This paper is causing high controversy and reactions in the United States and also in Israel. In the paper, the authors contend that the intimate relationship with Israel has been driving U.S. Middle East policy. The authors argue that although often justified as reflecting shared strategic interests or compelling moral imperatives, the U.S. commitment to Israel is due primarily to the activities of the “Israel Lobby." For the two authors, it's not because of terrorism that the USA are allies of Israel but the other way around: the USA have a problem with terrorism partly because they are Israel's allies. Also the USA wouldn't care so much for the threat of Irak, Syria or Iran if it weren't for Israel's security. The paper goes on to describe the various activities that pro-Israel groups have undertaken in order to shift U.S. foreign policy in a pro-Israel direction. It also accuses Israel of undertaking spying activities in the USA to serve Israel's interests, pretending that Israel does not behave as a faithful ally. An example is the case of Larry Franklin, who has provided top secret information on Iran from the Pentagone to Israel, and who was condemned in January to 13 years in prison. Another is recent sale of Israeli arms to China, which has also not pleased the USA.
In Israel this paper is seen as a cause for alarm. Israel's newspapers, like Yediot Aharonot and Haaretz agree that the USA will, in a post Bush time, most likely be forced to revise their Middle-east policy.
"For the past several decades, and especially since the Six-Day War in 1967, the centrepiece of US Middle Eastern policy has been its relationship with Israel. The combination of unwavering support for Israel and the related effort to spread ‘democracy’ throughout the region has inflamed Arab and Islamic opinion and jeopardised not only US security but that of much of the rest of the world. This situation has no equal in American political history. Why has the US been willing to set aside its own security and that of many of its allies in order to advance the interests of another state? One might assume that the bond between the two countries was based on shared strategic interests or compelling moral imperatives, but neither explanation can account for the remarkable level of material and diplomatic support that the US provides." [ read more . . . ]
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire