Out of curiosity, I stopped by an AIPAC lecture last week in Westport, Connecticut. To my surprise, AIPAC national president Michael Kassen was in attendance and took questions at the end of the event.
“Why,” I asked, “do you think that Israel boycotted last year’s planned international conference on establishing a Weapons of Mass Destruction Free Zone (WMDFZ) in the Middle East which was based on a proposal made by Iran in 1974? What is the downside of a WMD Free Zone as an alternative to war and sanctions against Iran?”
“I barely consider myself knowledgeable about American policy let alone Israeli policy. But I think that Israel felt that it was…it was…they would be…uh…in a very, very small minority…uh…at…at…such a conference. I think that Israel felt…that…that…the…the…the region in which they…they are thrust…is…is…uh…um…you know…”
Event staffers had to come rescue him. They said the question-and-answer session was suddenly off-the-record. Although I’m not a journalist, AIPAC staffers followed me outside and tried to make me delete the video from my phone.
One would expect the president of AIPAC to coherently answer what’s wrong with a peaceful alternative to sanctions and covert war hurting innocent Iranians. His organization lobbies for “strangling” sanctions (AIPAC’s words) and a “military option” against Iran. Their website celebrates that because of the sanctions, “[y]outh unemployment is over 28%” in Iran and “Iran’s currency, the rial, has lost eighty percent of its value since 2011”. “Iran’s GDP is falling by the largest margins in the past 25 years, according to the U.S. Treasury Department.”
As a precondition to negotiating a WMD-Free Zone, Israel demands that “peaceful relations exist for a reasonable period of time in the region”. The Israel Atomic Energy Council’s Dr. Shaul Chorev reiterated this bold demand to the IAEA last September. AIPAC defends Israel’s precondition on one hand while on the other hand it chastises the Palestinian Authority for “Refusing to Negotiate, Demanding Preconditions“.
If Israel and AIPAC were minimally serious about avoiding war, they would support talks regarding peaceful alternatives instead of lobbying for “strangling” sanctions and a “military option” against Iran. Why couldn’t Mr. Kassen answer a simple question? Because his job is to defend the indefensible.
Only Dick and Jane don’t get what Israel is all about at Dick and Jane’s expense, and on their children’s backs. Who is more ignorant than the average American as to how their government’s foreign policy in the Middle East sucks them dry and saddles their future for people who ridicule them?
“Even a majority of Israeli Jews supported the proposal.”
Yeah, I guess so. Here’s the question from the poll: ” First, all countries in the region, including Iran and Israel, would agree to have a system of full international inspections of all facilities where nuclear components could be built or maintained. Once the effectiveness of this inspection system was fully demonstrated to all countries involved, then all countries in the region, including Iran and
Israel, would commit to not having nuclear weapons.”
So yes, assuming there was an effective inspection regime, Israelis would support a WMD-Free Zone. We’re not quite there.
In any event, you left out this little tidbit:
“While Iran announced that it would attend on November 7, it also said it would not engage with the Israelis at the conference, and some experts believe Iran only announced it would attend because Tehran knew that the December 2012 meeting would not take place.”
http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/mewmdfz
I don’t know about Kassen’s rhetorical skills, but plenty of people can answer the question: there’s little incentive for Israel to give up its nukes in a region where everybody hates them and they clearly serve a deterrent purpose. And there is no need for Israel to show up to an NGO meeting on establishing a WMD-Free Zone just to be subjected to the anti-Israel hatefest these international meetings routinely become. What’s the point? Do you think Iran will magically dismantle its nuclear program because an arms control NGO held a conference? Why should the Israelis and the Americans for that matter lend a pointless conference legitimacy by showing up?
You might sooner ask why on Earth the French need nukes or why the Russians still need them before asking why the Israelis do.
Congrats, a VERY revealing video. “Give me your phone and he’ll answer the question….” Now THAT would have been a decent trade…if there had been another camera in the room.
AIPAC has been trying to cover up the Israeli nuclear weapons program for decades. Just as more were beginning to pay attention to Dimona, AIPAC executive director Isaiah Kenen ran Judy-Miller type articles in the Near East Report about why Israel would never be able to produce an arsenal. At the same time, Abraham Feinberg (Israel’s North American nuclear fundraising coordinator according to Avner Cohen) was writing checks to AIPAC. Coincidence?
The US National Security Council will still not release any documents outlining official US policy on the nuclear arsenal. If the policy were in any way defensible, surely some from the 1960s and 70s would have been released by now. But it’s logical to conclude that since Israel has stolen material, know-how and technology from the U.S., the political thinking is it’s easier to continue with the policy of “strategic ambiguity” than reveal to taxpayers just how corrupt this particular lobby/Israel/US policymaker issue is. Americans are children who aren’t welcome into this adult discussion.
“I think that Israel felt…that…that…the…the…the region in which they…they are thrust…is…is…uh…um…you know…”
Duh…ah…ugh…um…well…gee… Who the …. left that ……..in to ask me questions I am not prepared for.
You gotta love these idiots.
And they are on Israel,s side.
Amazing. Bravo Dan Fischer.