The elaborate pretenses that surround any discussion of Israel are fast making it impossible to say a word about that country without uttering a number of increasingly obvious lies.
We are, for example, supposed to believe that Israel is really a part of the West, when demographics – and the country’s radical political shift – point in the opposite direction. It is commonly asserted as incontrovertible fact that Israel is a democracy, just like us, the only one in a region ruled by monarchs, mullahs, and secular nationalist despots – and we aren’t supposed to notice its population of Palestinian helots in the occupied territories.
Defenders of Israeli government policies – the settlements, the repeated invasions of Lebanon, the prolonged agony of the West Bank and Gaza, the Wall of Separation – rationalize these actions by explaining that the country is beleaguered, a tiny island of Western liberal values in a sea of Arabic absolutism, one in constant threat of annihilation. Yet Israel is a military powerhouse, thanks to the US: its armies have beaten the combined Arab forces on several occasions, notably the Six Day War, and Tel Aviv has a trump card they could always play if that “existential threat” to its existence that we keep hearing about should ever materialize: a substantial nuclear arsenal.
The Israeli nuclear program began in 1949, when a special scientific unit was set up by the government for that express purpose, and they made some progress, but the effort couldn’t have succeeded without outside assistance, a technology transfer that would give the Israelis the ability to produce a functioning weapon.
France stepped into the breach, and offered assistance, in exchange for Israel’s invasion of the Sinai during the Suez crisis. French-Israeli cooperation was based on more than geopolitical advantage, however: the French were confronting the Arabs in Algeria, and the Egyptians, and the Israelis were their natural allies, and yet there was also an ideological motive. In solidarity with his fellow socialists in the Israeli Labor party, who dominated Israeli politics in the early years, French Socialist Prime Minister Guy Mollet is reported to have said, in private: “I owe the bomb to them.”
The US offered credible cover for the clandestine within the framework of the “Atoms for Peace” agreement initiated by President Dwight David Eisenhower: the building of a small, “swimming pool” reactor under this initiative effectively camouflaged the construction of the much larger nuclear facility at Dimona, where the Israeli nuclear arsenal was conceived and assembled.
In spite of the fact that the whole world knows, by now, the story of the Israeli nukes and how they came to be, thanks to the sacrifice of one man – Mordecai Vanunu – both the US and the government of Israel have kept up an elaborate pretense, ever since the Eisehower era, never alluding to Israel’s nukes, although the Israelis have indirectly alluded to their power to annihilate any city in the Middle East at will. The US, for its part, has maintained a discreet silence on the subject – until now.
Assistant secretary of state Rose Gottemoeller’s surprise announcement that the US would like every nation – including Israel – to sign the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) sent shockwaves from Tel Aviv to Brooklyn, confirming the worst fears of the Obama-haters who make up the radical fringe of the Lobby. You’ll recall that the first thing accused Israeli spy Steve Rosen, AIPAC’s former chief lobbyist, did when he resurfaced was to set up an “Obama Watch” blog on the web site of the crazed Daniel Pipes, one of the main perpetrators of the “Obama-is-a-secret-Muslim” meme. Expect the attacks on the President coming from the Lobby to intensify.
The Israelis are citing a supposed 40-year-old secret agreement to permanently shield the Israeli arsenal from international inspections – the same inspections Iran is expected to undergo without protest. Iran, unlike Israel, is a signatory to the NPT. To the Israelis, however, Tehran’s signature is proof that “the NPT is not “a miracle cure for the world’s ills.” Presumably Israel’s policy of nuclear “ambiguity” is one such solution, if not for the world’s ills, but for a very small part of the world. That this solution comes at the expense of the peace of the region – i.e. at everyone else’s expense – seems not to bother the elected leadership of the Jewish state at all. Indeed, under the new ultra-rightist regime – which includes neo-fascist Avigdor Lieberman, a former bouncer, as “foreign minister” – the Israelis seem to revel in it.
This is just posturing, of course, since the US could bring Israel to its knees rather quickly if it chose: without US aid, the Zionist settler colony would have disappeared long ago. What the Israelis depend on for their very survival is the existence and unmatched power of their lobby in America, which ensures the Jewish state a very large piece of the foreign aid pie. This lobby will now be mobilized for an all-out assault on the new policy, which could spell the end of our old Israel-centric stance in the region, and map out a new beginning for the US insofar as its historic role as the inheritor of Britain’s mistakes is concerned.
The very idea that Israel and Iran should be treated as equals, that they should both have to live up to the same standards, and go through the same inspections of their nuclear facilities, is unacceptable to the Israelis, and to this government in particular. The outright racist Lieberman reflects a very widespread sentiment in the country.
The idea of a nuclear-free Middle East is an old one, raised by the Syrians, and I believe the Saudis. This was immediately dismissed, during the Bush years, as propaganda. If President Obama actually takes them up on this proposal, however, it would signal a historic shift – not just a shift in American policy, but in the outlook and policy of the West.
