Walt-Mearsheimer "Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy"

"HARVARD PAPER" CRITIQUE CHART

This includes the main points of Walt-Mearsheimer paper, points made in a variety of both honest and "smear" critiques from both the left and the right, and counter-points made by many leftists, libertarians, pacifists, Palestinians and Arabs. Most of these points are included in the articles linked above. Some points include specific links. Since critiques come from both left and right, *OR* is used to differentiate between differing critiques, for example one might accuse the authors for being too anti-American and another that they are too pro-American. The most important and hotly contested points of the paper are in italics.Obviously, it is up to readers to do their own research and thinking and draw their own conclusions on this very important debate impacting United States' democracy and even the survival of the nation.

Walt-Mearsheimer Points	Critique Points	Counter-Critique Points
The 81 page paper includes 40 pages of 211 footnotes to books and articles, many of the from Jewish or Israeli scholars or publications. The authors admit that they have compiled available information and not done their own interviews in this draft working paper.	The paper is just a series of assertions with no real evidence. Quotations are out of context, important facts are misstated or omitted; weak logic is employed. There is no original scholarship. Its rhetoric sounds just like the anti-Semite David Duke who agrees with it. Authors cite America haters like Norman Finkelstein, Noam Chomsky and Counterpunch.Org. This is typical conspiracy theory blaming everything on the Jews and just one more high profile attack on the Israel supporters.	The importance of the paper is that role of Israel Lobby is now up for scholarly debate where errors can be corrected as the greater truth is sought. Guilt-by-who-agrees-with- you is NOT a credible argument. Finkelstein and Chomsky are professors at major universities. The paper focuses on the role of the Israel Lobby as a special interest group. Special interest group analysis by academics is entirely proper since defacto "conspiracies" to influence power exist everywhere. The "lobby" is too infrequently criticized except by openly anti-Semitic or anti- government anarchist/libertarian writers, not even by most leftists and antiwar activists.
"The U.S. national interest should be the primary object of American foreign policy."	And Israel is vital to helping the U.S. pursue those interests. OR Authors do not define national interest, but obviously have a right wing, pro-imperialist view of what that is.	They should define national interest clearly so that people cannot assume what they mean and/or interpret that as they please.
Aid to Israel of $140 billion over 58 years far outstrips aid to other nations	Israel "earned" this because it is such a great ally. OR quoting Chomsky, Israel has helped the U.S. "to evade congressional barriers to carrying out massive terror in Central America, to evade embargoes against South Africa and Rhodesia, and much else." Others emphasize its role in smashing Arab nationalism. OR This money allows the U.S. to control Israel against its own interests. And Egypt gets more than 2 billion a year so it's not just Israel receiving massive aid.	Israel has cost the U.S. even more through higher oil prices, lost opportunities and much of the cost of the Iraq war which is in large part for Israel. (Saddam was giving families of suicide bombers Money.) If the oil companies drove policy, the U.S. might to favor Palestinians, not Israel. Some leftists sound like they've bought Israel Lobby hype about Israel's usefulness. U.S. aid allows the most right wing Israeli expansionists to have power, even as it ALSO has kept them from expelling as many Arabs as they would like. The U.S. actually pays Egypt for keeping the peace with Israel.
The U.S. constantly comes to Israel's military and diplomatic aid.	Israel is an endangered democracy in a tyrannical region, one nation that will always be open to Jews, and will always help America. It therefore deserves such support.	The Israel Lobby doesn't just lobby for military and diplomatic aid, but for support for Israel's wars and for the U.S. fight wars that benefit Israel. It is well known the pre-Israel Zionist lobby, including in U.S. media, were one of the groups that helped convince U.S. President Wilson to enter World War I when Britain was losing. Britain paid off Zionists with the Balfour Declaration of a Palestine Mandate. Thus the Nazis blamed Jews for the defeat of Germany.
Financially and diplomatically, Israel is a strategic liability.	Quoting Douglas Feith: "...Israel has formidable military forces, intelligence capabilities, militarily relevant R&D skills, strategically located ports and airfields, training facilities, medical infrastructure, and high-quality equipment maintenance skills. Israel willingly allows the U.S. to benefit from all this.”	U.S. gives Israeli armed forces new high tech military hardware before U.S. forces receive them. U.S. defense industries complain of Israel’s unfair competition and violation of trade agreements. Even leftists often buy Israel Lobby hype about the strategic imortance of Israel to the U.S.
Israel inflames extremism in Arab world because terrorists care about the oppression of the Palestinians. “Saying that Israel and the U.S. are united by a shared terrorist threat has the causal relationship backwards: the U.S. has a terrorism problem in good part because it is so closely allied with Israel, not the other way around.”	The U.S. would have repressive economic and political policies inflaming Arabs even if Israel did not exist. These policies benefit military industrial, oil and corporate interests. Using the phrase "terrorist" fails to see that many of these people are freedom fighters versus U.S. imperialism. Even without Israel, there would be attacks on the U.S. OR Terrorists don't really care about Palestinians, it's just a useful organizing tool that mobilizes Arabs and Muslims.	While the U.S. does have imperialist tendencies, it is impossible to prove what would be U.S. policy without Israel's existence. U.S. oil import lobbies are hurt by increased cost of imported oil due to Israel-Arab wars and constant tensions. Only owners of oil wells in the U.S. benefit from higher Arab oil prices. Perhaps they fund the Israel Lobby. The military industrial complex does not need wars for profits since politicians need to be "pro-defense," and cost overruns and obsolescence provide huge profits.
Israel's nuclear weapons cause other regional nations to want them.	Israel needs its nuclear weapons to prevent its destruction.	Israel uses its nuclear threat to bully the region while it keeps expropriating Palestinian land. Israeli leaders have long hinted at their willingness to use the "Samson Option" of massive nuclear retaliation -- including against Russia -- if they are ever seriously harmed.
Israel is not a loyal ally, constantly spying on the U.S.	It is inherently anti-Semitic to accuse Jews of disloyalty. All nations spy on all other nations.	No other nation has as many or as powerful partisans, many of whom have Israeli relatives, some of whom have dual citizenship with Israel, throughout the media, intelligentsia, and government.
There is a dwindling moral case for U.S. support for Israel's immoral actions. First, Israel is not weak and beleagured. Zionists had larger, better forces during the 1947-49 War. Israel Defense Forces (IDF) won easy victories 1956 and 1967, before large-scale U.S. aid	The moral case remains as strong as ever. And, no, Israeli forces were not as big and Israel almost lost in 1948 and 1973.	Even some critics admit there is conflicting evidence regarding 1948 forces. If Israel thinks it is about to lose a war, the U.S. will come to its aid. One reason is it threatens to use nuclear weapons, as it did in 1973, quickly bringing massive aid from the U.S.
Israel is a Jewish state. Israel's 1.3 million Arabs (inside Israel itself) are second class citizens	Israeli Arabs have equal rights in Israel.	Israel restricts Arab rights and increase Jewish rights inside Israel through immigration and citizenship laws, land laws, military and veteran-tied benefits, government, special positions for Zionist organizations in government.funding of Jewish organizations. See israelicivilrights.org
Israelis owned only 7% of land at the 1948 founding of Israel and immediately expelled 700,000 Arabs and took their land. Israeli leaders have admitted, and even excused, this crime of ethnic cleansing.	There is evidence that Arab leaders urged Arabs to flee until the war was over. Arabs supported Germany during the second world war and deserved to lose land.	Zionist leaders since the 1890s admitted Israel could only be built by driving out most Arabs. The British had backstabbed the Arabs by giving the Zionists the Palestine Mandate so Arabs were more anti-British/Zionist than pro-Nazi.
Arabs and Palestinians are demonized and their bad behavior emphasized but Israel's behavior towards Arabs is no better than Arabs' towards Israel. Zionists used terrorism against innocents to drive out the British before 1948.	This is NO moral equivalence between Israel and terrorist behavior. It ignores Arab anti-Semitism and threats to destroy Israel. It ignores U.S. anti-Arab/ Muslim racism.	Colonialism, ethnic cleansing and apartheid practices are all anathema in the 21st century. So the "Israel Lobby" disguises the facts and convinces Americans (and to a lesser extent Europeans) that Israel is a brave democracy fighting evil infidels. This betrays all principles of liberty, justice and equality of peoples.
Europe’s crimes against the Jews provide a clear moral justification for Israel’s right to exist but do not obligate the United States to help Israel no matter what it does today.	The whole purpose of the paper is to deligitimatize Israel's existence and/or to blame Israel for the U.S.'s own moral failings and political and economic imperialism worldwide. OR Why don't they look at the pattern of U.S. aggressive policies worldwide? Why just target Israel?	Many believe that German crimes do not excuse creation of an Israeli state on Arab land and call for right of return of Palestinians to all lands. Some support a democratic secular state is the only just solution. Others would accept a Jewish state limited to land justly acquired through past or current voluntary sales, leaving an Israel perhaps 20% of its current size. Others support an Israel with 1967 borders, allowing Israel to keep land confiscated since 1948. The reasons for U.S. imperialism all over the world are not the topic of the paper, only Israeli influence on policies in that region.
