Defending Dennis Ross

In his latest attack on the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, Stephen Walt strikes a note that would have made Joseph McCarthy proud.

BY ROBERT SATLOFF | APRIL 8, 2010

Give Stephen M. Walt his due. After Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's tense visit to Washington last month, a cowardly U.S. government official lobbed an "Israel vs. America" dual loyalty canard at my former colleague, National Security Council advisor Dennis Ross. But while he or she hid behind a cloak of journalistic anonymity shamelessly provided by Politico's Laura Rozen, Walt at least has the gumption to stand up and make his McCarthyite case in his own name. And while Rozen's muse only attacked one person's bona fides, Walt pilloried the professional credentials of several dozen of our nation's leading Middle East experts.

For the record, Ross, who was a distinguished fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP) throughout George W. Bush's administration, has been advancing U.S. interests in peace and security for the past quarter-century. He is now working at a senior level for his fourth president -- two Democrats, two Republicans -- and has the battle scars that come with his membership in the increasingly narrow circle of bipartisan foreign-policy practitioners. Our nation could use fewer Walts and a lot more Rosses.

Of course, "McCarthyite" is a term one should be reluctant to throw around, but I can think of no more accurate word for fact-free accusations designed to smear reputations with an appeal to patriotism. What else is one to make of Walt's rhetorical question: "Isn't it obvious that U.S. policy towards the Middle East is likely to be skewed when former employees of WINEP or AIPAC have important policy-making roles, and when their own prior conduct has made it clear that they have a strong attachment to one particular country in the region?"

I cannot speak for other organizations, but I can speak for current and former employees of The Washington Institute. What "prior conduct" is he talking about? To which country do we allegedly have a "strong attachment"?

Our foreign-born scholars hail from virtually every country in the Middle East -- Turkey, Iran, Israel, and at least a dozen different Arab countries. It is true that some have strong attachments to their native lands. One went on to serve as senior aide to the Jordanian foreign minister, another is now an advisor to the French Foreign Ministry, and a third is currently a Lebanese diplomat. Our first Arab resident scholar was Saad Eddin Ibrahim, an Egyptian patriot if there ever was one. But I think Walt had something else in mind.

As for U.S. citizens on our staff, their suspicious "prior conduct" includes 35 years in the Defense Intelligence Agency (Jeffrey White), 30 years at the State Department and the old U.S. Information Agency (David Pollock), and tours of duty at the State Department, the FBI and the Treasury Department, the Pentagon, and the National Defense University (Scott Carpenter, Matthew Levitt, David Schenker, and Patrick Clawson, respectively). And then there are the dozen U.S. Air Force officers who have each spent nearly a year as national defense fellows, as well as the Foreign Service officers and Defense Intelligence Agency analysts who have been on loan to us from their home agencies. By Walt's arguments, all these public servants should be precluded from high office. But still, I think Walt had something else in mind.

And to which Middle Eastern country does Walt believe that I, director of WINEP for the past 17 years, have a "strong attachment?" Is it Jordan, where I studied at a university in Yarmouk and about which I have written two books and my Oxford dissertation? Or perhaps Morocco, where I lived with my family for more than two years and where I wrote two other books? No, it seems Walt had something more nefarious in mind.

LUKE FRAZZA/AFP/Getty Images

 

Robert Satloff is executive director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

SMCI60652

7:19 PM ET

April 8, 2010

Whatever dude

You can never alter the fact that WINEP is a creation of AIPAC and AIPAC openly advertises itself as "America's Pro-Israel Lobby." It's on the front page of their friggin' website!

So we can go round and round in this little tongue-in-cheek game that we all agree to play with our little looks and smurks in the beltway. But just like Bibi likes to say... "Everyone Knows" what the real deal is with WINEP.

WINEP is simply their to lend clout and credence and provide Pro-Israel staff to the executive branch, because AIPAC advertised its role just a little too well to pull off direct staffing.

Here's a challenge... anyone point to ONE SINGLE publication, whether it be from an Arab scholar or Non Arab scholar at WINEP, criticizing Israel (and no, not the "Israel took it too easy on Hamas or Hezbollah in this situation - that was a mistake" ruse), and we'll talk.

Until then, save your bologne for someone else Satloff.

 

BABAZULA

9:40 PM ET

April 9, 2010

Walt´s Response to Satloff´s desperate excuses

http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/04/09/robert_satloff_doth_protest_too_much

 

MILAGRO

6:15 PM ET

April 10, 2010

Apologetic nonsense

Dennis Ross is a neoconservative, affiliated with AIPAC. Ross is more interested in the advances of Israeli interests than that of the USA. He is directly responsible for trying to impose a non viable bantustan state for the Palestinians in Camp David 2000. Ross ignored international law and thought that the Palestinians would adhere to the bullying, bribing, blackmailing tactics of his team to accept Israeli needs, instead of Palestinian rights. His book about the Camp David exposes the contempt he had for the Palestinian negotiators and his sorry excuses for having failed the negotiations. Dennis Ross is a fraud and a despicable person, and should be regarded as such.

 

ARGONNE18

7:36 PM ET

April 8, 2010

Dennis Ross, His agenda is Israel uber alles

Walt is absolutely correct in raising questions about to whom Ross is loyal. There is not anything that the aggressive expansionst, apartheid nuclear armed, jewish supremacy, state of Israel that Ross would not condone or cheerlead for. Dual loyalty....you betcha. He's NOT QUITE Richarld Perle, Feith, Wolfawitz, Libby, Larry Franklin, Martin Indyk, Jane Harman, Jack Abramoff, Marc Rich, or Jonathon Pollard. They are hall of famers. They have all lost jobs for leaking or passing documents to Israel, or passing ginned up bogus intelligence to get us into war on Israel's behaf. They should be in prison......bubba drop the soap prison! Ross is not quite a hall of famer but his numbers are deserving of consideration. Like Rahm Emanuel, who, while the US was at war, went to Israel to put on an ISRAELI UNIFORM. Rahm doesn't like to talk about it much. You know how heroes are.....and I don't see him down at the American Legion much. These guys should not be trusted with a security clearance. Our country ( America) cannot afford it. Perhaps the Bureau of Weights and Measurements!

