[Peace-discuss] Finkelstein on the Israeli lobby

[n.dahlheim at mchsi.com]

Excellent point---the two political parties are the twin right wings of the War Party itself...  Destruction 
and dismantling of the last few social safety net programs left is a major component of the policy agendas 
of both parties.
       Nick


----------------------  Original Message:  ---------------------
From:    David Green <davegreen84 at yahoo.com>
To:      Peace Discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Finkelstein on the Israeli lobby
Date:    Wed, 19 Sep 2007 15:50:29 +0000

> 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