Mission & Name
US Foreign Policy (Dr. El-Najjar's Articles)
US Total Paralysis:
Loyalty to Israel Alone, No More Dual Loyalty
By Alan Sabrosky
Redress, Al-Jazeerah, ccun.org, March 29, 2010
Alan Sabrosky argues that US politicians’ loyalty to Israel –
“there isn't any longer even a facade of ‘dual loyalty’, only loyalty to
Israel alone – has reached a point where, despite its enormous power, the US
is totally paralysed in the face of Israel.
Bibi Netanyahu’s babe: kneepad diplomacy lives!
There has been something verging on the surreal in the US-Israel interplay
over the past year or so, culminating in the kick in – er, the face
delivered to Vice-President Biden two weeks ago with Israel's surprise
announcement of yet more new settlement construction, and capped by
Secretary of State Clinton's groveling submission to Netanyahu at a recent
American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) conference. Her speech was
the verbal equivalent of what a White House intern allegedly did for her
husband once (or more) upon a time, supposedly earning "Presidential
Israeli officials have repeatedly not only ignored
but also openly insulted in word or deed the persons or policies of almost
every senior American official with whom they have dealt, including Clinton,
Biden, Middle East envoy George Mitchell and President Obama himself.
they have taken it, one and all, occasionally with brief bursts of verbal
anger that rapidly subsided into yet another steadfast affirmation of the
eternal, undiminished, unchallenged and unchallengeable US willingness to
underwrite the security of Israel, and especially to its absolute
unwillingness to deny Israel a single dollar, bomb or bullet. God knows, I
wish they had even half the same demonstrated commitment to the security of
the United States and the well-being of the American people – but then, no
one can easily serve two masters.
Creating a shambles and calling it policy
Sure, America's Middle East policy is a shambles. America's standing is
much lower now than when Obama came into office. The Iraq war is winding
down, with no certainty at all how that country will go. Afghanistan is a
mess, but then, Alexander the Great couldn't do much with it either, so
that's no surprise. And Israel – not wanting America to be bored with only
one and a half wars – evidently is trying to help by encouraging us into war
with Iran, to spare them the cost of attacking it. Such a friend!
Then there are the long-suffering Palestinians, a people whose situation
Obama himself declared in his one bright moment in Cairo last June to be
"intolerable". Hello? Mr Obama, did you sleep through so many classes that
the meaning of that word slipped past you? Something that is "intolerable"
needs to be put right, and by any objective measure, the US has the power on
absolutely every dimension needed to do just that.
Ah, but that would
mean actually doing something to Israel, or at least withholding something
from it, or perhaps even voting against it in the UN. And that would mean
bypassing Congress and going to the American people. And that isn't going to
happen, at least with this administration. Obama just isn't the man to do
From bad to worse
The whole thing almost reminds me of a turnabout "battered spouse"
exercise, in which the stronger lets the weaker do the beating, murmuring
"now, dear" at intervals but letting the beatings continue. And as usual,
whenever anyone else dares to point out what is happening, the battered
spouse staunchly affirms a determination to stand by the battering partner,
no matter what happens.
What is manifestly going to happen is that a
demonstrably bad situation is going to get worse, and more than a few people
are making that abundantly clear. Probably the only thing that might jolt
the Israeli-dominated train of US Middle East mismanagement off its tracks,
would be a catastrophe following a US strike against Iran producing US
casualties way beyond those from the Vietnam War – something that could
happen all too easily. And then, yet again, there is Gaza and the rest of
the Palestinian Bantustan.
More dangerously, Clinton's hat-in-hand,
I-love-you-now-and-forever verbal burlesque at the AIPAC conference makes
two things abundantly clear. One is the extraordinary extent of Zionist
control within and over the US government – when you hurt someone or some
administration and it comes back for more, you have them. The other is how
little the members of AIPAC themselves, at least nominally US citizens, care
about the US itself – there isn't any longer even a facade of "dual
loyalty", only loyalty to Israel alone.
I am very old-fashioned, and
a decade in the US Marines gave me an odd affinity for qualities such as
pride and loyalty and duty and honour. I'd like to hope that somewhere way
down deep these supposed "leaders" of the most powerful country on earth
would find something of those qualities in themselves, or at least acquire a
sense of shame, and understand that they are there to safeguard America and
Americans, and not to sustain Israeli militarism, racism and colonialism.
If they did, then Israel would find itself confronting sanctions and
embargoes, its aid from the US would end, and the illegal blockade of Gaza
would be forcibly broken – and that would be just for starters.
that, too, isn't likely in the here and now. In the Middle East, as in so
many other areas of public policy, the US government and its so-called
"leaders" simply are not a part of any workable solution. So perhaps we
should just send them all some diplomatic kneepads emblazoned with the Star
of David – although I do wonder what kind of a cigar Netanyahu will flash.
Alan Sabrosky (PhD, University of Michigan) is a 10-year
US Marine Corps veteran and a graduate of the US Army War College. He can be
contacted at firstname.lastname@example.org.