 

RBRADL

3:01 AM ET

April 9, 2010

Ross

I agree - Ross is a proven apologist for egregious Israeli behavior over the last 45 years that I remember. Thanks to Walt and Miersheimer and other pioneers the US public are now finally seeing through the myths and propaganda that AIPAC and this hack have been propagating. Their main goal has been to protect the myth of Israeli democracy and Israeli victimhood by equating Israel with the Holocaust. i.e. you cannot criticize the Holocaust belief and you cannot criticize Israel. If you criticize AIPAC and their subsidiaries you are cast as an anti-semite. Meanwhile, they have indulged in a dishonest land-grab that has placed half a million Jews living on the Palestinian homeland and produced misery and pain for the Palestinians that is the equivalent of a holocaust. This AIPAC control of our government has finally been unmasked by loyal Americans who now make the point that our close relationship with Israel is endangering our country and our armed forces. Tragically, this has been caused by the treacherous activities of Israel who have disrespected the loyalty and support that the US has showered on Israel since WW2. I, for one, have recently realized this because of the behavior of the Israeli government who have resisted our attempts to help them solve their serious international problems and establish the 2-state solution that they had seemingly accepted. They have simply revealed that they had no interest in peace at all but were hoping that the Palestinians would go the same way as the American Indians. Another trick the Jews have used is to develop a sparing language that can easily classify thoughts and statements (equating them all with words like "holocaust denier") and thereby be used to exclude criticism or even argument. Such a word is "canard" - Israel partisans use it all the time. It is used to describe any criticism of Israel as a hoax. The old anti-semite canard has lost its bite - it has been overused and overplayed for too long. In my opinion, in the last year only, millions of Americans have seen the light. AIPAC had better readjust if they are able. I doubt it. The current diatribe complete with "canard" against Walt proves my contention. The establishment of J-Street as an honest and open version of AIPAC with the goal of a 2-state solution, has made it fashionable to argue with Israel again.

 

JUST A NORMAL GUY-THE ORIGINAL

8:03 PM ET

April 8, 2010

TO ROBERT SATTLOF

WELL MR SATTLOF I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT YOU OUR LITTERALLY THE BEST ARABIC SPEACHER I HAVE EVER HERD, MUCH BETTER THAN MANY NATIVE-BORN ARABIAN'S I HAVE LISTENED TO THEM SPEAKING. WELL IF YOU EVER WANT TO GIVE AN ARAB LANGUAGE LESSON I AM 'ALL EARS'

 

SEANMCBRIDE

11:10 PM ET

April 8, 2010

Robert Satloff: Pro-Israel activists and WINEP funding

A few questions for Robert Satloff:

What percentage of WINEP's funding comes from pro-Israel activists at the neconservative/neoliberal end of the political spectrum?

One notices that some of the following names -- key members of the Israel lobby -- have been associated with WINEP: Cheryl Halpern, Daniel Pipes, David Makovsky, John Hannah, Joshua Muravchik, Martin Kramer, Martin Peretz, Max Kampelman, Mortimer Zuckerman, Paul Wolfowitz, R. James Woolsey and Richard Perle.

Also: didn't WINEP play a lead role in coordination with other neoconservative policy centers in promoting the trillion dollar foreign policy disaster in Iraq? Is WINEP a spinoff of AIPAC, and basically one of dozens of tentacles of the Israel lobby?

Regarding Dennis Ross: he seems to be working against the American government and on behalf of the most extreme right-wing regime in Israeli history to relieve pressure on Netanyahu and Lieberman to halt the development of illegal Jewish settlements in the occupied territories. The entire international community strongly opposes those settlements, but Ross apparently is tone deaf on the matter.

What's up with that? And are you on the same page with Dennis Ross? The emotional (almost hysterical) tone of your attack on Stephen Walt suggests that you are.

An interesting and fateful pattern to track: attacks by pro-Israel activists on Americans on behalf of Israeli interests -- probably a self-defeating and losing activity over the long run, for all the obvious and commonsense reasons.

 

AMADIB

11:22 PM ET

April 8, 2010

Really? Wow...

Rahm Emanuel Really Served in the Gulf War with an Israeli Uniform? Why don't we hear about this anywhere?

 

STRATEGIC DISCOURSE

11:59 PM ET

April 8, 2010

I'll add my two cents... I actually worked at WINEP

In 2002, after finishing undergrad studies I interned at the Washington Institute, and had the opportunity to meet and work with Dennis Ross, Matthew Levitt, Michael Eisenstadt, Avi Jorisch, and many others. Since then I have continued with my studies in and passion for both international affairs and defense.
.
I know that Institute has continued to develop and expand since my brief stint at WINEP, but even at that time the organization was comprised of Jews, Gentiles (for lack of a better word), Arabs, and Turks... all interested in Near East and Southwest Asian affairs. Certainly there were differences in opinion as the to political, security, and social relationships between Israel, Palestine, Turkey, Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Saudi, etc. Indeed, I would say that you could find perspectives across the political spectrum, as you would with most policy institutes in DC.
.
If it is worth anything to the characterization of the Institute, I am from Scandinavian Lutheran ancestry, and there are many policy areas where I am deeply critical of Israel, the PA, HAMAS, their neighboring countries in the Middle East and Levant, and of course the US as well.
.
I don't wish or intend to be apologetic or overly defensive of the Washington Institute. Like any organization, large or small, it had / has its issues. When dealing with politically sensitive matters, there is always going to be challenge to find balance - whether that is within your own personal belief system and constructs, or within a policy institute. All in all, however, I thought it was a great experience, with individuals who were knowledgeable and passionate, and within an organization that allowed for debate. These experiences undoubtedly helped prepare me for my postgraduate work and my continuation in the field of international security affairs.
.
My point is, when you are disconnected from something, be it government, the Armed Services, think tanks or whatever, it is easy to form generalized opinions based on little more than conjecture or even weak anecdotal evidence. I'm sure there will be some who will lambast me for this statement, and that's fine... you're entitled to your views. I just wanted to add my personal experience to this discussion.