The Israel Lobby is a loose network with the support of about 2/3 of American Jews, as well as Christian evangelicals who believe Israel’s rebirth is part of Biblical prophecy, support its expansionist agenda, and think pressuring Israel is contrary to God’s will	The authors too broadly define who is a "lobbyist." Most Jews support Israel because the Jewish state is the heart of Judaism.	"Lobby" is a convenient, non-conspiratorial-sounding phrase to describe individuals and groups that work in concert towards the common goals of ensuring that U.S. foreign policy helps Israel and stifling public criticism of or debate about these policies. Except for the bullying with anti-Semitism charges, the Lobby uses all the same techniques as other lobbies, just more effectively. Many Jews believe Israel's ugly behavior over 58 years has undermined Judaism and caused anti-Semitism.
American Jewish leaders often consult with Israel on their policies and bow to Israeli concerns.	It is inherently anti-Semitic to see conspiracies among American and Israeli Jews against gentiles or the U.S.	Considering that the Jewish and Israeli media report on these consultations frequently, it is hardly anti-Semitic for gentiles to comment on it.
AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) is one of top 2 or 3 most powerful lobbies.	Oil and arms lobbies contribute more than AIPAC and other Israel lobbies. AARP is 16 times bigger than AIPAC. So how can AIPAC be almost as strong? OR We don't know how strong AIPAC is, we just know Israel and its policies are bad for America and have to be dealt with appropriately.	AIPAC networks with hundreds of innocuous sounding PACs which really support Israel, as well as many wealthy contributors. They can be mobilized quickly to destroy elected critics of Israel. Jewish media report that Jews give half the money to the Democratic and Republican National Committees. Congress and the Executive Branches are bribed and bullied into supporting Israel. See comments on oil and arms lobbies' relative weakness above.
The Israel Lobby includes non-Jewish neoconservatives and Christian fundamentalists.	The Lobby includes most of the political-intellectual ruling class, not just Jews.	Much of the non-Jewish or non-Christian Zionist elite is too intimidated by possible charges of anti-Semitism to question or speak out against pro-Israel propaganda and policies.
The Israel Lobby is more effective than others ways in influencing elected representatives, making campaign contributions, voting in elections, molding public opinion, finding employment in Congress and the Executive branch, etc.	Do they want to punish success? Stifle Jew's free speech? Do they want a quota on number of Jews in politics and media? Congressional support reflects the morality of Israel's case, not bullying and intimidation.	Israel partisans are elected to and employed in Congress, as well as appointed to Executive branches in far greater proportions than their percentage of the population. It is human nature for majorities to dislike successful tight-knit racial, religious, ethnic minorities that gain power over them. It is wise for tight-knit groups to exercise self-control and not abuse others with their relative economic and political power.
The Israel Lobby has targeted elected critics of Israel and had them defeated, for example Senator Charles Percy.	Any group has the right to organize against any elected official, Jews especially if the official is anti-Semitic.	Others driven from office for criticizing Israel include congressional representatives Sen. Mike Gravel and Reps. Paul Findley, Pete McCloskey and Cynthia McKinney. McKinney managed to regain her seat two years later. Jim Moran was similarly targeted by beat his challenger. Eected representatives avoid the double whammy of being labeled anti-Semite and driven from office by superior funds and organization.
The Israel Lobby is effective in getting their partisans well-placed in media and in protesting and boycotting media critical of Israel.	It is inherently anti-Semitic to assert that Jews may have too much power or influence in or over media. Do they want a quota on number of Jews owning and staffing media?	We need a systematic, quantitative study of pro-Israel ownership, control and staffing of major media. Ad hoc listings do suggest pro-Israel Jews and Christian Zionists own and/or control much of U.S. media. Such excessive control naturally engenders resentment.
The Israel Lobby partisans dominate the Think Tanks.	It is inherently anti-Semitic to assert Jews are over-represented in Think Tanks or that they support Israel.	A systematic, quantitative study of pro-Israel ownership, control and staffing of Think Tanks could help settle that issue.
The Israel Lobby attempts to intimidate professors and students in academia and promotes laws to "monitor" for anti-Israel debate. Partisans have set up 130 Jewish studies programs.	Arabs and leftists try to intimidate Jewish and pro-Israel professors and students. Wealthy Arabs set up Arab studies programs too.	A systematic, quantitative study of pro-Israel versus pro-Arab influences on campus could help settle that issue.
