Hi.  Amy Goodman has enticed Congressman John Conyers into a
debate over impeachment with Ray McGovern, former CIA analyst.
At the head of today's Democracy Now!, 9 AM on kpfk, 90.7 fm, and
throughout Pacifica, many NPR and public TV and other media.
ed

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Dick Platkin
Subject: New Scott Ritter essay on Israel raises many important questions
(Platkin adds 'for LA Jews for Peace,' to whom he is writing the preface.
Intro and essay clearly raise critical questions of interest to all of
us. -Ed)


Scott Ritter has written a powerful piece calling for a total reversal of US
policy toward Israel.  While useful in its own right, I think it indicates
that at the non-public level, there is a growing debate in the US foreign
policy establishment on how Israel fits in, or more accurately does not fit
into overall US policy in the Middle East.

In other words, does Israel help or hinder the efforts of the US to maintain
its dominant economic and military position in the oil-rich Persian Gulf?
Does Israel help of hinder the efforts of the US government to maintain
close relationships with the major pro-US Sunni governments: Saudi Arabia,
Kuwait, Jordan, and Egypt?  Does Israel help or hinder US efforts to counter
Islamic fundamentalism?  Does it help or hinder the efforts of the US to
establish and enormous network of bases and fleets in and surrounding the
Persian Gulf, from Southern Europe and Turkey, to the Horn of Africa, to the
"stans," to the Indian Ocean?  Does Israel help or hinder the efforts of the
US to engineer a discreet Vietnam-type retreat from Iraq in order to later
square off against Iran?

Like Jimmy Carter and Walt and Mearsheimer, Ritter has sided with the
foreign policy realists on this question.  He calls for the US to sever its
relationship with Israel until Israel comes clean on its nuclear weapons and
stops provoking war against Iran.  Unlike Carter and Walt and Mearsheimer,
though, Ritter does not even mention the Palestinians.

My guess is that as the Iraq War wages on, and as the military position of
the US weakens in the Persian Gulf, and the global economic position of the
US is pulled down by its colossal military blunder in Iraq, more
"anti-Israel" voices will emerge from Brookings, the Council on Foreign
Relations, the major International Relations centers at prestigious
universities, and other think tanks of the empire.

The question facing LA Jews for Peace is how to distill the worthy points of
the Ritters, without endorsing their larger goal of breathing new life into
the crumbling US position throughout the greater Middle East.


Perhaps It Is Time For The U.S. To Reconsider Its Partnership With Israel
By Scott Ritter,  http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18906.htm

12/17/07 " Antiwar" -- --- I have for some time now publicly articulated my
sympathy and support for the state of Israel, even while criticizing those
cases that I believed constituted poor judgment and bad policy. My stance
was based upon my past experiences with Israel, which began indirectly in
1990-1991 when I was involved in counter-SCUD activities during Operation
Desert Shield/Desert Storm, and continued in a much more direct fashion as a
weapons inspector with the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM),
charged with disarming Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.

As a weapons inspector I made numerous visits to Israel for the purpose of
coordinating with the Israeli intelligence community on matters pertaining
to Iraqi WMD. I was greatly impressed not only with the professionalism of
the Israeli intelligence services, but also with the Israeli people and
society. During my time in Israel, I was witness to numerous horrific
events, including several terrorist bombings and the assassination of Prime
Minister Yitzhak Rabin. The resilience of the people of Israel in absorbing
these blows yet continuing to live life to its fullest was remarkable, and
worthy of admiration.

As a firsthand witness to the remarkable vigor of the Israeli state and its
people, and as someone who considers himself to be their friend, it saddens
me to see just how poorly the current Israeli government returns this
friendship, not to me personally, but to my country, the United States of
America. The government of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has embarked on
policies that are questionable at best when one examines them from a purely
Israeli standpoint; they are nothing less than a betrayal of the United
States when examined from a broader perspective.

The insidious manner in which the current Israeli government has manipulated
the domestic political machinery of the United States to produce support for
its policies constitutes nothing less than direct interference in the
governance of a sovereign state. The degree to which the current Israeli
government has succeeded in this regard can be tracked not only by the words
and actions of the administration of President George W. Bush and the
American Congress, but also by the extent to which a pro-Israel lexicon has
taken hold within the mainstream media of the United States. Witness the
pro-Israel bias displayed when discussing the situation in southern Lebanon,
the air strike in Syria, or the Iranian situation, and the retarding of any
effort toward a responsible discussion of anything dealing with Israel
becomes apparent.

One would expect such efforts to shape the domestic public opinion of a
state deemed hostile, but when the target of these Israeli actions is its
ostensible best friend, one must begin to question whether or not the
friendship is a one-way street. And if this is indeed the case, then perhaps
it is time for the United States to reconsider its decades-old policy of
strategic partnership with Israel.

