Trending Topics:

CL Sulzberger believed in the Israel lobby

Israel/Palestine
on 44 Comments

CL Sulzberger, who died in 1993, was a legendary insider, a longtime foreign affairs reporter and then columnist for the New York Times, whose publisher during his time was his uncle and then his cousin. Sulzberger lived in Paris and was the intimate of many leaders, and was accused of working for the CIA (and received the Stern Gang’s warning ahead of Bernadotte’s murder).

Last night I was reading his book, An Age of Mediocrity (1973), journals from the 60s and 70s. Sulzberger went frequently to Israel.

Herzliya, May 22, 1971

Stayed up late with Wally Barbour [US Ambassador to Israel from 1961-1973], as able a diplomat as he is devoted, and a balanced, wise man…

Wally feels it is a plain statement of fact that the U.S.A. couldn’t sell Israel down the river or blackmail it, even if it wanted to (which it doesn’t) because of the influence and wealth of its Jewish minority of about 6 million. Nor is there anything shameful in this. Our system has always been based upon minorities and heeding their wishes on major issues.

Last time Barbour saw President Nixon, Wally said to him: “You know Israel may be a small horse but it’s the only horse we are riding that has four sound legs.”

Will you ever see this idea, espoused by two eminent insiders, reflected directly in the New York Times? The newspaper derided Walt and Mearsheimer’s paper and book on the Israel lobby when they came out in 2006 and 2007. Insider Leslie Gelb did the honors. “Why have two such serious students of United States foreign policy written so weak a book and added fuel, inadvertently, to the fires of anti-Semitism?” But influence and wealth surely played a role in Obama’s collapse on settlements and Alice Walker’s disinvitation from the University of Michigan, and myriad other accommodations of the garrison state.

PS. I wonder whether Barbour said, And there’s nothing shameful in that because he worried about the fact that his guest was Jewish. Also, there’s an American school in Israel connected to our State Department named after Barbour.

More gems from Sulzberger to follow.

philweiss
About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

44 Responses

  1. W.Jones
    W.Jones
    August 17, 2013, 11:36 am

    It’s actually hard to discredit this idea that the Lobby makes it impossible for the US to disconnect itself.

    There is a theory that western elites strongly wanted to set up a state there ever since the Crusaders were driven away by the Muslims. The place is right in the middle of the joining of 3 continents, etc. Plus, the US in terms of size and military is many times stronger. So an argument can be made that it was the West’s intention to set up the Isr. State for important philosophical and strategic reasons, and that the US is powerful enough not to worry about leaving.

    However, you have the case where Netanyahu said on camera that the U.S. is something easily moved. And Pres. George HW Bush, probably one of the strongest politicians in the US due to his past position as CIA director, complained about thousands of Israeli lobbyists swarming the capitol against “Little Old Me” because he took a position that was less favorable to the Isr. State. Bush then lost re-election.

    It’s true that the Lobby apparently preferred Romney and didn’t get it’s way, but they did not fully reject Obama either, and he is upping the yearly money donated to the State. And this is not even getting into the financial power of the State’s supporters.

    So all in all, the US would find it very hard to extricate itself from the Isr. State.

    • American
      American
      August 17, 2013, 12:29 pm

      ‘There is a theory that western elites strongly wanted to set up a state there ever since the Crusaders were driven away by the Muslims. ‘…..Jones

      Never heard that….got any background on it?…..who might have promoted ths?
      Was it ” relgous” elites?

      • James Canning
        James Canning
        August 18, 2013, 6:41 pm

        The Crusaders had a tendency to slaughter Jews in cities they captured.

      • W.Jones
        W.Jones
        August 20, 2013, 1:17 pm

        James,

        ‘Christian Zionists’ are, among large Christian groups in America, one of the least tolerant toward other groups. Yet they have come to support the system for strategic or philosophical reasons.

      • W.Jones
        W.Jones
        August 20, 2013, 12:58 pm

        American,

        Barry Chamish has a theory involving the Knights of Solomon’s Temple. The theory probably cannot be proved.

