[Peace-discuss] Finkelstein on the Israeli lobby

[Morton K. Brussel]

The social issues cited by M&W in the quoted paragraph can be major  
issues, but do not exhaust the set.
I read nothing in the quotation that engages the other "major"  
issues; they seem only to be making a (valid) point about the power  
of the lobby in electoral campaigns. I don't believe they are  
misguided in this, even if they are misguided in other respects (as  
e.g., on foreign policy differences between Dems and Pubs).

My 2¢ worth, --mkb


On Sep 19, 2007, at 10:50 AM, David Green wrote:

> As usual, I'm in lockstep with NF. The following quote appeared on  
> another list praising Mearsheimer/Walt, and my response. We have to  
> remember that Mearsheimer is the ultimate foreign policy "realist,"  
> but ironically realism is now attributing to Israel the power to  
> direct major foreign policy decisions:
>
> From Mearsheimer and Walt, The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy:
> "The [2008 presidential] candidates will inevitably differ on various
> domestic issues - health care, abortion, gay marriage, taxes,
> education, immigration - and spirited debates are certain to erupt on
> a host of foreign policy questions as well... Yet on one subject, we
> can be equally confident that the candidates will speak with one
> voice ... None of the candidates is likely to criticize Israel in any
> significant way ... Any who do will probably fall by the wayside ...
> The real reason why American politicians are so deferential is the
> political power of the Israel lobby"
>
> This quote illustrates why M/W are misguided. Do they not realize  
> that the major parties will not differ on any major issue, only  
> "social issues"? This is perfectly consistent with their support  
> for U.S. foreign policy and Israel's assistance to its goals, in  
> return for their own piece of the pie.
>
>
> "C. G. Estabrook" <galliher at uiuc.edu> wrote:
> [The craven behavior of the administration at DePaul University in
> regard to Prof. Norman Finkelstein illustrates the rather narrow  
> limits
> of allowable debate within American universities -- most would have
> acted as badly as DePaul did -- but here Finkelstein discusses the  
> more
> important issue of the Israeli lobby: "I don’t think there’s any
> evidence that the is lobby was a crucial factor in the decision for  
> the
> US to go to war in Iraq and I don’t think that there is evidence  
> that US
> policy in the Middle East in general is shaped by the lobby.  
> However, I
> do think that the lobby is a crucial factor in determining US policy
> towards the Palestinians. I don’t think it determined US policy in
> Iran, in Turkey or in Iraq. But on the Israel-Palestine conflict --  
> the
> building of settlements and the colonisation of Palestine, I think  
> it is
> a crucial factor." --CGE]
>
>
>
> Finkelstein Interviewed
> by Norman Finkelstein and George McLeod; September 16, 2007
>
> Israel critic Norman Finkelstein made national headlines after
> his tenure was denied by DePaul University . Finkelstein, an author of
> five books, had received outstanding reviews from his students and
> peers. His dismissal sparked student protests and sit-ins, and led top
> academics to rally to his defence. Many questioned whether campuses  
> had
> fallen victim to powerful pressure groups.
>
>
>
> In this interview with George McLeod, Norman Finkelstein
> discusses the Israel lobby, his writings and what makes the Israel  
> issue
> unusually sensitive in the US.
>
>
>
>
>
> McLeod: What is unique about the Israel/Palestine issue that
> makes it so controversial and sensitive?
>
>
>
> Finkelstein: There is nothing unusual about the
> Israel/Palestine issue, apart from the fact that there is a lobby here
> that prevents any kind of rational debate and discussion about what  
> goes
> on there.
>
>
>
> The conflict itself is not particularly unusual. And its main
> features are fairly well-known, especially outside the US.
>
>
>
> There is no other field where a gang of hoodlums use their
> money and their brass knuckles to prevent tenure appointments, and
> that’s very odd. There are other politicised fields like Cuba  
> studies or
> China studies – but these kinds of jihads and witch hunts – they just
> don’t go on in other fields.
>
>
>
> In Israel/Palestine academia, in the past few years, you have
> the Juan Cole case at Yale, you have the Joseph Massad case, you have
> the Nadi Abuel-El-Haj case, you have my case, and you have the Rashid
> Khalidi case.
>
>
>
> But you take other fields that are politicised, like China
> studies and Cuba studies where there is a lobby at work, they just  
> don't
> engage in these sorts of mafia tactics.
>
>
>
