An
alarming headline appeared in the English language Jerusalem
Post February 8: “Washington Watch: banging the war
drums.” The article below it, written by Douglas Bloomfield,
president of Bloomfield Associates Inc., a Washington lobbying
and consulting firm, noted that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu, “who has a penchant for dabbling in American
politics,” will be in Washington to speak March 3 at the
annual policy conference of the American Israeli Political
Action Committee (AIPAC) and meet with President Obama.
“Look for him to whip up the activists
long schooled in lobbying for a get-tougher Iran policy,”
wrote Bloomfield.
“They’ll take the message to Capitol
Hill with enthusiasm.”
Bloomfield knows of what he speaks.
He served nine years as AIPAC’s legislative director and
chief lobbyist.
Last year’s AIPAC confab drew 10,000
delegates and guests - including 70 U.S. Senators and 270
members of the House of Representatives. This year a group
calling itself Occupy/AIPAC plans to demonstrate outside
the Washington Convention Center.
“If past performance is any indicator,
Obama will tell the Israeli leader that sanctions are showing
results and, along with diplomacy, should be given more
time to work.” Bloomfield wrote. “Netanyahu will respond
that the Iranians are not serious about diplomacy and use
it only to stall while they go full speed ahead on their
nuclear program. Obama will repeat assurances of ‘ironclad’
US support, and Netanyahu will dodge the president’s plea
for patience and his request for advance notice.”
“It is no secret that senior American
officials across the board distrust Netanyahu, believing
he does not level with them, does not keep his commitments
and is manipulative,” continued Bloomfield. “Israeli analysts
suggest Netanyahu could decide to hit Iran during this election
year, believing Obama would be reluctant to try to block
him for fear of offending Jewish supporters. The window
of political opportunity is wide open, in Netanyahu’s view.
“Republicans are trying to make support
for Israel a wedge issue and are accusing Obama of being
hostile to the Jewish state. They say his willingness to
negotiate with the Iranians is a sign of weakness. The president
has been in make-nice-to-Israel mode, effectively shelving
any effort to revive peace negotiations, which pleases Netanyahu.
The president’s assumption is that peace process progress
is impossible, so why ruffle any feathers among Israel’s
friends. Netanyahu has argued there can be no progress in
peace talks until the Iran problem is resolved.
“If Netanyahu does decide to strike
Iran this year, with or without US administration backing,
Republicans could be expected to turn that into a campaign
issue against the Democrats.”
At first glance it might seem strange
for such a candid view of what the right wing Israeli government
has in mind for the U.S. to appear in a conservative Israeli
newspaper that supports the policies of Netanyahu’s Likud
Party-led government. However, a kind of bravado often seeps
into the paper’s coverage – a kind of transparency of motive
and intent.
Prime Minister Netanyahu’s threats
have more to do with challenging Washington than with actually
attacking Iran, wrote Arkansas Times columnist Gene
Lyons on Salon.com last week. He wrote, “When articles
invoking the Holocaust and urging ‘creative destruction’
in Iran appear on the same day (Feb. 7) in the Washington
Post, Wall Street Journal, Newsweek and Bloomberg
News, a skeptical observer might be forgiven for suspecting
a well-coordinated propaganda campaign.”
That is clearly what is afoot.
It is doubtful that the government
of any other country in the world could so boldly inject
itself in the internal affairs of the U.S. without being
called to task. And this incursion comes at a critical and
volatile moment in this country’s political life. Netanyahu
and friends are not just “dabbling’ in our politics; this
is a full court press.
Netanyahu’s mission in the U.S. will
clearly have two objectives: to raise the level of threats
against the government of Iran over its nuclear program
and gain support for Tel Aviv’s continued hold on the occupied
territories in the face of near complete international disapproval.
There is widespread concern that Israel might carry out
a unilateral military attack on Iran at some point between
now and November, confident that Washington would not demur,
this being an election year.
Asserting that an attack on Iran
“could set the entire Middle East aflame,” Lyon wrote on
Salon, “You’d think the Israelis, of all people,
would recognize that threatening a people with death and
destruction hardens their resolve. Yet the New York Times
reports that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu ‘told
visitors that he believes the Tehran government to be deeply
unpopular, indeed despised, and that a careful attack on
its nuclear facilities might even be welcomed by Iranian
citizens.’”
Needless to say, bombs over Bagdad
didn’t bring cheering crowds into the streets, nor would
bombs over Teheran. But of course, Netanyahu knows that.
“Assuming that the Israeli prime
minister’s motives for threatening a unilateral Israeli
strike against Iranian nuclear facilities are as reported
- I suspect they are not,” continued Lyon. “To put it bluntly,
it’s not so much the regime in Tehran that Netanyahu is
keen to destabilize as the one in Washington. The question
now is how far he’s willing to take it.”
Lyon went on to note that in his
State of the Union speech, Obama, while reiterating his
determination to prevent Iran’s getting nuclear weapons,
“also expressed hope that international sanctions could
lead to a peaceful resolution.”
“On cue, Washington Post columnist
Richard Cohen called this ‘startlingly naïve.’ Only a fool
or a Frenchman, the same pundit once opined, could doubt
the existence of Saddam Hussein’s WMD. Bombs away!”
“Netanyahu
appears to see an Obama second term as an impediment to
further Israeli expansion into the West Bank … and has cast
his lot with the Republican right,” Lyon wrote. He noted
that the Israeli leader has made public appearances with
such reactionary notables as Glenn Beck, “End Times” evangelist
John Hagee and multibillionaire Las Vegas casino tycoon
Sheldon Adelson, who has largely financed Newt Gingrich’s
futile attempt to gain momentum in the Republican Presidential
primary race and who has signaled that he is prepared to
throw his weight and his dollars behind anyone in a relentless
drive to defeat Obama.
Rob Kall, editor and publisher of
OpEdNews.com, wrote last week that if there is any
truth in the picture that people like Lyon draw of Israeli
intent to jump into the U.S. Presidential election, “then
progressives need to take action, particularly Jewish progressives.
They (we) need to do a lot more to stand up in opposition
to the right-wingers leading Israel. Democrats need help
articulating a conversation that enables them to support
Israel while opposing the hawkish, politically motivated
threats and machinations purportedly about Iran, but practically,
aimed against US Democrats.”
Interestingly, Bloomfield is clear
on what is at stake in the threat of an attack on Iran.
“Obama can expect to be accused of forcing Israel to attack
by failing to stop the Iranian nuclear program, and blamed
for any Iranian retaliation. War in the Gulf, even a brief
one, will certainly cause a major disruption in oil supplies
and a spike in fuel prices, and if Iran carries through
on its threats to close the Straits of Hormuz, it could
damage an already fragile global economy.
“America is vulnerable to Iranian
retaliation because it has extensive assets in the region,
including ships, bases, tens of thousands of troops and
civilians and many American businesses. Retaliation against
them would trigger a major American military response, sparking
a wider war this country cannot afford.”
“The American public does not want
another war in the Middle East, and President Obama will
be blamed if one erupts, whether triggered by an Israeli
attack or Iranian retaliation,” noted Bloomfield. “Republicans
may criticize the president for cautioning against another
conflict, but Jewish voters, who traditionally support Democrats
3:1, are not likely to shift to the GOP because it bangs
the war drums loudly and wants to follow Netanyahu into
battle with Iran.”
BlackCommentator.com Editorial Board member
Carl Bloice is a writer in San Francisco, a member
of the National Coordinating
Committee of the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy
and Socialism and formerly worked for a healthcare union. Click here to contact Mr. Bloice.
|