 

STRATEGIC DISCOURSE

12:06 AM ET

April 9, 2010

one more comment...

I understand Rob Satloff's anger at what he perceived to be an egregious slight. Be that as it may, Rob's critique could have been written with a cooler mind and more professional demeanor. Respect to Rob, but I wanted to say it.

 

SMCI60652

6:57 AM ET

April 9, 2010

Fair enough

Thanks for your input about your experience.

Although what ultimately matters isn't the ethnic diversity of the organization, it's the political diversity that you claimed.

For CAIR could go and establish some benign-sounding institute, and hire for its employ the likes of Norm Finklestein or Noam Chomsky and go on to say "AHA! See! We employ Jews, therefore we're fair to Israel!"

No one would buy that.

Or it could go on to employ establishmentarians whose sole purpose in scholarship is to offer apologetics for the paradigm of the nation from which they hail, which Lo and Behold, ALSO happens to serve the predetermined interests of their lobby.

Such is the case with WINEP. Pro-Israel Jews and Gentiles, and self-hating Arabs who'll look for any platform to shout their views from.

I say again, the day WINEP truely employs a scholar who genuinely questions the "special relationship" and its limits, the day they host open seminars on this issue, THAT'S the day we'll believe that it is truely a "scholarly and diverse institute."

 

SMCI60652

7:01 AM ET

April 9, 2010

Thanks for your input about

Thanks for your input about your experience.

Although what ultimately matters isn't the ethnic diversity of the organization, it's the political diversity that you claimed.

For CAIR could go and establish some benign-sounding institute, and hire for its employ the likes of Norm Finklestein or Noam Chomsky and go on to say "AHA! See! We employ Jews, therefore we're fair to Israel!"

No one would buy that.

Or it could go on to employ establishmentarians whose sole purpose in scholarship is to offer apologetics for the paradigm of the nation from which they hail, which Lo and Behold, ALSO happens to serve the predetermined interests of their lobby.

Such is the case with WINEP. Pro-Israel Jews and Gentiles, and self-hating Arabs who'll look for any platform to shout their views from.

I say again, the day WINEP truely employs a scholar who genuinely questions the "special relationship" and its limits, the day they host open seminars on this issue, THAT'S the day we'll believe that it is truely a "scholarly and diverse institute."

 

SMCI60652

11:25 AM ET

April 9, 2010

Just to give you a few examples

Sorry for the dual post above

Here are all of the listed Arabs, Turks and Persians on WINEPs staff and their recent publications, just to give you an idea of what little they have to say about Israel, much less offer criticism, and how central the criticism of anything remotely "Islamic" is to their scholarship:

Soner Cagaptay, Turk

http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/templateC06.php?CID=1440

Where he decries the democratically and duly elected AK Party's crackdown on coup-plotting secular fascist generals as some sort of 'Putin-esque' purge of innocent liberal patriots.

He has written on Turkish relations with Israel, but surprise surprise, the article is basically a whipping of the AK Party for failing to honor Turkey's quiet, unquestioning relationship with Israel.

Mehdi Khalaji, Persian

http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/templateC06.php?CID=1405

Titled: The Iranian Republic of Fear

Self explanatory. He has no known public mention of Israel, much less criticism of it.

Hassan Barari, Jordanian Arab

http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/templateC05.php?CID=3123

His most recent book, "Israelism," is a critical look at Israel studies in Arab countries and its failures, not the other way around. Again, he's analyzing the problems and failures of Arabs, not even getting close to criticising Israel.

Nazar Janabi, Iraqi Arab

http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/templateC11.php?CID=513

Never has said a word on-the-record, never written an article, or given an interview about his views of Israel.

Mohammad Yaghi, Palestinian Arab

http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/templateC11.php?CID=516

Virtually every article he's written for the institute has been an analysis and criticism of Hamas and Fatah, not Israel or its potential mistakes, even if they were tactical. This Palestinian Arab from Ramallah has written multiple times in WINEPs policy review, and yet there isn't ONE SINGLE criticism of Israel in ANY of his writings. How is that possible?

Ahmed Ali, Iraqi Kurd (?)

http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/templateC10.php?CID=70

No single public record of ever talking about Israel, much less criticizing it.

Saad Eddin Ibrahim, Egyptian Arab

Satloff's mentioning Ibrahim requires a bit of nuance. Ibrahim may be classified by WINEP as their "First Arab Resident Scholar," but he only wrote one major piece for them which encapsulated his views on how Sadat's peace deal with Israel was vidicated. And that was almost two decades ago. My guess is that Ibrahim may not be so comfortably received back into WINEP considering his open criticism of the previous administration's policies in the region since then. So Satloff is a bit disingenuous, to say the least.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/22/AR2006082200978.html

So the record speaks for itself.

 

SARK

12:52 AM ET

April 9, 2010

1st commenter got it right

Whatever dude is probably the best response possible. Mr. Satloff pretty obviously came completely unhinged in the writing of this hysterical rant and can hardly be taken seriously. But I'll raise a few points anyway.

Was WINEP created by AIPAC? It's a simple question. With a simpler answer.

Mr Satloff, telling us how many Washington establishment types are affiliated with your think-tank doesn't really impress us. Nor does telling us that Dennis Ross has worked for multiple administrations. That kind of proves the point that critics of the US' Israel policy are usually trying to make. Namely, that the US' overt and undeserved favoritism toward Israel is largely unaffected by which political party is in power (and among the political class, their opinion is nearly unanimously pro-Israel).

 

JACOB BLUES

1:00 AM ET

April 9, 2010

Stop beating around teh bush and let's call it what it is

Walt has a problem with Jews, and his hatred shows through whatever scholarship he claims to wield.
.
It's not realism that pushes Professor Walt to his demonization of American Jews, but outright Jew hatred.
.