>
>
> McLeod: There are many lobby groups in the US with significant
> resources at their disposal that have not been accused of stifling
> debate. What makes the Israel lobby different?
>
>
>
> Finkelstein: The Israel lobby has money. Money is important
> because it can be used to threaten to withhold donor contributions or
> alumni contributions, and the lobby has a lot of clout in the  
> media, so
> they can drag your name through the mud.
>
>
>
>
>
> McLeod: Does your case suggest that the Israel lobby is growing
> stronger and that debate over Israel is narrowing?
>
>
>
> Finkelstein: Actually, there is more debate on Israel/Palestine
> than ever.
>
>
>
> In terms of its strength, the Israel lobby is beginning to fall
> apart. The case for Israel is becoming indefensible. Israel’s human
> rights record, the actual historical record, and the diplomatic  
> record,
> are becoming better known. And the more the facts are becoming part of
> mainstream discourse, the more the lobby has a difficult time  
> defending
> what is indefensible.
>
>
>
>
>
> McLeod: How can the lobby be falling apart if it controls such
> significant resources?
>
>
>
> Finkelstein: The lobby is strong, but it is weaker than ever.
> They had several debacles this last year. There was the Jimmy Carter
> book, which ended up as number one on the New York Times best-seller
> list and there is the Walk & Mearsheimer book – these are all signs of
> the weakening power of the lobby.
>
>
>
>
>
> McLeod: Did the lobby have a role in your tenure dispute?
>
>
>
> Finkelstein: Of course.
>
>
>
>
>
> McLeod: On a practical level, what was the lobby doing
> regarding your tenure bid?
>
>
>
> Finkelstein: The university doesn’t deny that [it was
> pressured]. The university has repeatedly said there was intense  
> outside
> pressure. They claim to have resisted it, but they don’t deny that it
> had been exerted.
>
>
>
>
>
> McLeod: Why were you singled out over other academics that
> criticise Israel?
>
>
>
> Finkelstein: I am more active. Most other critics confine their
> criticisms to academic venues such as conferences and academic  
> journals
> – but I am pretty active. I speak to a lot to audiences; I make my
> presence known in the political arena.
>
>
>
>
>
> McLeod: Does the fact that you lost your tenure bid suggest
> that academic freedom is in decline?
>
>
>
> Finkelstein: No, I wouldn’t say that – I was a bit of an odd
> case because I was both an academic and highly political. Most  
> academics
> are not involved in politics, except in the very narrow world of
> academia. So the standards of academia remain the same as they have  
> been.
>
>
>
>
>
> McLeod: One of your most controversial positions has been your
> contention that pro-Israel groups and individuals are using the
> holocaust for political purposes. Could you discuss your views on  
> this?
>
>
>
> Finkelstein: I’ve written a whole book on that topic – The
> Holocaust Industry, which basically tries to document and show how the
> Nazi holocaust has been used since the June 1967 war as a political
> weapon to suppress criticism of Israel.
>
>
>
> I argue that it takes basically two forms. First is the claim
> of Holocaust uniqueness, which is that no people in the world have  
> ever
> suffered the ways Jews have. The purpose of this doctrine, which  
> has no
> intellectual or MORAL foundation, is to basically immunize Israel from
> criticism.
>
>
>
> That is, if Jews suffered uniquely during the Holocaust, then
> they should not be held to the same moral standards as others.
>
>
>
> The second aspect of this Holocaust dogma is the claim that all
> the gentiles want to kill the Jews – the thesis of Daniel Goldhagen
> Hitler’s Willing Executioners. And therefore, all gentiles are  
> latently
> or flagrantly anti-Semitic, so their criticism of Israel cannot be  
> credited.
>
>
>
>
>
> McLeod: And what sort of response did the book receive?
>
>
>
> Finkelstein: When the book came out, it was the object of a
> vicious attack. A lot of name calling, a lot of ad homonem attacks on
> me. But now, I think a large part of what I wrote back then has become
> mainstream. And the Holocaust Industry has even been the object of
> ridicule by mainstream figures – not my book but the industry itself.
>
>
>
> So, for example the wife of the former executive director of
> the US Holocaust museum in Washington, Tova Reich just published a
> satirical novel on the Holocaust Industry and it was quite well  
> reviewed.
>
>
>
>
>
> McLeod: Why was the book so rigorously attacked?
>
>
>
> Finkelstein: Because nobody was saying it at the time, but
> things have changed. For example, take my position of the money  
> that was
> being extorted from Europe for what was called needy Holocaust  