It must be understood that the government of Ehud Olmert is acting in a
post-9/11 environment, with considerable facilitators in the administration
of President Bush, including the vice president. These two factors combine
to create a cycle of enablement that allows a purely Israeli point of view
to dominate American policy. If the Israeli point of view were built on
logic, compassion, and the rule of law, then this tilt would not constitute
a problem. But the Israeli point of view is increasingly constructed on a
foundation of intolerance and irresponsible unilateralism that divorces the
country from global norms. In this day and age of nuclear nonproliferation,
the undeclared nuclear arsenal of Israel stands as perhaps the most
egregious example of how an Israel-only standard destabilizes the Middle
East. It is the Israeli nuclear weapons program, including its strategic
delivery systems, that is the core of instability for this very volatile
region.

The statements by Israeli officials concerning the recent National
Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iran and its nuclear program are perhaps the
best manifestation of this reality. Avi Dichter, Israel's public security
minister, has condemned the NIE as a flawed document, and in terms that link
the American analysis to a cause-and-effect cycle that could lead the Middle
East down the path of regional war. Like many Israelis, including the prime
minister, Dichter disagrees with the American NIE on Iran, in particular the
finding that Iran ceased its nuclear weapons program in 2003. The Israelis
hold that this program is still active, despite the fact that the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has reached a conclusion similar
to the NIE's based upon its own exhaustive inspection activities inside Iran
over the past five years.

In threatening the world with war because America opted for once to embrace
fact instead of fiction, Israel, sadly, has become like a cornered beast,
lashing out at any and all it perceives to threaten its security interests.
The current Israeli definition of what constitutes its security interests is
so broad as to preclude any difference of opinion. Israel's shameless
invocations of the Holocaust to defend its actions not only shames the
memory of those murdered over 60 years ago, but ironically dilutes the
impact of that memory by linking it with current policies that are cruel and
intolerant. The message of Holocaust remembrance should be "never again,"
not just in terms of the persecution of Jews, but in terms of man's
inhumanity to man. The birth of the Israeli state, as imperfect and
controversial as it was, served as a foundation for the pursuit of
tolerance. However, Israel's current policies, rooted in ethnic and
religious hatred, are the antithesis of tolerance.

Israel at present can have no friends, because Israel does not know how to
be a friend. Driven by xenophobic paranoia and historical grievances, Israel
is embarked on a path that can only lead to death and destruction. This is a
path the United States should not tread. I have always taken the position
that Israel is a friend of the United States, and that friends should always
stand up for one another, even in difficult times. I have also noted that,
to quote a phrase well known in America, friends don't let friends drive
drunk, and that for some time now Israel has been drunk on arrogance and
power. As a friend, I have believed the best course of action for the United
States to take would be that which helped remove the keys from the ignition
of the policy vehicle Israel is steering toward the edge of the abyss. Now
it seems our old friend is holding a pistol to our head, demanding that we
stop interfering with the vehicle's operation and preventing us from getting
out of the car. This is not the action of a friend, and it can no longer be
tolerated.

It is time for what those who are familiar with dependency issues would term
an intervention. Like a child too long spoiled by an inattentive parent,
Israel has grown accustomed to American largess, to the point that it is
addicted to an American aid package that is largely responsible for keeping
the Israeli economy afloat. This aid must be reconsidered in its entirety.
The day of the free ride must come to an end. The United States must
redefine its national security priorities in the Middle East and position
Israel accordingly. At the very least, American aid must be linked to
Israeli behavior modification. The standards America applies to other
nations around the world when it comes to receiving aid must likewise apply
to Israel.

Let there be no doubt: Israel and its considerable lobby of supporters here
in America will scream bloody murder if their aid is trimmed in any fashion.
But in the greater interest of what will best benefit the security interests
of the United States, and indeed the Middle East and the entire world, the
grip Israel has on American policymaking must come to an end. It is up to
the American people to make this change, first and foremost by recognizing
that a real problem exists in American-Israeli relations, then by electing
officials to Congress who will deal responsibly with these problems based
not on the behind-the-scenes lobbying of Israel and its proxies, but rather
the legitimate interests of the United States.

If Israel decides it wants to be our friend, then it will change its
behavior accordingly. Absent this, America has no choice but to declare its
independence from a relationship that has destroyed our credibility around
the world and drags us dangerously down the path toward another
irresponsible military misadventure in the Middle East. If, in the future,
Israel desires to reestablish a relationship with the United States built
upon the principles of mutual trust and benefit, then so be it. Such a
relationship is something I could embrace without hesitation. But one thing
is certain: no such friendship can truly exist under the conditions and
terms that are in place today, and for that reason the entirety of the
American-Israeli relationship must be reexamined.

Scott Ritter is a former UNSCOM weapons inspector in Iraq and the author of
Target Iran: The Truth Behind the White House's Plans for Regime Change
(Nation Books, 2006).

Copyright 2007 Antiwar.com



---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digest: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Reply via email to