      • W.Jones
        W.Jones
        August 20, 2013, 1:21 pm

        American,

        If you give me your email, I can send you a few things about it.

  2. Les
    Les
    August 17, 2013, 11:45 am

    Name just one person who supports Israel’s ethnic cleansing of Palestinians who is not a racist.

    • Citizen
      Citizen
      August 17, 2013, 11:51 am

      @ Les
      How about the Black Caucus?

      • Marco
        Marco
        August 17, 2013, 12:21 pm

        I’d argue that anyone who knowingly supports Israeli apartheid and ethnic cleansing is ipso facto a racist.

        That includes the Black Caucus. When it comes to Zionism, the racism is less about anti-Palestinian or anti-Arab or anti-Muslim animus, in my opinion, and more about a belief in Jewish racial superiority.

        The congressional Black Caucus, and other African Americans who support Israel and its occupation are clearly communicating their endorsement of this belief.

      • Les
        Les
        August 17, 2013, 1:22 pm

        Marco,

        Good point. If Zionists had been given a chunk of Montana and neighboring Canada for a state, the sole unifying characteristic of this self-discovered tribe would remain a faith and belief in Jewish racial superiority. Zionists are encouraged by their leaders to think that they are a race. I suspect any search for the Jewish gene would still be among white Europeans rather than Jewish Ethiopians let alone Jewish Palestinians.

      • W.Jones
        W.Jones
        August 20, 2013, 1:36 pm

        If the State System there is racist, including in its ideology, and the Black Caucus puts out statements endorsing those views and that system, doesn’t that make it racist?

        What if a person in the 1980’s announced: I like _South_Africa_, it has well-functioning, advanced political system?

        Now play mad libs with the word _South_Africa_.

      • ThorsteinVeblen2012
        ThorsteinVeblen2012
        August 17, 2013, 3:26 pm

        The Black Caucus could be considered indifferent.

        I don’t think the Black Community or the Black Caucus sees the plight of Palestinians as central to their focus.

        Is Corrie Booker a racist for being so one sided?

        Do politicians triangulate the political terrain?

        What did Harry Truman say about there being no Arab lobby?

      • W.Jones
        W.Jones
        August 20, 2013, 1:34 pm

        Thorstein,

        Imagine that a wealthy South African delegate comes to you, working on capitol hill in the 1980’s, and says it would be ‘very beneficial’ for you to support Apartheid and send soldiers and weapons to enforce it. You decide to accept, and over the next 10 years billions of dollars, weapons, and mercenaries are sent. Does it make you a racist? Does it matter how much you do it out of financial motivation or because you accept the delegate’s ideological claims?

  3. Citizen
    Citizen
    August 17, 2013, 11:48 am

    Barbour must have known JFK despised the Israel Lobby and did all he could to reduce its power, including pushing for big change in campaign finance, as well as all he could do to stop Israel from getting the nuke bomb–both efforts going on full tilt when he was murdered. http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=20167

    • Walid
      Walid
      August 17, 2013, 12:54 pm

      Wow, great article, Citizen. Apart from Kennedy’s ongoing personal campaign to put an end to Israel’s nuclear arms plans, here’s another small gem from it that makes you wonder:

      Kennedy defended the right of return of the 800,000 Palestinian refugees expelled from their neighborhoods and villages in 1947-48. On November 20, 1963, his delegation to the United Nations called for the implementation of Resolution 194 crafted for this purpose. Kennedy probably never got the chance to read Israel’s hysterical reactions in the newspapers: two days later, he was dead.

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        August 18, 2013, 2:31 am

        here’s another small gem from it that makes you wonder: Kennedy defended the right of return of the 800,000 Palestinian refugees expelled from their neighborhoods and villages in 1947-48.

        That was not unusual. Until 1967, every member of the P-5 cast their votes in the General Assembly in favor of the annual resolutions that reaffirmed the Palestine refugee right of return. It’s about the only thing they ever agreed on.

    • RoHa
      RoHa
      August 18, 2013, 2:58 am

      “JFK despised the Israel Lobby and did all he could to reduce its power, including pushing for big change in campaign finance, as well as all he could do to stop Israel from getting the nuke bomb–both efforts going on full tilt when he was murdered.”

      But he was killed by a lone, crazed, gunman, right?

      • James Canning
        James Canning
        August 19, 2013, 2:39 pm

        Are you explaining why an effective investigation was never carried out?

    • James Canning
      James Canning
      August 18, 2013, 6:38 pm

      Great post, Citizen.
      JFK opposed Israeli nukes, while LBJ conspired with Israel to help Israel build nukes.

      What a disaster for the US was JFK’s assassination. It gave us Vietnam War catastrophe, and helped Israeli nuke programme.

    • hophmi
      hophmi
      August 20, 2013, 11:57 am

      Whaddya know, another conspiracy theory article appears on Mondoweiss, by a guy who blamed the Mossad for 9/11. The same idiot says that Israel was also responsible for the 1993 attack on the WTC.

      http://www.voltairenet.org/article179295.html

      The whackjobery never stops here.

  4. annie
    annie
    August 17, 2013, 12:01 pm

    Wally feels it is a plain statement of fact that the U.S.A. couldn’t sell Israel down the river or blackmail it, even if it wanted to (which it doesn’t) because of the influence and wealth of its Jewish minority of about 6 million.

    that was in 1971. can someone explain to me how this american demographic has stayed the same? that doesn’t make sense. someone told me once there were many more jewish americans than were reported. i thought, ‘that’s nuts, why would anyone lie about that?’ but this number is very curious. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Jews

    • American
      American
      August 17, 2013, 12:22 pm

      I ‘ve seen various explainations–usually for the decline in the Jewish population —that group for the study of US Jews headed by Dennis Ross (cant recall the name of the org) ascribed it mostly to ‘aging out’ of the two great waves of Jewish immigrants in late 1800’s and early 1900’s …..and to the fact that Jewish families tend to have fewer children than others.
      I dont know how anyone could get an absolutely accurate number though, since as I’ve pointed out several times the US census does not count or survey Jews as an ethnic—they are only represented in those who ‘affilate’ wth Judaism on the religious survey

      • American
        American
        August 17, 2013, 12:42 pm

        BTW……the US 2010 census showed Judaism affilated Jews to be somewhere around 3 1/2 million .
        Did show Judaism had decreased…but then no one can know how many Jews chose not to be relgously ‘affilated’…..so again not accurate.
        But I say or guess the jewish pop. has declined some based on that and the jewish figures like the NTY’s David Brooke that are so freaked out over jews assimilating too much and only the ultra relgou sects having enough children.

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        August 18, 2013, 3:09 am

        I dont know how anyone could get an absolutely accurate number though, since as I’ve pointed out several times the US census does not count or survey Jews as an ethnic—they are only represented in those who ‘affilate’ wth Judaism on the religious survey

        Its either fear of the Lobby, fear of reprising that whole Jewish Census/Angel of Death thing – or even worse, both;-)

        I know that the Supreme Court ruled that Jews are an ethnic group. Accordingly, the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department has to treat them as such. There are a couple of other federal agencies tasked with monitoring Antisemitism. But the OMB has never revised its official list of ethnic groups to facilitate collection of census data on us Jews. I don’t believe in divine intervention, so I guess the Jewish Lobby is responsible for that.

        There are always a few subsidized programs and grants going to local Jewish Federations and Jewish organizations – and they play the primary role in collecting whatever population/racial incident data there is, if the government ever decides to ask;-) I wonder who’s keeping McDonald’s honest on the number of burgers sold?

      • Shegetz
        Shegetz
        August 18, 2013, 9:37 am

        I wonder who’s keeping McDonald’s honest on the number of burgers sold?

        This particular rabbit hole is very deep.

        Beyond the obvious problems of double, triple and quadruple counting, you have observer bias, and a vested interest in keeping the population looking like it’s growing for a multitude of reasons.