 

SARK

1:16 AM ET

April 9, 2010

Such an old radical

Such an old radical pro-Israel trick. What would you say about American (and otherwise) Jews who agree with Walt? Not just on this point, but largely with regards to Israel?

 

ZATHRAS

1:03 AM ET

April 9, 2010

Not Defending Dennis Ross

This is not a defense of Dennis Ross against Stephen Walt's distasteful insinuations.

It's an attack on Walt, and a reminder to me of why "academic" is one of my least favorite words. These folks write about policy and policymakers as a way to score points off one another. Just look at this piece; it has two paragraphs that mention Ross, mostly to talk about his having served under Presidents of both parties. All the rest is rhetoric -- why doesn't Walt accuse A or B or C or D of having dual loyalties? Huh? Huh?

I don't think much of what Walt had to say about Ross in his blog. I think his imputation of motive was wrong and an injustice to someone who has done more in public service than Walt ever has. Ross deserves better in his defense than some academic hissy fit, which is what he gets here.

 

EW66

12:29 PM ET

April 9, 2010

That's because the main point

That's because the main point really isn't about Ross. It's about how "dual loyalty" accusations COULD be made across the board. Walt is clearly selective in his finger pointing given what Satloff points out and in maintaining his distinguished whistle blower status (what a FP niche!) on the Israel lobby. Walt's an entertainer and a bit of a....nevermind.

 

SIR_MIXXALOT

2:02 AM ET

April 9, 2010

Help me! Please define the special Relationship.

Help me! Please define the special Relationship.

So, OMG, I am, like, totally confused -- what is the "special relationship" between US and Israel?

I mean, like, I know we give them shit loads of money but what do they do for us -- besides make us a target of terrorism?

I mean, like, what has Israel done for the US, lately?

And....nooooooooooo, Israel ain't no democracy: it is part ethnocarcy and part Apartheid.

It is not a member of the NPT.

It has nukes -- that it stole from the US.

When do we sanction it?

 

YASEEN

5:35 AM ET

April 9, 2010

Article lacks truth, glad the comments section is opposite

It is encouraging to see that the people reading and commenting on rubbish articles like the one written here do not share the view of the writer. It is about time that the US rids itself of the Israeli-burden that has done nothing but damage the US reputation internationally.

Sanity needs to prevail after more than 60 years of an illegal and brutal occupation that has entailed the murder, torture and humiliation of the Palestinian people and this is all done with the aid and approval of the US. America can in no way pretend to be the moral champion of the world when one considers this fact and the illegal wars it has been fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. The holocaust is no excuse for what Israeli's are doing to the Palestinians and it is in no way fair to compare the freedom struggle of the Palestinians to terrorism.

Let's hope Obama and ordinary decent Americans will push for a peaceful settlement to this gruesome US/Isreali injustice.

 

SEANMCBRIDE

8:50 AM ET

April 9, 2010

Right Web on the Israel lobby and WINEP

From the Right Web entry on WINEP:

http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Washington_Institute_for_Near_East_Policy

"The Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP) is one of a handful of influential U.S. policy institutions—sometimes referred to as the “Israel Lobby”—whose central aim is to push an Israel-centric Middle East agenda. Many of WINEP’s current and former scholars have been closely associated with neoconservatism, and the organization has been supportive of many of the same “war on terror” policies pushed by groups like the American Enterprise Institute (AEI)."

And:

"Founded in 1985 by Martin Indyk, a former research director of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), WINEP was conceived as a think tank focused primarily on influencing the executive branch while AIPAC remained focused on lobbying congress."

And:

"Although WINEP plays down its links to Israel, claiming instead to provide a 'balanced and realistic' perspective on Middle East issues, it is funded by individuals deeply committed to advancing Israel's agenda." They continue: "The Lobby's influence extends well beyond WINEP, however. Over the past 25 years, pro-Israel forces have established a commanding presence at the American Enterprise Institute, the Brookings Institution, the Center for Security Policy, the Foreign Policy Research Institute, the Heritage Foundation, the Hudson Institute, the Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis, and the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA). These think tanks employ few, if any, critics of U.S. support for Israel.""

Be sure to read the entire entry for important details.

Question: why has a supposed "liberal" like Dennis Ross been mixed up with so many hardline neoconservatives at WINEP? Perhaps he isn't what he claims to be, and has burrowed into the Democratic Party with the objective of sabotaging the Mideast peace process, not promoting it. Two words: Likud mole.

It came as no surprise to some observers when Ross sided with the Israeli government over the American government with regard to Likud's continuing settlements program in East Jerusalem. It couldn't be more obvious that Ross is very much preoccupied with Israeli interests in an emotional and ideological way that undermines his judgment in rationally calculating the American interest.

 

SMCI60652

2:02 PM ET

April 9, 2010

You forgot something

""Founded in 1985 by Martin Indyk, a former research director of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), WINEP was conceived as a think tank focused primarily on influencing the executive branch while AIPAC remained focused on lobbying congress."

WINEP was co-founded by Indyk and ONE OTHER person.

Anyone want to venture a guess?

Let me help you:

http://books.google.com/books?id=U5INKlOqNeAC&pg=PA39&lpg=PA39&dq=winep+ross&source=web&ots=9i0jHJyhP_&sig=jk-g2koGEho7pGsqaGWZ78m2NfQ#v=onepage&q=winep%20ross&f=false

Yes, it is none other than... DENNIS ROSS.