The Israel Lobby stifles all criticism of Israel or the Israel Lobby by accusing critics of anti-Semitism. The "new anti-Semitism" means anyone criticizing the state of Israel or any of its policies is anti-Semitic, not just those who smear or make absurd, untrue claims about Jews or Judaism, as a people or religion.	Jews correctly root out any and all evidence of anti-Semitism -- including criticism of the Jewish state -- in order to prevent another Holocaust against Jews.	The assumption that any gentile criticism will lead to pogroms and genocide is itself insulting and bigoted. Intimidation techniques, from charges of "anti-Semitism" to physical intimidation by groups like the Jewish Defense League are immoral and undermine democracy.
The Israel Lobby has caused the U.S. to demonize the Palestinians and consider and conduct war against enemies of Israel who support Palestinians like Syria, Iraq and Iran.	The U.S. is just defending the only Middle East democracy and the authors ignore how evil the "Islamo-fascists" are. OR the U.S. would have repressive policies towards Arabs and Muslims even if Israel did not exist because they benefit military industrial, oil and corporate interests. OR This represents a naive view of American innocence.	Israeli colonialism, ethnic cleansing and apartheid equal many Arab states' repressive deeds. See above as to why Israel benefits more than other interests from current policies. "Leftists" more comfortable with Israel's Labor Party ideals than American capitalism might agree. Some conservatives may blame Israel, but most libertarians and leftists are willing to admit U.S. culpability.
Sixty percent or more of Americans do not support these Israeli policies against the Palestinians and these wars.	Americans support Israeli democracy against Arabs who would destroy it, U.S.-Israeli efforts against international terrorism, and war for oil and lower gasoline prices. Israel helps achieve these goals.	Most Americans fear war and prefer to achieve these goals peacefully, unless inflamed by perceived or actual attacks on America itself, like the 9-11 attacks. Yet many Americans also believe we do not have whole truth of who in the U.S. government--or the Israeli Mossad -- knew what in advance of these attacks.
The Israel Lobby is effective in bullying the President into going along with its policies if he strays from them, especially regarding Palestinian rights and a Palestinian state.	U.S. Presidents, as leaders of the US foreign policy establishment, have always done what they wanted about Israel, for the good of the U.S.. Kennedy opposed Israeli nuclear weapons, Johnson didn't care. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and top gentiles have their own motivations for going to war. The authors attribute too much power to the Israel Lobby.	The pro-Israel, Mossad connected financial head of the Mafia in the early 1960s was Meyer Lansky, who ran guns to Israeli fighters in the 1940s and money-laundered for the Mossad thereafter. He and his underlings, including Carlos Marcello and Jack Ruby (who assassinated Kennedy's alleged assassin), are linked by mainstream authors to the Kennedy assassination. Johnson was a big fan of Israel and gladly gave them what they wanted. Despite his dislike of Jews (on tape), Nixon received 60% of his money from Jewish contributors and caved in to Israel's 1973 threats to use nuclear weapons. President Carter was threatened he'd be called anti-Semite if he bucked the Israel Lobby. Reagan was openly mocked for opposing it. Carter and Bush I were defeated in part by Israeli lobby efforts. Gentile leaders having their own motivation for going to war may work with Israeli Lobbyists who have the political and media clout to influence the public and congress into supporting wars in Israel's interest.
The major reason for the Iraq war was Israel Lobby pressure, including in media, think tanks, and government, with control of oil only a secondary reason.	This is an anti-Semitic charge which ignores the need to protect America and spread democracy. OR This ignores the role of oil and big corporate interests and blames Jews.	Even a cursory study of who promoted the war on Iraq in government, think tanks and media shows an overwhelming percentage of pro-Israel Jews, Christian Zionists and, in much smaller numbers, former or current lobbyists for specific corporations that ended up benefiting from the war.
Despite, neoconservative and Israel Lobby leadership for war, 62% of American Jews opposed the war, a higher percentage than most Americans.	These Jews still support Israel and know it is anti-Semitic to blame Israel in any part for the Iraq war.	While this may be true of many Jews opposed to the war, it must be remembered that even Jews are attacked as anti-Semites and as "self-hating" Jews and risk personal loss if they are too critical of Israel.
September 11 attacks were a golden opportunity for the neconservatives.	They are inferring the Jews were responsible for 9-11.	Hundreds of Israelis were arrested and deported after 9-11 for possible espionage, including some arrested for videotaping the collapse of the twin towers and allegedly celebrating. Some wonder about the fact that Larry Silverstein, the owner of the Twin Towers Lease and of Building Number 7, was close friends of Israeli Likkud Party leader Bibi Netanyahu. He profited handsomely in insurance monies from the disaster. Was there Israeli foreknowledge of 9-11?
