Israel as a strategic asset is one of the postualtes: One of the most popular argument for the depth of the support by the US to Israel was that Israel was a bulwark against Soviet influence in the Middle East. The argument was that by supporting Israel militarily and financially the US was also defending itself. Israel was also seen as a balancing force for the rise of radical Arab states. This argument has lost a lot of credibility since the breakup of the USSR and the destruction of the strongest radical Arab state after the Gulf War. Despite the end of the USSR and the end of Arab radicalism support for Israel among US policymakers remains stronger than ever.
The idea that Israel is an asset to the US Empire does not hold water. During the Gulf War Israel was a liability and not an asset. The US had to lean on Israel heavily to prevent retaliation agianst the Scud missiles.
Also note that Bush Sr lost the elections right after the Gulf War partly because of the recession that overlapped with the elections and partly because Bush Sr decided to get tough with Israel after the Gulf war. Remember that Sr tried to withhold the $10 B in loan guarantess from Israel. Almost all Jewish organizations in the US supported Bill Clinton as an alternative. Bill Clinton has been one of the most pro-Israel presidents to date.
It is also postulated that a Common historic experience binds the US and Israel: Both the US and Israel are settler states. Both were able to settle an already populated land and take it over and create their state. This has created a common frontier mentality.
The problem with this argument is that it does not account for the mechanism of how this common experience is translated into policy support.
The US domestic policy process is the key to understanding the depth of US support to Israel: The US policy making process is heavily influenced by interest groups. One of the strongest interest groups in American foreign policy making is AIPAC. According to Edward Tivnan, The Lobby: Jewish Political Power and American Foreign Policy, The power of AIPAC is based on:
1. The six million American Jews who regularly vote in high numbers. Approx 90% of Jews vote in elections. Moreover, the Jewish vote is concentrated in key states such as CA, NY, IL, FL, OH. These are important states to win in.
2. The ability of AIPAC to collect funds from 10,000 prominent members in the US. The funds are usually to pro-Israel candidates in Congress. The Jewish lobby is the second largest contributor to the Democratic party. If a Congress person takes an anti-Israel stand, AIPAC targets him for defeat by contributing funds to his challengers in the next elections. Just read what happend to Paul Findley and James Abou Rizq in "They Dare Speak Out."
3. The ability of the Jewish lobby to rally public support for Israel in the media and to brand those who criticize Israel as Anti-Semites. Remember what happened to Marlone Brnado when he said something on Larry King. He was branded as Anti-Semite and was forced to apologize. If your a Jew and you criticize Israel, you are labeled a "self hating Jew."
4. The professional, sophisticated, and astute leadership of AIPAC.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Doug Henwood" <dhenwood at panix.com> To: <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com> Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 6:43 AM Subject: Re: placing the palestinian struggle
> Naji Dahi wrote:
>
> >Support to Israel has not been driven by the geopolitical interests of
the
> >US. It is driven by the strength of AIPAC. In order to break the power of
> >AIPAC over US policy to the ME, you need public financing of elections in
> >the US.
>
> Everything I know about how U.S. power works internationally tells me
> that the U.S. marches to its own drummer, choosing policies that will
> sustain or enhance this country's wealth and/or power. Why in this
> case a domestic political lobby should take precedence over imperial
> interest is something that needs to be more rigorously explained than
> this.
>
> Doug