******************** POSTING RULES & NOTES ******************** #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. *****************************************************************
---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Paul Flewers <trusscott.foundat...@blueyonder.co.uk> Date: Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 1:43 PM Subject: [Marxism] Comment on Bricmont and Johnstone on AIPAC To: <acpolla...@gmail.com> List members might be interested in Moshé Machover's comments on Jean Bricmont and Diana Johnstone's latest, 'The People Against the 800 Pound Gorilla' < http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/09/13/the-people-against-the-800-pound-gorilla/ >. Their basic thesis is that AIPAC determines US policy in the Middle East against real US interests. This is the same "tail wags dog" thesis argued by Mearsheimer and Walt -- except that the latter are more sophisticated, and stress that the Israel lobby is much wider that AIPAC and includes many more Christians than Jews. They also don't belong to the left, but are bourgeois political "scientists". According to this thesis Israel is the most powerful state in the entire world, as it can compel even the US to do its bidding, willy-nilly! The flaw in this thesis is: why do the decision-making political elite and dominant big-business interests in the US allow this alleged manipulation of US foreign policy if it is really so much against their interests. If big business -- the MIC, oil companies etc -- were really against this, they could surely muster enough resources to counter AIPAC. To defend themselves against the charge of antisemitism, they could easily find enough Jews to help refute this charge. The answer is that Israel is really an important strategic asset for the US. Bricmont and Johnstone consider and refute various alternative explanations as to why the US seems to do what is in Israel's but not US interest. But they omit to mention the two most evident points. 1. Israel, possessing by far the strongest military force in the region, is also the most deeply committed to US dominance in the Middle East. Unlike other ME states, its commitment to the US is independent of which party is in office, and is not threatened in the foreseeable future by a popular anti-US internal opposition. It is therefore most reliable as US regional Rottweiler. No other ME state is in anything like this position. 2. Specifically, in the case of Iran (and hence its allies Syria and Hizbullah), what B&J fail to consider is the Mafia principle: in order to maintain credibility, any display of disobedience and insufficient compliance must be severely punished and made an example of. So, with respect to Iran the strategic interests of Israel and US imperialism coincide. Israel jealously guards its regional hegemony (as main junior partner of the US), and is committed to prevent any regional state becoming a credible rival. The US is interested to preserve its credibility as the the dominant power, and punish any disobedience. Note, that it was the credibility issue that Obama stressed in his last speech before he climbed down. The role of AIPAC and the (much wider) Israel lobby is however very important: it is to silence dissent and prevent challenge in the press and Congress to US policy that is in the interest of the dominant part of the US ruling class, but would otherwise be quite unpopular. ________________________________________________ Send list submissions to: marx...@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/acpollack2%40gmail.com _________________________________________________________ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