Two Pentagon offices that manipulated intelligence were headed by Jewish friends of Israel.	Typical anti-Semitic attacks against Jews in government.	Or pro-Israel manipulation of data to promote a war desired by Israel?
Neoconservatives supported Ahmed Chalabai because he promised to bring Iraq closer to Israel.	Israel needs all the friends it can get.	Chalabai also was very friendly with the Iranians, unsuccessfully seeking allies wherever he could get them.
Clinton's new policy of dual containment--which meant more U.S. troops would be put in the region-- was drafted by Israel supporters.	This policy was best for America. OR The U.S. would have this policy anyway because it wants to control the region. OR Those who want to blame Israel are too idealistic about U.S. motives.	Dual containment was just a first step in the grand plan for gaining U.S. public support for Israel's expansionist aims outlined in the neoconservative "Clean Break" paper of 1996, written originally for Israeli leader Netanyahu but then pushed on Clinton and more successfully on Bush II.
Under Bush, neoconservatives pushed further for Iraq regime change as best protection for Israel.	This policy was best for America. OR The U.S. would have this policy anyway because it wants to control the region. OR Those who want to blame Israel are too idealistic about U.S. motives.	Clinton did successfully resist this, but the worst neoconservatives were not in his administration. But Bush wanted to avenge Saddam's alleged plan to kill his father. Plus he probably believes protecting Israel is part of God's mission for him personally.
Iran is the next target for regime change since it is Israel's most serious threat.	This policy is best for protecting America. OR The U.S. would have this policy anyway because it wants to control the region. OR Those who want to blame Israel are too idealistic about U.S. motives.	The fear is not that Iran will use nuclear weapons against its neighbors but that it will use the mere possibility it could build them to pressure the U.S. and other nations to make Israel give the Palestinians back much of their stolen land.
In sum, the Israel Lobby has far too much power over middle east policy. Israel is the tail that wags the U.S. dog, forcing the U.S. to work against own interest. "Other special-interest groups have managed to skew U.S. foreign policy in directions they favored, but no lobby has managed to divert U.S. foreign policy as far from what the American national interest would otherwise suggest..."	Israel is America's most faithful ally. OR The lobby just makes minor changes in direction, content, or impact of U.S. policies and the U.S. would have repressive policies towards middle east anyway because they benefit military industrial, oil and corporate interests. OR Those who want to blame Israel too idealistic about U.S. motives. OR Israel has lost some battles like AWACS jet sales to Saudi Arabia in 1981, U.S. out of Lebanon in 1982, loan guarantees to Israel in 1990s, selling arms to China in the 1990s, or currently moving U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, the release of one Israeli spy or stopping prosecution of other alleged spies.	Critics often use examples from 1950s and 1960s when the lobby was not very strong, as opposed to since the mid-1990s when it teamed up with neoconservatives and fundamentalists. As long as the lobby has as much power as it does, it is difficult to tell if its absence would significantly change the direction, content or impact of U.S. policies. Just because it lost some small battles in the past, it's ability to steal so much more Palestinian land and drive the U.S. into Iraq and Iran wars shows it is an extremely powerful lobby today.
These policies make the U.S. an enabler and co-conspirator to Israel's crimes.	The U.S. wouldn't care what Israeli's did to Palestinians even without the Lobby.	Now that the U.S. is occupying an Arab land, torturing, repressing and killing its inhabitants, it has become blood brothers with Israel with little opposition from the American people.
The Israel Lobby is bad for Israel because it increases its enemies and chances of attack instead of decreasing them through peaceful negotiations and concessions.	This assumes Israel is dealing with true partners as opposed to Islamo-fascists who want to destroy it OR The Israel Lobby is powerful enough to ensure the most repressive Israelis rule Israel.	Israel will be destroyed eventually in a nuclear attack; most city-living Jews will die in any world nuclear war. This cannot be good for Israel or the Jews.
We need candid open debate about the power of the Israel Lobby, or our democracy is threatened by the stifling of debate.	This infers there is an evil Jewish conspiracy out to destroy U.S. democracy.	The attack on the motives of the authors is just one more evidence of attempts to stifle debate. But debate is going on anyway.
Mere existence of the Israel Lobby suggests unconditional support for Israel is not in the American national interest.	Just because groups have lobbies doesn't mean they are against the national interest.	Many skeptics of government power note that lobbies do in fact pursue goals that narrowly help some people to the detriment of most people, including AARP, the AMA, minorities seeking special privileges, boondoggle contractors, farmers, labor unions, etc. Making the same argument about the Israel Lobby is firmly within this skeptical tradition.