 

JJH722

9:56 AM ET

April 9, 2010

ugh. please. his article was

ugh. please. his article was entirely appropriate. stop pretending that putting jewish americans entirely in charge of israel policy doesn't compromise our position on that issue. Jewish Americans have contributed more than, perhaps, any other ethnic group to this country. on this SINGLE ISSUE, however, it is clearly inappropriate to put all responsibility in the hands of a group that is inevitably biased towards a particular outcome. It's like ted kennedy being biased towards the Irish. I wouldn't have sent him to badger the British during that conflict, and we shouldn't send people who, even if they aren't biased, give that impression because of their ethnicity. Can you IMAGINE the reaction if Obama suddenly replaced these officials with a largely arab contingent? It would be madness. And the outcry would be justified, because the optics of such a move would destroy credibility with Israelis. Why, then, are we so quick to undercut our credibility with Arabs by sending Jewish Americans to resolve the conflict? They are at least unfairly perceived to be, and at most definitely are. biased towards the Israeli side. It doesn't matter which--either one undercuts our position. And our position should be the paramount concern of this country. Not the electoral dilemmas of a batshit crazy Israeli government.

 

F1FAN

10:12 AM ET

April 9, 2010

Mr. Satloff makes some very good points

Yet Walt is right. WINEP hasn't done anything to advance peace in the middle and only exists to make sure that Washington's Middle East policies put Israel first no matter what the cost.

The proof is in the policy, and Mr. Satloff , no matter where he's studied or traveled, is an Israeli schill.

 

BETZ55

10:54 AM ET

April 9, 2010

Well said

Well said and entirely agree. Satloff is just a schill for Israel. Shame.

 

SIR_MIXXALOT

10:31 AM ET

April 9, 2010

Help me! Please define the

Help me! Please define the special Relationship.

So, OMG, I am, like, totally confused -- what is the "special relationship" between US and Israel?

I mean, like, I know we give them shit loads of money but what do they do for us -- besides make us a target of terrorism?

I mean, like, what has Israel done for the US, lately?

And....nooooooooooo, Israel ain't no democracy: it is part ethnocarcy and part Apartheid.

It is not a member of the NPT.

It has nukes -- that it stole from the US.

When do we sanction it?

 

SIR_MIXXALOT

10:38 AM ET

April 9, 2010

I am a Jew

Ross is a proven apologist for egregious Israeli behavior over the last 45 years. Thanks to Walt and Miersheimer and other pioneers the US public are now finally seeing through the myths and propaganda that AIPAC, WINEP and this hack have been propagating.

Their main goal has been to protect the myth of Israeli "democracy" (Apartheid) and Israeli victimhood by equating Israel with the Holocaust. i.e. you cannot criticize the Holocaust belief and you cannot criticize Israel. If you criticize AIPAC and their subsidiaries you are cast as an anti-semite.

Meanwhile, they have indulged in a dishonest land-grab that has placed half a million Jews living on the Palestinian homeland and produced misery and pain for the Palestinians that is the equivalent of a holocaust. This AIPAC control of our government has finally been unmasked by loyal Americans who now make the point that our close relationship with Israel is endangering our country and our armed forces.

Tragically, this has been caused by the treacherous activities of Israel who have disrespected the loyalty and support that the US has showered on Israel since WW2. I, for one, have recently realized this because of the behavior of the Israeli government who have resisted our attempts to help them solve their serious international problems and establish the 2-state solution that they had seemingly accepted. They have simply revealed that they had no interest in peace at all but were hoping that the Palestinians would go the same way as the American Indians.

Another trick the Israelis have used is to develop a sparing language that can easily classify thoughts and statements (equating them all with words like "holocaust denier") and thereby be used to exclude criticism or even argument. Such a word is "canard" - Israel partisans use it all the time. It is used to describe any criticism of Israel as a hoax.

The old anti-semite canard has lost its bite - it has been overused and overplayed for too long. In my opinion, in the last year only, millions of Americans have seen the light.

AIPAC had better readjust if they are able. I doubt it. The current diatribe complete with "canard" against Walt proves my contention. The establishment of J-Street as an honest and open version of AIPAC with the goal of a 2-state solution, has made it fashionable to argue with Israel again.

I am a Jew.

Since the early 20th century, Zionists have waged a relentless campaign to equate their political movement with the Jewish religion. They have largely succeeded; in the eyes of many, Zionism and Judaism are one and the same, and opposition to Zionism becomes opposition to Judaism. But that doesn't change the fact that the two are antithetical.

I am a Jew, and I know from my religious education that if the Jewish people are to attain the Holy Land, it will be through the Messiah, and not with guns.

Jews are taught to heal the world ("tikkun olam"), not to displace families, create refugee camps, and practice collective punishment such as that used against Jews in the past.

So long as this confounding of Zionism with Judaism continues, it will sow anti-Semitism. But, in the end, anti-Semitism serves the Zionist ideology.

 

BETZ55

10:55 AM ET

April 9, 2010

Thank You

Well said and succint as always.

 

ARGONNE18

12:41 PM ET

April 9, 2010

Bravo Sir Mixalot!

Amen brother!

 

BOUGHETTO

6:02 PM ET

April 9, 2010

Respect

well said.

 

BUDAHH

1:10 PM ET

April 9, 2010

Great article thanks, all you Israel haters becoming antisemites

That is what became of Israel haters they are slowly becoming antisemites, it is O.K not to agree with Israel and it's policies, BUT when the hate becomes blind to all the accusations and stories, it makes Israel haters sound like antisemites.
You guys are coming up with some conspiracy theories that steven spilberg should buy from you. Just blame jews all over the world especially in America for every problem this world has. Is Israel really the most terrible country on Earth, even you guys with your blind hate know it is not true yet you still focus unproportional attention to Israel .
I have to say that the arabs lost a lot of wars besides this one of spreading propoganda of hate and lies about Israel and you guys are drinking it like thirsty man. Look into yourselves before you blame us for all the world's problems.
SIR MIXALOT if you don't know about the special relationship I can tell you that Israel has saved a lot of american lives in Iraq and in Afgahnistan, thanks to our extensive experiance with terror, we have developed warfare and spacial equipment which is saving U.S lives we have a company that makes special armor for U.S vehicles and saving lives because we have been dealing with the same type of bombs when you guys didn't even know what an IED was, We develop special technology togethere like defensive missiles, and sophisticated technological systems, America has it's military staches in Israel, we are the only true pro Americam country in the middle east. We give the U.S a lot of Intelligence since we are pretty good and have some talanted spies that also saves u.s lives.
There are a lot more things you don't know about, we share technology and high tech, we have some of the best medical invensions so we do a lot for the world not just the U.S. How much is the U,S spending to spread democracy In iraq and afghanistan when it already has a living one which is a true ally and friend. So 3 billion is a small price.