> victims.
> The fact that the victims never actually got the money has become
> commonplace.
>
>
>
>
>
> McLeod: What do you think about the recently-released book The
> Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy by John Mearsheimer and Stephen  
> Walt?
>
>
>
> Finkelstein: Parts of it I agree with, parts of it I don’t.
>
>
>
> For example, I don’t think there’s any evidence that the is
> lobby was a crucial factor in the decision for the US to go to war in
> Iraq and I don’t think that there is evidence that US policy in the
> Middle East in general is shaped by the lobby.
>
>
>
> However, I do think that the lobby is a crucial factor in
> determining US policy towards the Palestinians.
>
>
>
> I don’t think it determined US policy in Iran, in Turkey or in
> Iraq. But on the Israel-Palestine conflict – the building of  
> settlements
> and the colonisation of Palestine, I think it is a crucial factor.
>
>
>
>
>
> McLeod: You also exposed serious problems with the popular book
> From Time Immemorial by Joan Peters, which argued that Palestine was
> almost empty of inhabitants prior to the arrival of western migrants.
> The book had received excellent reviews and was a best-seller. How did
> you come to realise there were problems with the book?
>
>
>
> Finkelstein: Very simple answer, I read it.
>
>
>
>
>
> McLeod: But you were not the only one. It was a popular book.
>
>
>
> I am not sure how many people read it back then – I am not sure
> how many people actually read books now.
>
>
>
> For example, I am not sure how many people who claim to have
> read Hitler’s Executioners actually read it – I doubt people actually
> read Joan Peters. I mean most of these books are unreadable – they’re
> completely illiterate. People don’t know that because they don’t  
> read them.
>
>
>
>
>
> McLeod: Do you mean the footnotes, or literally the book?
>
>
>
> Finkelstein: I don’t think they read the book. Nobody reads
> footnotes.
>
>
>
> The fact that it sold well tells you nothing – these books are
> good for a coffee table. There is a famous line by Christopher  
> Hitchens.
> Someone asked him: “Did you read this book?’’ To which he answered
> “Let’s put it this way. I reviewed it.’’
>
>
>
> Anyone who actually reads the kinds of books that I expose and
> has a mind capable of rationally assimilating information can’t  
> help but
> notice that books like Peters’ are incomprehensible and are completely
> absurd.
>
>
>
>
>
> McLeod: Alan Dershowirz has argued that Israel received a
> disproportionate amount of criticism. Do you think other countries  
> with
> worse human rights records, such as Saudi Arabia and Myanmar,  
> should be
> receiving more criticism?
>
>
>
> Finkelstein: Well there are a number of issues. First, as a
> matter of language, Dershowitz doesn’t argue anything because  
> Dershowitz
> doesn’t know anything. He’s a complete ignoramus, so I don’t agree  
> with
> the formulation that Dershowitz argues.
>
>
>
> Maybe Dershowitz shouts, but argues? No. He doesn’t know anything.
>
>
>
> On the question of proportionality. If you look at the reports
> of human rights organisations, such as Human Rights Watch, there have
> not been a significantly larger number of reports on Israel/Palestine
> than on other noteworthy places such as Darfur. The numbers have been
> tabulated; you can go and check with them, it’s simply untrue.
>
>
>
> Number three, the Israel/Palestine conflict does have a
> noteworthy feature – it is the longest running occupation in modern
> history. So, had Israel resolved it 40 years ago, perhaps it wouldn’t
> receive so much attention.
>
>
>
> But the fact that it has been ongoing for 40 years, which is
> probably longer than the lifetime of most people living on the  
> planet –
> most people are under 40 years old – means it was going on before most
> people were born. Therefore, it’s not surprising that it would be the
> object of so much attention.
>
>
>
>
>
> McLeod: Does the failure of your tenure bid make you regret
> your vocal stance on this issue?
>
>
>
> Finkelstein: No, I’m just glad it’s over.
>
>
>
>
>
> McLeod: What are your plans for the future?
>
>
>
> Finkelstein: I don’t know, it’s too soon to tell. I am glad
> that the DePaul nightmare is over and I will surely miss my students,
> but otherwise, I want to get on with doing serious work and put that
> chapter very far behind me.
>
>
> ###
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
>
> Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha!
> Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy) at  
> Yahoo! Games.
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/private/peace-discuss/attachments/20070919/5b9dc10b/attachment.htm