James Baker was purged from the Republican Party because he was an “Arabist,” Bill Kristol once bragged. The former chief of staff and secretary of state to George H.W. Bush reportedly said “Fuck the Jews, they didn’t vote for us,” when the Bush administration criticized Israel in 1991.
Well, Baker is a speaker at J Street’s fifth annual conference next month (March 21-24). This will shock Israel supporters. It is a sign that the lobby really is splitting, and there’s going to be a rightwing lobby for the Republicans and a centrist lobby for the Democrats. J Street declared that the lobby was splitting over the illegal Israeli settlements issue five years ago. But it couldn’t pull that off; the lobby was still unified in favor of settlements, and J Street pulled in its horns lest it get completely ostracized, and Obama supported the settlements at the U.N. Getting Baker on board is a sign that J Street means to drive that settlement wedge after all and believes it has support for such a stance inside the Democratic Party.
Speaking of a centrist lobby, former California Congressman Mel Levine, a darling of liberal Zionists, has a piece out in Politico (co-authored with an Israeli diplomat) deploring the fact that Israel support is becoming a “vulnerable political football rather than a national interest of the United States.” Such a development poses “grave dangers.” But nowhere in the piece does he indicate what “national interest” our blind support for Israel serves. The only country whose interest this is in is Israel. Levine says that Netanyahu’s speech will put Republicans on one side and Democrats on the other and:
Given the enormity of the problems Israel is and will be facing in the coming years, this is a risk Israel cannot afford.
In fact, this is a healthy development for the U.S.. It means the people are getting to debate our support for Israel. Levine wants the political elites to keep down any public differences between the countries.
both sides kept their relationships a bipartisan issue, insulated from the partisan rivalry in either the United States or Israel,,,
For decades, the relationship between the United States and Israel has transcended political parties, elections, ethnic and religious affiliations. This is how it should stay.
J Street’s choice is a further indication that the relationship has been politicized, and it needs to be politicized.
I’m delighted. I am hopeful.
“In fact, this is a healthy development for the U.S.. It means the people are getting to debate our support for Israel.”
I hope that this includes a debate about the core problem~ Zionism in all its vainglorious and violent practice~ including the Occupation, the apartheid, the massacres, the theft, the cruelty, the criminality/violations of epic proportions wrt international laws, etc .
“But nowhere in the piece does he indicate what “national interest” our blind support for Israel serves. The only country whose interest this is in is Israel.”
As it has always been. This relationship/”blind support for Israel” has caused a whole lot of damage/death/destruction to many millions of people.
Levine: “For decades, the relationship between the United States and Israel has transcended political parties, elections, ethnic and religious affiliations. This is how it should stay. ”
Translation: “For decades the Israel Lobby has scared the pants off American politicians, newspapers, talking heads and academics without regard for their politics, religion or ethnicity. This is how it should stay.”
I think it was Baker who was allowed a column in the NYT around August 2002 during the run-up to Iraq War, attempting to turn the tide with a realist’s cool analysis, and which overtime served instead to reveal that, for almost everyone else in media, Neocon Kool-Aid was being served at work, disabling the ability to hear and grasp realist assessments.
RE: Levine says that Netanyahu’s speech will put Republicans on one side and Democrats on the other and: “Given the enormity of the problems Israel is and will be facing in the coming years, this is a risk Israel cannot afford.”
MEANWHILE, A RISK ISRAEL APPARENTLY THINKS IT CAN AFFORD:
Large Areas Of West Bank Desert Declared “Closed Military Zone”, imemc.org, February 10, 2015 07:48
The Israeli army issued a ruling, on Monday evening, considering large areas of the West Bank desert, a closed military zone, in preparation for the expansion of five illegal Jewish-only colonies, and for further military control.
LINK – http://www.imemc.org/article/70528
Jim Baker? Perhaps J Street thought first to try to get Christian Zionist Jim Bakker but decided otherwise because it would remind everyone of Dershowitz’s troubles.