        Also, how many have made a pilgrimage, family visit, or gone on a Birthright trip and are now Israeli citizens, without their knowledge or consent, and are thus added again in the global count?

      • American
        American
        August 18, 2013, 11:01 am

        @ Hostage

        That is odd that the census doesnt have a Jewish count since they have been offically ruled a ethnic group and are a minority group also. It’s confusing in that, for instance in the census, hispanics and others even though in the white racial group, are broken out and counted as a ‘minority” group but Jews are not, partculary so because some other ethnic and minority groups like Hispancs and Asians that are counted separately are way larger than the Jewish group.
        If its the typical ‘Lobby’ influence that prevents a Jewish US census count as an a ethnic or minority then its the usual illogical switcharoo that Jews are ‘sometimes this and other times that’, depending on which classification or identity is most beneficial to whatever agenda they are pursuing at the moment.

      • James Canning
        James Canning
        August 18, 2013, 6:34 pm

        The Supreme Court, of course, has made some foolish rulings over the years.

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        August 18, 2013, 9:10 pm

        The Supreme Court, of course, has made some foolish rulings over the years.

        That may be the case, but the ruling that the Congress intended to legally recognize Jews as ethnically distinct isn’t one of them.

        After all, the Executive branch and the Senate ratified a number of minority rights treaties which did that very thing. In addition they ratified the Zionist Holy Grail: the “Anglo-American Palestine Mandate Convention”, 44 Stat.2184; Treaty Series 728, which was signed into law back in 1925. It not only codified the rights of the Jewish communities in Palestine as part of the “supreme law of the land”, but made reference to the protection of those rights of Jews in other countries under the minority treaties too. So far as the Supreme Court was concerned, the Congress had not considered Jews or Arabs white persons when it adopted the 19th century civil rights act in question.

      • James Canning
        James Canning
        August 19, 2013, 2:46 pm

        Great post. Now one sees them, now one does not.

      • James Canning
        James Canning
        August 19, 2013, 6:30 pm

        Jews were protected in other countries on grounds of race? Or religion? Or no distinction drawn?

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        August 20, 2013, 12:46 am

        Jews were protected in other countries on grounds of race? Or religion? Or no distinction drawn?

        In most cases, persons of Jewish descent were registered at birth under the Jewish nationality by operation of the law. For example, in Czechoslovakia, adult Jews could claim to be Jewish by nationality even if they lacked knowledge of a Jewish dialect or membership in the Jewish religious community. Their status was guaranteed by the official interpretation of Article 128 of the Czechoslovak constitution of 1920 and the clauses on minorities in the Treaty of Saint-Germain-en-Laye. http://www.yivoencyclopedia.org/article.aspx/Czechoslovakia

        In other countries the League of Nations minority treaties worked much the same way.

        I believe that Jews are still considered a racial or ethnic group under the UK Race Relations Act of 1976 (as amended in 2000).

      • James Canning
        James Canning
        August 20, 2013, 3:35 pm

        Very interesting. No allowance for intermarriage, one assumes.

    • Marco
      Marco
      August 17, 2013, 12:24 pm

      You’re right. This is very strange.

      http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/usjewpop1.html

      According to this, the number has barely increased since 1970.

    • Citizen
      Citizen
      August 17, 2013, 12:27 pm

      @ Annie Robbins
      As of 2012, two recent and differently done surveys put the Jewish population of the USA at between 6.4-6.5 million: http://forward.com/articles/149492/us-jewish-population-pegged-at–million/

  5. Citizen
    Citizen
    August 17, 2013, 12:21 pm

    Here’s more on Balbour , this time under Johnson’s thumb. The article shows the US Johnson administration, including Balbour, knew Israel was not in any danger in 1967, when it decided to do its turkey shoot, beginning by wiping out the Egyptian air force and Syrian air force nearly as quickly as you can snap your fingers. It also reveals how easily Johnson was manipulated by the Zionists, beginning with Zionist donations to his early career: http://sabbah.biz/mt/archives/2010/07/06/bibi-back-at-the-white-house/

  6. upsidedownism
    upsidedownism
    August 17, 2013, 12:33 pm

    “the U.S.A. couldn’t sell Israel down the river or blackmail it, even if it wanted to (which it doesn’t) because of the influence and wealth of its Jewish minority of about 6 million.”