 

ARGONNE18

1:20 PM ET

April 9, 2010

I'm glad youare fimally saying "we" BUDAHH"

Not that we didn't already know where you are coming from. Nothing "dual" about you....

 

BUDAHH

1:53 PM ET

April 9, 2010

BASE

That is a FALSE argument you are making, please bring me proof that American soldiers are getting killed because of Israel, you think that America attacked afghanistan because of Israel, who has created the taliban to fight the soviets, it wasn't Israel.
Israel didn't like Sadam Hussain and we are not sorry he is gone but we had nothing to do with Iraq.
Iran is the one who is killing soldiers, all those IED's that are deadly are made in Iran. the Iranians know that if there will be a stable Iraq with democracy than Iranians will want the same and that is the end of the ragime, they can't let that happen, they are sponsoring the shia militias there, Sunni groups are coming from syria, how does Israel have to do with that? because muslim countries who support terror say that Israel is the Issue it means it's true???
How many Palestinians are fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan that you know of?
By the way we never had Al Qaeda on our boarders before and now we have them in Gaza since the war on terror started, and they took part in the kidnaping of an Israeli soldier on the gaza strip in 2006 .
Please bring me proof besides what you hear around.

 

SMCI60652

2:57 PM ET

April 9, 2010

Budahh, the 'proofs' you wanted

The United States tolerated the Taliban regime from its fledgling in 1996 to October of 2001.

The only reason we saw fit to go to war and change that regime is because it was sheltering the leadership of Al Qaeda, who carried out the attacks on 9/11. Not the Kenya and Tanzania embassy bombings, nor the the USS Cole incident prompted the US to go to all-out war, it was only an attack on the homeland.

So that 's what it took for the US to get entangled in its Afghan War. Causa Profundus: Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda.

-Then-

The Bush Administration, along with what they believed to be was sound intel on WMDs postulated that a credible threat would be Saddam Hussein handing off said weapons to a terrorist group such as Al Qaeda, and resulting in the oft-repeated "Mushroom Cloud." So we went to war with Iraq to change that regime.

On WMDs: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxhIkzTg14M
On Al Qaeda and Saddam Collusion: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDz6e7CdmbA

A major cause of the Iraq War? Again: Osama bin Laden and the thought that he may get dirty weapons.

So we've determined what functions as a profound [though obviously not only] cause of both wars that the United States is entangled in. The spectre of Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda.

So naturally it would make sense that if Al Qaeda is functioning as such a nuisance as to get the United States involved in two costly wars, that we try to determine why they are so peeved.

What's the easiest way to do this? Listen to what they openly say is the reason why they're so worked up.

Tayseer al-Alouni of Al Jazeera carried out a rather lengthy interview with Bin Laden which was picked up by CNN just 3 weeks after 9/11, in which Bin Laden spells out his concerns.

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/south/02/05/binladen.transcript/index.html

Excerpts concerning Israel:

-- "The U.S. government will lead the American people and the West in general will enter an unbearable hell and a choking life because the Western leadership acts under the Zionist lobby's influence for the purpose of serving Israel, which kills our sons unlawfully in order for them to remain in their leadership positions."

-- "Clinton has said, "Israel has the right to defend itself," after the massacres of Qana. He didn't even reprimand Israel. When the new President Bush and Colin Powell declared in the first few months of their taking office that they will move the American embassy to Jerusalem. They said Jerusalem will be the eternal capital of Israel. They got a standing ovation in Congress and the Senate. This is the biggest bigotry, and this is tyranny loud and clear."

-- "I said Americans take our money and give it to Israel to kill our children in Palestine. I established a front a few years ago named The Islamic Front for Jihad against the Jews and the Crusaders. Sometimes we find the right elements to push for one cause more than the other. Last year's blessed intifada helped us to push more for the Palestinian issue. This push helps the other cause. Attacking America helps the cause of Palestine and vice versa. No conflict between the two; on the contrary, one serves the other."

-- "Not all terrorism is cursed; some terrorism is blessed. A thief, a criminal, for example feels terrorized by the police. So, do we say to the policeman, "You are a terrorist"? No. Police terrorism against criminals is a blessed terrorism because it will prevent the criminal from repeating his deed. America and Israel exercise the condemned terrorism. We practice the good terrorism which stops them from killing our children in Palestine and elsewhere."

-- "America forced itself and its people in this [unintelligible] more than 53 years ago. It recognized Israel and supported its creation financially. In 1973, under Nixon, it supported Israel with men, weapons and ammunition from Washington all the way to Tel Aviv. This support helped change the course of history. It is the Muslim's duty to fight. ... "

-- "We swore that America wouldn't live in security until we live it truly in Palestine. This showed the reality of America, which puts Israel's interest above its own people's interest. America won't get out of this crisis until it gets out of the Arabian Peninsula, and until it stops its support of Israel. This equation can be understood by any American child, but Bush, because he's an Israeli agent, cannot understand this equation unless the swords threatened him above him head."

The last excerpt is especially poignant.

So it's blatantly obvious that to our enemies, Israel is a root cause of what drives them to the conflict.

Let's also keep in mind the costs of the resultant wars.

These wars have caused:

Afghanistan Military Fatalities: 1031 as of 3/31/2010
Iraq Military Fatalities: 4385 as of 3/18/2010

Afghanistan Wounded: 5188 as of 3/31/2010
Iraq Wounded: 31716 as of 3/31/2010

Cost of Afghanistan War to the U.S.: $262.635 bn
Cost of Iraq War to the U.S.: $714.880 bn

Logical conclusions from the above facts?

a. Israeli oppression is cited by Al Qaeda's top ranks as a profound cause of their struggle against a complicit United States.

b. We fight wars in Afghanistan and Iraq because we believe Al Qaeda is a credible threat to our people, having cited our supposed complicity.

c. We lose over 6000 of our troops and bring home nearly another 40,000 injured. All at a cost of nearly a trillion dollars.

