What's
Special About the US-Israel Relationship?
By Marwan
Bishara
July 19,
2016 "Information
Clearing House"
- "Al
Jazeera" -
If you must read Dennis Ross' Doomed to Succeed: The
US-Israel-Relationship from Truman to Obama, take
some sedatives because you are doomed to scream in
agony.
A survey of
seven decades of US diplomacy towards Israel, the
book is a reflection of the author's own mindset as
much as it is about the mindset of those who manage,
nurture and protect the "special relationship"
between the United States and Israel. And it's
nauseating.
Ross
doesn't hold back. After serving four decades in
successive US administrations, he is clearly eager
to set the record straight, not only about
Washington's approach to Israel, but about his
unshaken loyalty to the "Jewish State".
Like
Colonel Nathan Jessup in A Few Good Men, Dennis the
menace is eager to reveal his role on behalf of
Israel, and the book is just a way of leading him to
his desired destination.
It
surpasses his last book The Missing Peace, to reveal
not only his personal experiences but also his inner
thinking. It is hypocritical and avowedly one-sided.
Three objectives
The book is
set up to demonstrate three main points:
1 Israel is
always right.
2 It
follows that the US is right only when it sides with
Israel, and also defends its belligerence, and
rewards it for its aggression and obstruction.
3 American
leaders don't learn from the lessons of their
predecessors who repeatedly, naively and erroneously
give weight to Arab positions on Israel, when
according to Ross, Palestine is not the Arabs'
priority.
This is no
surprise coming from Ross. After all, he is the head
of the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee's
auxiliary think-tank, The Washington Institute for
Near East Studies, and co-chairman of the Iran Task
Force of the warmongering Jewish Institute for
National Security Affairs, a group that promotes
relations between the US and Israeli militaries and
has been critical of the Obama administration's
nuclear negotiations with Iran.
Ross reviews the record of each
administration's dealings with Israel to
prove the above points, and when the
record doesn't support his claim, he
distorts it through acrobatic
selectivity and subjective
interpretations. |
What is
shocking is how far he has gone to prove his point.
Ross
reviews the record of each administration's dealings
with Israel to prove the above points, and when the
record doesn't support his claim, he distorts it
through acrobatic selectivity and subjective
interpretations.
For
example, when President Jimmy Carter accuses Israeli
Prime Minister Menachem Begin of deceiving him, Ross
insinuates that Carter misrepresents the record, or
at best has a poor memory.
When
President Ronald Reagan accuses Begin of lying to
him, Ross makes the case for "lost in translation";
the president simply misunderstood the Israeli
premier.
Remember,
Israel is always right and its leaders are holier
than thou.
So when
Begin's successor, the obstinate, obstructionist and
deceiving Yitzhak Shamir lies even more, Ross dances
around the issue to show that Reagan was perhaps
harsh in his interpretation.
Likewise,
when President George HW Bush is angered by a lying
Shamir, who is widely known to have done everything
in his power to torpedo the convening of the 1991
Madrid International Peace Conference, Ross explains
how the Bush administration didn't appreciate the
Israeli psyche.
Insensitive to
fragile Israel
This line
of reasoning is prolific throughout the book:
America just doesn't understand the complexity of
Israel's political psychology and is therefore
inconsiderate to its needs.
Apparently
this applies to Eisenhower, Nixon, Carter and Bush
Senior And it also applies to Clinton and Netanyahu,
as well as Obama and Netanyahu.
While they
have proved supportive of Israel, they just don't
know how to babysit the insecure state.
But Ross is
comfortable recalling how American leaders have
mistrusted the Palestinians because in his eyes
Yasser Arafat was the ultimate liar - the missing
piece in Ross's equation of peace. No attempt at
contextualising or interpreting the psyche of the
Palestinians who have been dispossessed and occupied
for decades.
Like any
book that recounts diplomatic history without the
necessary wider strategic context, Doomed to Succeed
is doomed to fail in explaining the contradictions
between rhetoric and policy. When Ross does
contextualise, he is deliberately selective, and
notably to push for a dubious point he is making.
Considerate to the
undeserving Arabs
For
example, Ross argues that the Arabs have generally
got their way with Washington's leaders at Israel's
expense.
He claims
Washington sold the Arabs sophisticated weapons
despite Israel's objections, while the US repeatedly
denied Israel weapons they asked for, jeopardising
Israel's security.
The delusional Ross doesn't see how
regional hostility to US complicity with
Israel has been a constant rallying
cause for violent extremist groups. |
Nowhere
does he explains how, thanks to its European and
American backers, Israel has defeated and rolled
back its Arab enemies in each and every war.
Or, that
the US suspended arms only when Israel used US
weapons offensively in contradiction to the
conditions of their sale. Or for that matter, that
the Arabs buy these expensive weapons, while Israel
pockets them.
In one
astounding case, Ross recalls how during a National
Security Council debate on providing Israel with
more sophisticated weapons, one official said that
the timing wasn't right (Israel was being bad again)
and besides, it already had enough weapons to defeat
all its Arab neighbours combined.
But Ross,
Israel's knight in shining armour, wouldn't have any
of it. Furious at his colleague's logic, he
reprimanded him for not understanding the Arabs or
for that matter, deterrence!
Basically,
to deter the Arabs you must make it clear that you
can obliterate them beyond defeat, and to scare them
shitless in the process, in order to ensure they
make no demands.
No such
deterrence of Israel is needed even though it
basically initiated most of the wars with the
exception of the 1973 war when the Arabs tried to
roll back Israel's 1967 gains. (I realise this point
will draw counter arguments, but I shall leave that
for another day.)
At any
rate, I honestly don't have the nerves or the
patience to comb through all of Ross' falsehoods,
distortions and spins point by point. So flagrant
are his claims, refuting them here requires the kind
of language that is not publishable.
The strategic
assets
In short,
it is true that a number of Arab leaders did look
for US protection and help in curbing the aggression
of its client state, Israel. And yes, Israel was
eager to be America's regional and strategic asset
but only on its own terms.
At the end
of the day, Israel created far more trouble for the
US in the Middle East than it provided solutions and
opportunities. Consequently, the US created greater
trouble for the region. Ariel Sharon's reoccupation
of the West Bank in 2002 and Bush's War in Iraq in
2003 are good examples of the Israelification of US
policy in the region.
No, not
everything can or should be blamed on the US, Israel
or their complicity in the Middle East region. But
judging from the opinion polls, including the
so-called friendly states, the majority of the Arab
public, have consistently seen the US and Israel
(perhaps less so during the Obama administration) to
be the leading menace to regional stability and
security.
The
delusional Ross doesn't see how regional hostility
to US complicity with Israel has been a constant
rallying cause for violent extremist groups. And
that official policy might reflect the narrow
interests of the ruling elites, much of today's
problems in the Middle East are caused by neglecting
the Arab public opinion.
Thanks to
Israel, The US' "strategic asset", and to Israel's
own strategic assets in Washington, the likes of
Ross and his Zionist pals who have influenced and
eventually come to dominate US policy-thinking
towards the Middle East beginning with Ronald
Reagan, the US-Israel relationship has been elevated
to new highs. And why ultimately, for those same
reasons, it is doomed to backfire against both.
That is
unless other voices, Jewish and other, continue to
rise and advance, as did Bernie Sanders and his
supporters in recent months. We should all take
comfort in the fact that the influence of these
moderates within the American establishment and the
Jewish community, while modest is also growing.
Marwan Bishara
is the senior political analyst at Al Jazeera.
Follow him on
Facebook. |