    A purely anti-Semitic statement (unless of course, you are a Zionist; then it is simply stating an obvious truth).

    I wish somebody had a collection of similar ‘ant-Semitic’ statements made by Zionists.

  7. Citizen
    Citizen
    August 17, 2013, 12:48 pm

    Apparently made a secret agreement with Golda Meir they would both be mum on Israel’s bomb; and Nixon kept Balbour in the dark: http://www.monbiot.com/2007/11/20/ban-the-bomb-but-only-in-iran/

    Kerry’s just the latest illustration how Israel via AIPAC makes every US administration tie itself in knots to benefit Israel. It’s embarrassing. I wish there was a way to get the facts on the US “special relationship” from Truman to Obama into the hands of Dick and Jane. There’s 9 members of SCOTUS. How many are Jewish Zionists?

  8. American
    American
    August 17, 2013, 3:24 pm

    ”Will you ever see this idea, espoused by two eminent insiders, reflected directly in the New York Times? The newspaper derided Walt and Mearsheimer’s paper and book on the Israel lobby when they came out in 2006 and 2007. Insider Leslie Gelb did the honors. “Why have two such serious students of United States foreign policy written so weak a book and added fuel, inadvertently, to the fires of anti-Semitism?”

    The NYT imo represents the general schizophrenia in and around Jews—on one hand showcasing certain Jewish influence and then on the other hand either 1)denying that influence exist or 2) implying critictism of it is related to anti semitism.

    Sulzberger ‘s note on his visit by Barbour reflects one side of that schizophrenia we often see, a kind of child -like satisfaction or glee with praise of the child’s prowess in something.
    Then we see the other side of the schizophrenia operation for instance, in attacks on those like W&M who point out it exist and maybe the Jewish influence as in the Lobby is bad for the US.

    Whatever we want to call the schizophrenic -like operation , it just is what it is and I doubt the two halves are ever going to come together into anything totally honest or coherent on their part.

    • James Canning
      James Canning
      August 19, 2013, 2:41 pm

      Is it fair to say Leslie Gelb wanted the truth about the power of the Israel lobby to be suppressed, and that he knew his comments about the book were rubbish?

  9. wondering jew
    wondering jew
    August 17, 2013, 6:44 pm

    I think that it is a fact that the US ‘s policy is warped by the pro Israel campaign contributors. It is not clear how precisely the US would be advised to navigate the current waters of the Middle East seeing as they contain Egypt and Syria aside from Israel. I think an Israeli withdrawal to the lines demarcated by Abbas in the Palestine Papers would be in the US interest, if the new Palestine would not become another source of instability. I don’t think the current instability is in the US interest and hell if I know what should be done now vis a vis the generals in Egypt and vis a vis the Assad regime’s future in Syria (and Lebanon).

    • James Canning
      James Canning
      August 19, 2013, 2:43 pm

      @yonah – – You touch on one reason I think the Palestinians should accept the residence of Jews in Palestine, even if those Jews settled there contrary to international law.

  10. dbroncos
    dbroncos
    August 17, 2013, 11:08 pm

    ” Our system has always been based upon minorities and heeding their wishes on major issues.”

    I’ll remember that one. The best joke I’ve heard in a while. Sulzberger leaves out the most relevent part Barbour’s reflections, that being the “influence and wealth” of the Jewish minority.

    • James Canning
      James Canning
      August 19, 2013, 2:45 pm

      Wealth and power of Jews in the US, and their special skill in bringing that wealth and power to bear on the politicians, is key.

  11. James Canning
    James Canning
    August 18, 2013, 6:30 pm

    Great piece. And what complete rubbish from Gelb.

Leave a Reply