Elementary algebra pop-quiz folks:

If A = B, and B=C

Does A also equal C?

 

BUDAHH

3:56 PM ET

April 9, 2010

Base

I don't suggest that you are antisemitic, you have a right to think that but I just think that you are wrong, I didn't suggest that people who disagree with our policies or are against supporting Israel are antisemitic, i only meant people who single out jews and blame them for all kinds of lies and fairytales. Look the only true and I mean true ally in the whole middle east is Israel.
Maybe sometimes the U.S has to take some heat for Israel but allies do those things for each other.
The U.S army finds weapons in Iraq which have the Iranian Military industries logos on them, the u.s has arrested Iranian agents and you can ask any U.S general or newspaper.
It is time we make nice with our neighboors? We tried to do so and we always want real peace, we made a lot of concessions, we cleared the gaza strip unilatterally same with lebanon, we released lots of prisoners, we halted all the building of all settlements in the west bank, no government has ever done that before, yet the palestinians are refusing to negotiate, we made peace with Jordan and with Egypt, we tried lots of times with the palestinians yet we can't achieve peace right now.

General portreaus said that his words were taken out of context, and Biden denied saying those things you suggested, they said that it will probably make it easier for the U.S to achieve it's startegic goals in the region if there was peace nothing about dead u.s soldiers.

 

BUDAHH

4:12 PM ET

April 9, 2010

SMCI

You have some fuzzy math, and we are obviously not talking numbers, You have to look into the founders of Al Qaeda and it's ideological origins to understand their antiwest ideology, Sayid Qutub and his likes, all of those things were created in Egypt before there was the 1967 war and before Israel was on the world map.
Osama bin laden is always saying that Israel is the cause because it sounds good, otherwise he will find another reason to hate, those who choose to hate and murder will do so no matter what the reason is, How come people in Africa are not commiting sucide and blowing themselves up in the name of god, they suffer far more oppression than any people on earth.
It is the ideology which is the problem here fanatic muslims which want to make the world a sharia state under muslim rule, when they tried to blow up the world trade center for the first time it wasn't because of Israel but they decided that this time it was.
They don't like the west and what it stands for, you cannot explain that the only way to help the palestinians is to fight America, if they cared about it so much they will come to Lebanon or Gaza and fight with Israel directly why fight with America.

 

SMCI60652

5:00 PM ET

April 9, 2010

You're right

I forgot. Kenya, Tanzania, Egypt, Morocco, Nigeria and Somalia aren't in Africa.

And you can cite Sayyid Qutb and Global Islamic Conpiracies against "The West" all you want, but the fact remains that prior to 9/11 neither Al Qaeda, nor anyone else ever carried out an attack against any Western Nation other than the US. The French-Algerian episode aside.

In fact, it was only after certain nations' involvment in the two ill-fated wars that attacks against them were carried out. Witness London and Madrid for example.

So why the US and not say... Sweden? Or Germany? In fact, come to think of it, when Black September struck in Munich, they weren't targetting Germans or "Westerners." Who were they targetting, again? And they sure-as-hell didn't have anything to do with Qutb.

So you can deny and obfuscate all you want, it still doesn't change the objective reality of the situation.

The Qutbian scapegoat : Pro-Israel fanatics :: the Protocols : Anti-semites.

 

BUDAHH

7:36 PM ET

April 9, 2010

I don't get it

You are proving my point for me, you mentioned all those countries in Africa which had terror attacks in them and guess what relious affiliation all those attckers had, not jewish and not christian. I forgot to add besides Muslim countries.
You are forgetting that there were a lot of attcks before 9-11, /Israel is a western nation, Lockerbie, and I don't get your point about the fact that attcks on other western countries only started after 9-11 you are saying that it is a way of fighting back, terror, what are you trying to say, it is the west's fault that it is being attcked because it is in Iraq and Afghanistan. You think terror is a legitamte form of resistance???

The palestinian terrorists and the Al Qaeda terrorists are not the same they claim to fight for palestinians only and the rest are interested in global gihad. Black september have not read Qutb's writings but I am sure that all the terrorists in Afghanistan and Iraq didn't either, you guys have already unleashed that jeannie out of the bottle, and it seems to be tacking us to a place that no one can control anymore, why would young muslim man want to fight Americans? Because they care so much about their palestinian brothers so that is why they are willing to die. Or maybe it is because they are brainwashed with the poisinous ideology which Qutb and his friend s have spread that muslim Imams keep spreading against the west, Israel is a good excuse but who is really to blame here, the louzy imams and religous leaders who spit hate and murder or Israel.

 

SMCI60652

12:14 AM ET

April 10, 2010

it's funny...

Because you Pro-Israel ideologues didn't really say much about the "Imams spewing hatred" when you helped foster Hamas as a rival to the secular nationalist PLO.

Nor did the CIA have a problem with Qutub or Mullahs and the brainwashing of an entire generation of Muslims during the Soviet War in Afghanistan.

It wasn't Qutub who doled out multi-million dollar contracts to American Universities to print Jihadist manifestos in Pashto and Dari which would then be distributed to a CIA-ISI bankrolled network of Madrasas in FATA and the NWFP.

It just seems you have a selective reading of history that can fit neatly into a pre-determined narrative whose imperative it is to always have Israel and "The West" emerge as the embodiment of good.

All of the claims above have been openly admitted by the American and Israeli operatives in charge of the theaters concerned. They aren't speculative.

