I keep saying the Israel lobby has jumped the shark this week. Not that it has changed that much, but its scandalous conduct in pushing for a war Americans don't want has afforded the opportunity to people who once supported the lobby (say when Walt and Mearsheimer were attacking it) to say, I can't believe they're doing this, this is outrageous. Like the New Yorker. And good for them. Here is Daniel W. Drezner at Foreign Policy:
Rep. Eric Cantor, the No. 2 Republican in the House of Representatives, said the [Sunday Obama AIPAC] speech was "a step in the right direction," but that "we need to make sure that this president is also going to stand by Israel and not allow his administration to somehow speak contrary to what our ally thinks is in its best interest." (emphasis added)
Now, this bolded part of the quote is quite extraordinary, if you think about it. Apparently, Cantor's standard with respect to American policy towards Israel is that the U.S. government cannot and should not contradict anything that Israel's government says. What's good for Israel's national interests -- as defined solely by Israel -- serves American interests as well.
Step back for a second and ask yourself if this is true of any other U.S. ally. A NATO member? Nah, we disagree with them all the time. Japan?
Good man, Drezner. But remember what Democratic Party boss Ann Lewis said in 2008:
"The role of the president of the United States is to support the decisions that are made by the people of Israel. It is not up to us to pick and choose from among the political parties."
As reported by Dana Milbank. What's the difference?
Thanks to Scott McConnell.