cabals and dual loyalty! The Times coverage specifically brings up the Israel problem:
some experts say it may be hard to draw the line if, for example, a
Persian Gulf country tries to curb an American bank’s ability to do
business with Israel…
Which is to say the potential crisis facing the Israel lobby right now is economic in character. When the U.S. ceases to be the top dog in the world economically, influence in Washington will mean less and less.
Leon Hadar, the realist adviser to Ron Paul, makes the same point in an email about changes in political climate:
AIPAC’s influence is
tied to the current political status quo in Washington and it’s in the interest of
Israel
and its supporters to preserve it. Hillary and McCain are familiar figures.
They are predictable. They can be counted on. Obama and Paul are
"unknowns." They are not in the pockets of lobbyists and
contributors. They could become a Carter. Hence the fears.They [supporters] have
to understand that the world and America are changing: rise of China and India
(with no guilt feelings about anti-Semitism and the Holocaust), a more
assertive EU and the decline in U.S. power coupled with major demographic
changes in America (less number of Jews, more Hispanics, blacks coming to
power, etc.). I’m worried that one day historians will suggest that the
Israelis have failed to take advantage of the window of opportunity (1989 –
2007) when U.S. power was at its height to achieve a sensible agreement with
the Palestinians and the Arab world, and instead joined (and in a way, led) a
futile and costly confrontation with "Islam-Fascism."My view has always been that
"normalizing"
ties with Israel will be good for the U.S.
and Israel since the dependency on Washington is creating
disincentives for change in policy in Israel. And taking into the consideration that America
is not going to remain in the Middle East
forever. (See a summary of this argument in "Israel: Americans’ Weakest Link"
here: http://www.theglobalist.com/StoryId.aspx?StoryId=4635)