 

BUDAHH

8:04 AM ET

April 10, 2010

It's funny that you keep proving my point for me

The hamas was looked at as a peoples movement for the palestinian's and you are right israel did suppoort it instead of the plo. If we had any idea what they would have turned into (Fanatics) we never would have supported them just like the u.s wouldn't support al qaeda.
So how is it israel's fault that people took islam in afghanistan and turned it against the west?

 

TIMOTHYL

1:19 PM ET

April 9, 2010

and the money????????

Who gives to WINEP (besides Belfer)? The single most important indicator of bias is the identity of the organization's funders. Who does WINEP rely upon for its finances? Not a word, neither here nor at its website. I, for one, would like to know how many Jewish-American institutions and individuals affiliated therewith, finance WINEP. Wouldn't you? And if WINEP didn't makes the noises (or maintain the silences) they expect, it would go out of business. Yes, the word is "business". It is just another business, it trades in "senior-fellow" characterized propaganda, and yes, earns money that way.

 

SIR_MIXXALOT

5:09 PM ET

April 9, 2010

I am a Jew. Since the early

I am a Jew.

Since the early 20th century, Zionists have waged a relentless campaign to equate their political movement with the Jewish religion. They have largely succeeded; in the eyes of many, Zionism and Judaism are one and the same, and opposition to Zionism becomes opposition to Judaism. But that doesn't change the fact that the two are antithetical.

I am a Jew, and I know from my religious education that if the Jewish people are to attain the Holy Land, it will be through the Messiah, and not with guns.

Jews are taught to heal the world ("tikkun olam"), not to displace families, create refugee camps, and practice collective punishment such as that used against Jews in the past.

So long as this confounding of Zionism with Judaism continues, it will sow anti-Semitism. But, in the end, anti-Semitism serves the Zionist ideology.

 

DDSNAIK

5:14 PM ET

April 9, 2010

What if this was Google In China ?

Just kidding in a feeble attempt to cool passions - but I do have input, naturally

Agree about the usefulness of intertwining anti-Semitism and objective criticism of the "special relationship" Israel enjoys to deflect legitimate points of debate for the AIPAC and other staunch pro-Zionists - one doesn't have to mingle at politically-charged dinners and cocktail parties or be privvy to celebrated personalities to experience this - try having a normal conversation with neocons and Israeli apologists/non-apologists at the gym/happy hour/school/etc. and see if valid logic and input from those of us without an agenda in the MIddle East has a chance before it's shouted down by invoking the label of anti-Semite. Not that I care or back off in those circumstances, but it's makes maintaining social graces tricky.

Without belaboring the point, how many unprovoked slaps to the face would one tolerate from someone for whom one is at least a partial benefactor ? The recent absurd, ill-timed announcements from the Israelis about the settlements show poor discretion at best and blatant disrespect at worst. I'm not thin-skinned and advocate a tempered response politically and socially across the board in almost any circumstance, but let's not forget who enables whom and that supporting a problem child indefinitely shouldn't be a national foreign policy tenet.

The self-evident nature of Israel and its proponents' ambition and panache running amuck is... self-evident. Additionally, while Walt and others accused of somehow being anti-Semite when speaking freely (while the opposite teams freely invokes indignation or political correctness when questioned) is oddly commonplace probably lends some credibility for arguments for the Matrix/a Jewish conspiracy/etc., which we know isn't true but isn't entirely unimaginable. Regardless, there is clearly a shortage of common sense assessments and lack of insistence on basic diplomatic courtesies amongst nations that are supposedly close friends which no rational adult can deny.

Carry on, Walt et.al., while some of us parry onwards at the grassroots level...

 

SEANMCBRIDE

11:31 AM ET

April 10, 2010

WhoRunsGov.com: Dennis Ross and Israel

http://www.whorunsgov.com/Profiles/Dennis_Ross

"Some, including former President Jimmy Carter and Obama supporter Dan Kurtzer, have accused Ross of being pro-Israel in the negotiations. In his book The Missing Peace, Ross acknowledged that he was often the strongest defender of Israel’s positions.

After he left government in 2000, Ross headed up Washington Institute for Near East Policy, a hawkish think tank with a pro-Israeli bent. His close association with pro-Israeli organizations has caused some to speculate that he was out of the negotiating business for good."

And:

"Ross’s addition [to the Obama administration] was seen by many as a way for Obama to shore up his support among Jewish voters. He helped write Obama’s AIPAC address.

Ross accompanied Obama on a trip to Israel, after meeting with leaders in advance to ensure that Obama’s discussions went smoothly. In the weeks after the election, senior Israeli officials continued to contact Ross to discuss the country’s priorities and their hopes for the new administration."

 

SEANMCBRIDE

1:33 PM ET

April 10, 2010

Best political profile of Dennis Ross

Check it out:

BEGIN ARTICLE
TITLE Right Web: Dennis Ross
URL http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Ross_Dennis
END ARTICLE

And also see this:

BEGIN ARTICLE
AUTHORS Eli Clifton, Ali Gharib
TITLE Dennis Ross Caught Between Obama And Netanyahu
PUBLICATION Lobelog
DATE March 30, 2010
URL http://www.lobelog.com/dennis-ross-caught-between-obama-and-netanyahu/
END ARTICLE

It is a great mystery that Dennis Ross is still serving in the American government in any position concerning Mideast policy. He is up to his eyeballs in conflicts of interest concerning any policies related to Israel.

Robert Satloff: please correct any misstatements of fact in the above two articles, if you can.

 

SEANMCBRIDE

9:41 AM ET

April 13, 2010

No replies from Satloff

I've also noticed that Satloff so far apparently hasn't replied anywhere to any of the counterpoints that were made to his original article.

I would love to see Robert Satloff debate Philip Weiss, Stephen Walt, M.J. Rosenberg, Richard Silverstein or someone of that caliber on Mideast and Israeli politics, but it will probably never happen: most neoconservatives shy away from engaging in free and open debate with their political adversaries. They are essentially defending an emotional belief system in which most of the facts in the real world consistently go against them. In fact, neoconservatism in many respects bears all the hallmarks of an ethno-religious cult.