Don’t Look to AIPAC for Help
print
tell a friend
Photo Credit: Yori Yanover
Chuck Hagel was just confirmed as the next Secretary of Defense in Obama’s administration. The media having shed plenty of light on his controversial views on Israel, Iran and the Middle-East at large, didn’t stop 58 Senators—which included four Republicans—from confirming him. One of those Republicans was the supposedly pro-Israel Rand Paul of Kentucky.
A close friend of mine—who is a staunchly pro-Israel non-Jew—expressed shock and disappointment upon hearing the news of his vote. But as we’ve learned from the story of Purim (and frankly most Jewish holidays), just when the situation looks bleak, everything is for the best in the long run.
As we’ve come to find out, Chuck Hagel’s views on Israel are not in the norm in the Republican Party. Quotes such as “the Jewish lobby intimidates a lot of people up here” isn’t something you’d hear from an aspiring Secretary of Defense. At least not since Secretary of State James Baker’s “f— the Jews” comment some 25 years ago.
But again, just when the situation looks dire, everything is for the best. The entirety of his quote on the “Jewish lobby”—which maybe was in fact a misnomer on his part and he meant the Israel lobby—was “The political reality is that… the Jewish lobby intimidates a lot of people up here…. I’ve always argued against some of the dumb things they do, because I don’t think it’s in the interest of Israel.”
You know what? In a way, he’s right. AIPAC, which is by and large a secular organization and the biggest Israel lobbying organization in America, has in fact done less for ‘hasbara’ or Israel advocacy movement and more to foment anti-Semitism and anti-Israel sentiment in America. The only venture they’ve succeeded in is raising capital in the name of Israel. This falsely leads people to believe that the “Jewish lobby” does in fact control American foreign policy, and it plays into the greater idea of Jews secretly controlling every aspect of American lives from cradle to the grave. AIPAC is helping the Protocols of the Elders of Zion come to life, to the tune of $3 billion annually.
And this fund-raising comes at a heavy price. The result being that when America says jump, Israel has to say how high. Therefore, Israel can never take care of business in a real way when it comes to the likes of Hamas and Hezbollah. Moreover, when it comes to Iron Dome, America cashes in on the very conflict which it is at best complicit with and at worst actively foments. In the long run, it’s economically not worth it for America if there’s peace in this part of the world. See: America’s arming of “rebels” in Libya and Syria.
In the case of Israel, any American administration official or bureaucrat with half a brain would by now come to understand that the true path to peace between cousin Isaac and cousin Ishmael is having Israel not give away land, because the Arab nation, when given an inch, they usually tend to demand a yard or more. And America insists on asking Israel to give that inch every single time and Israel gets nothing in return. So either the U.S. administration is daft and still hasn’t fully grasped how things work in the Middle East or they understand it and are deliberately trying to shrink Israel. (Disclaimer #1: One has a choice. One can say I’m making a sweeping generalization based on race or one can open up the history books and see the results for themselves).
For more proof see: The Oslo Accords under Clinton, Gush Katif under George W. Bush (of all people), Jimmy Carter’s book on “Israeli apartheid,” which was the intellectual inspiration for the BDS movement. Reagan suspending a shipment of military aircraft to Israel, and harshly criticizing Israel after the bombing of the Osirak reactor near Baghdad, as well as contemplating sanctions to stop the Israeli siege of Beirut. The list goes on of “bright ideas” America has given Israel and/or has propagated about it, only to result intifadas and rocket attacks.
So when it comes to Rand Paul’s vote, he feels the same way as I do. That the financial (but not moral and social) relationship between Israel and America needs to end. Not immediately but in stages. The result would be Israel handling their business as they see fit. The result would be no Hillary Clinton making 11th hour “cease-fire”—or what in Islam is called a ‘hudna,’ which is a temporary cessation of hostilities for the purpose of re-armament—deals with the Muslim Brotherhood, which is nothing more than a temporarily self-restraining and more sophisticated Egyptian version of Hamas. We witnessed the result just this week with rockets being hurled at Ashkelon so as to provoke Israel into conflict shortly before President Obama’s visit.
tell a friendAbout the Author: Greg Lauren was born in Ukraine and grew up in the NYC metro area. After working as a trader on Wall St. for 8 years, he made aliyah in 2010. Now living in Jerusalem, he runs the blog IsraelUnseen.com, where he educates young Jews about Israel, the Middle East and Judaism. His ultimate goal is to inspire young Jews to seek out their spiritual heritage and become interested in Judaism in a way that's connected to the Land of Israel itself, then visit independently and even consider moving here.
You might also be interested in:
You must log in to post a comment.
No Responses to “Don’t Look to AIPAC for Help”
Loading ...
Who every got the idea that Rand Paul was pro-Israel? While he hasn't authored anti-Semitic propaganda the way his father has, his foreign policy is identical. He makes Chuck Hagel look like a neocon by comparison!
Regarding other issues in the article: The siege of Beirut was a disaster for Israel; they should have listened to Reagan. Clinton had no idea that Oslo negotiations were happening — it was actually a major US intelligence failure. The Disengagement was pushed by Ariel Sharon, not George W. Bush.
And the rebels in Libya were very different from the rebels in Syria. The rebels in Libya were pro-western Muslims whose sympathies lie with the modern world. OTOH, some of the rebels in Syria appear to be little different from Al Qaeda. Why Mitt Romney was so adamant about sending them arms is still puzzling.
Yeah, Bush pushed for the elections that Hamas won, not the disengagement
sorry but the rebels in Libya are much like the rebels in Syria…Al Qaeda clones. and how could Clinton not know if he invited Arafat to the WH lawn.
" but the rebels in Libya are much like the rebels in Syria…Al Qaeda clones"
A completely false statement. And Libya's election results proved that.
"how could Clinton not know if he invited Arafat to the WH lawn."
Peres told Clinton only after the deal was done. The WH dog and pony show was a few weeks later.