> What's your evidence for this? I don't see much visible evidence of this sort of critique or debate going on via the usual outlets - journals, op-ed pages, think tank agendas, breakfast meetings at the Council on Foreign Relations, etc. Where do you get this sense from?
>
Pretty much from the same sources you're talking about. Although I do remember that after I gave a talk at a UN meeting on Palestine in Cyprus, the low level US diplomatic rep sent to observe the meeting came up to me and said basically what I just said, speaking about the foreign service. I guess it depends in part on how you read the evidence. For example, the fact that there's such a big gap between the rhetoric of establishment types who want a govt job and their colleagues in exactly the same institutions who don't want govt jobs - so much more on Israel than other issues - rings a bell for me. Also, if an establishment type responds to criticism of US policy on Israel (in a candid forum) by defending the policy, that means one thing; when he refrains from defending the policy but cites domestic constraints, I take that to mean something else. It's just the "critique of sources" - though more an art than a science, I guess.
SA