It's Not Just
the Oil
By Stanley Heller
(bio below)
Does a boxer fight with one hand tied behind his back?
Why is the anti-war movement reluctant to talk about all the reasons
for the drive to invade Iraq?
Yes, major reasons for the permanent war drive are corporate greed for
oil, dreams of political domination, and the lust to test weapons. But
there's another one. Extreme right-wing forces from a foreign country and
their powerful American backers are pushing the U.S. to invade Iraq and
many other countries. I'm, of course, talking about Israel.
On November 12 Zev Chafets wrote an incredibly revealing article in
the New Haven Register. In an article headlined,"Disarming Iraq is
only a start in Middle East" he explained that the Arab and Iranian
cultures were "irrational" and that nothing could be done to
"improve the collective mental health of Arab societies".
He proposed "giving the Arabs and Iran a stark choice they can
have sovereignty or jihad (in its secular or religious forms), but not
both". He says "disarming" but of course he means invading
the "Middle East's most hostile and deranged regimes".
Now, who is Zev Chafets? He was originally from Michigan, but went to
Israel in 1967 and fought in their army and became director of the government
press officer under Prime Minister Menachem Begin. He's now a columnist
for the New York Daily News. His ideas reflect the desires of Likud, the
Israeli ruling party, one variant of extreme Israeli right wing opinion.
The current party head, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, is delirious for
the war. In his mind, with Iraq leveled the Palestinians will give up hope
and he then can go on to his other objectives, destroying the governments
of Lebanon, Syria and Iran.
How is this influencing the U.S.? It's not blatant. When you go to the
Anti-Defamation League site you see nothing calling for war with Iraq.
Sharon doesn't have to engage in noisy public appeals. The forces that
demand the Iron Fist as the answer to all problems (the Neo-Cons) are at
the highest levels of the U.S. government.
When I was in Hebrew School I remember the teachers railing at the State
Department for being filled with "Arabists" who hated Israel.
Nobody rational would say that today. The top officials and advisors to
Bush are all rabid Neo-Cons.
Some like Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, and David Wurmser actually worked
for Israeli think tanks, writing grand papers for (Likud) Prime Minister
Netanyahu on how the U.S. and Israel should take apartand reconstruct the
Middle East.
Do we have to talk about Congress? Just a few days ago the House voted
near unanimously to congratulate the Israeli government on its wonderful
fair election. Here's a government that is in material breach of the Security
Council "demand" that it remove its forces from the Palestinian
cities and Congress offers it hugs and kisses.
Is it any wonder? The Israel Apartheid lobby just knocked off a fourterm
Congresswoman (McKinney) as it has done to Senators and Congressmen so
many times in the past.
Years ago a wit called Congress "Israeli Occupied Territory".
The joke is still right on the mark.
Are we giving aid to anti-Semites by denouncing Likud-Neo-con influence?
Not at all. In no way are we advancing the loony nazi charge that "the
Jews" run the country. Sure, many neo-cons are Jews. Jews are also
the leaders of the U.S. anti-war movement.
The biggest Jewish organizations are backing Sharon, but most Jews don't
support them. According to a 1995 survey by the American Jewish Committee
only 22% of American Jews consider themselves Zionists.
Most American Jews don't give a dime to the ADL or any other Israel
boosting organization.
A small group of U.S. Jews are fanatical supporters of Israeli Apartheid
and they shower it with money. But even though they seem to have the world
by a string, it isn't so. When Israeli interests clash with American ruling
class interests the tail does not wag the dog. [Ask Jonathan Pollard who's
sitting out alife term in Danbury prison]
The U.S. ruling class is overwhelmingly Christian and the fundamentalism
that inspires it is Pat Robertson's evangelism, not Jewish Orthodoxy.
Our argument is angry but precise. When the Left denounces Sharon we
mean Sharon. When we assail an obvious foreign influence we're not alleging
some all-powerful secret plot. When we condemn Israeli apartheid we denounce
a Jewish superiority state, notthe idea that Jews should live in Israel
and enjoy every human right.
With that said we owe it to Americans to tell them the whole truth,
that part of the war drive is being fueled by a wacko militarist clique
from Israel and its interlocking bands of American Jewish and Christian
supporters.
We're told not to bring up Israeli influence on the U.S. because it
would split our supporters. Well, who would it alienate? It would tick
off a certain group of Jews, those Jews who are schizophrenic politically,
people who can be liberal or radical on every causeexcept Israel. They
learned democracy in school, but they're still intimidated by their grandmothers.
An example is Rabbi Michael Lerner. While at times he makes sharp criticisms
of Sharon when it comes down to a critical moment he's on the wrong side.
When Palestinians were making progress explaining the Right to Return he
got into the editorial page of the New York Times denouncing the mass return
of people to their homes. While he willcriticize human rights abuses he
does not call for any effective action, i.e. boycotting Israel goods or
suspending Israeli foreign aid.
Hundreds of Israeli Jewish activists are warning that Sharon might forcemass
deportation of Palestinians during the Iraq invasion, but Lerner calls
it anti-Semitic to make a connection between Israel and the drive for an
Iraq invasion. ("Singling out Israel in the context of a war rally
about Iraq is racist." -Tikkun website 2/17/03).
Lerner's vocabulary is that of a chauvinist. He uses terms like "pro-Israel"
or "anti-Israel". He is constantly brandishing charges about
"Israel bashing" and "anti-Semitism".
I will say this. It was wrong to ban him from speaking at the San Francisco
demo because he criticized ANSWER. We all have a right and duty to make
criticisms. I have plenty problems with the politics ofANSWER, and I wrote
about it on Counterpunch. [Yet far from being anti-Semitic on January 18
ANSWER bent over backwards and made no connection between the Iraq war
and Israeli government.]
We don,t need Lerner. We don't need the American Friends of Peace Now
who support Sharon's attempt to grab $12 billion more in American tax dollars.
Include these types in your coalitions and youwill waste hours and hours
talking about the politically correct way to describe Israel. We do need
Jews who are fully committed to equality and democracy, but they won't
be angered by exposures of the
Likud-Neo-cons. Most importantly we need to be honest and tell the whole
truth to Americans. They need to know of all the reasons behind the drive
to conquer Iraq. Some of us used the following chant in NYC. I recommend
it at your next rally. "Bush and Sharon, they say War. We say, No!,
We say No!"
----------------
Stanley Heller has been chairperson of the Middle East Crisis Committee
(New Haven) since 1982. He is a moderator of al-Awda-Unity, a division
of the Right to Return movement intent on encouraging Jewish activism.
He can be reached at mail@TheStruggle.org
Return to Cactus 48 Home Page
Return to Read List
_