The legacy of Western imperialism in the region is written on the map, which delineates borders drawn by the British Foreign Office with a stick in the sand. Divided up amongst the victors in the wake of World War I, and the lingering death of the Ottoman “sick man of Europe,” the Middle East was dominated by the European imperialist powers up until the end of World War II, when the Americans moved in. The white man’s burden, as Kipling dubbed it, turned, in American hands, from a civilizing mission into a strictly commercial enterprise.
The very existence of Israel, its genesis in the Balfour Declaration and its historic economic and military links to the West, is, in the Muslim mind, the living symbol of this imperialist legacy, just as the Iranian Shah was. The Khomeini movement had its roots in the struggle against Western imperialism, and the admixture of religious fervor and the movement for national self-determination was made possible due to Western intervention. The CIA overthrow of Mohammed Mossadegh diverted secular nationalist sentiment into the only alternative outlets: the ayatollahs. We have to live with that blowback from 1953.
Obama, however, promises to reverse it, to neutralize the long history of Western betrayals, insults, and indifference and strike a grand bargain with the peoples of the region, one that will put them on an equal footing with the rest of the world – and with the Israelis, too.
Not if the Lobby can help it, mind you, and I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see that Ms. Gottemoeller’s statement is “clarified” to mean its exact opposite – and that Gottemoeller herself is out on her ear (or, at least, called on the carpet) before this post gets Googled.
If Gottmoeller’s statement stands, and she isn’t exposed as a secret neo-Nazi by Monday morning, then Obama will be the first US President since John F. Kennedy to put pressure on the Israelis to abandon their status as nuclear rogues, as David Bedein, the Philadelphia Bulletin’s Middle East correspondent points out. Although Kennedy did not pressure them in public, but only in private communications: that Obama is putting the screws on them publicly is a real giant step forward to peace in the Middle East. The idea of a nuclear-free zone in that region makes so much sense that there is no way the Israelis could credibly oppose it. The ultimate argument in favor can be made by simply pointing at Israel’s foreign minister, the crazed Lieberman – who once advocated bombing the Aswan dam – and asking: Do you want to put nuclear weapons in his hands? I have no doubt that the prospect of a future Israel led by this fascist nutball is one of the considerations behind the timing of Gottemoeller’s speech.
This bombshell announcement – that the US is openly calling on the Israelis, along with the North Koreans, to join the rest of humanity in containing the spread of nuclear weapons – will hit US-Israeli relations with the force of a tsunami. If Obama follows through on this one – and I have my doubts – it will truly mean an end to the “special relationship,” or, more accurately, the current Israeli interpretation of the terms of that relationship. Obama, it seems, wants those terms renegotiated, which is why invoking a mysteriously vague 40-year-old secret agreement probably won’t have much effect on the White House’s apparent determination to make a historic breakthrough on the Middle Eastern front.
We’ll see, however, if that determination is somewhat blunted in the coming months, under relentless pressure from the Lobby, which will go all out to crush this initiative before it gets off the ground. President Obama is being tested. Here is a man who has all the mannerisms of greatness, but whether he’s merely aped these, like any second-rate actor is capable of doing, or is the real thing, has been a matter of some debate. The next few months should be enough for us to see what he is made of. If he lasts that long without capitulating entirely, I’ll be surprised – and honestly delighted.
NOTES IN THE MARGIN
What did Nancy Pelosi know, and when did she know it, suddenly became a pressing issue overnight, as the CIA – Obama’s CIA, Leon Panetta’s CIA – releases documents showing she was briefed about “enhanced interrogation techniques” used on Abu Zubaydah – yes, the one who was water-boarded 83 times. Read my take here. (Note: that’s not my title).
Read more by Justin Raimondo
- The Orange Revolution, Peeled – February 7th, 2010
- Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell — Don’t Go – February 4th, 2010
- Who Was That Well-Dressed Man? – February 2nd, 2010
- Will the Dragon Awake? – January 31st, 2010
- The State of the Empire – January 28th, 2010





peacewjustice
May 8th, 2009 at 2:57 pm
"This is just posturing, of course, since the US could bring Israel to its knees rather quickly if it chose: without US aid, the Zionist settler colony would have disappeared long ago. "
I have my disdain for an ethnoreligious state, and how Israel was founded, but that is a larger discussion. But the only reasonable path forward is a true 2-state solution, given political realities. This quote surprises me on 2 levels… Do you really believe Israel requires US support to survive? They seemed OK w/ minimal US support during creation and through the '67 war. We are an enabler of their occupation and expansion, but the Israelis have their own means for survival as a nation.
peacewjustice
May 8th, 2009 at 2:57 pm
Also do you consider the entire state a "Zionist settler colony"? I think this language was largely correct in the past, but w/ time I think the appropriateness of the term fades. But more importantly, I think this language is counterproductive in our (assumed) shared goal of ending the occupation and curbing Israel's expansionist and militaristic policies. When Israelis who were born in Israel or immigrated from a DP camp hear such language, what are they to think? It questions their right to live in the only land they know, and this prevents moderation and progress. Worse, it understandably feeds into their irrational fears that most people ultimately seek the destruction of the state itself… not an end to the occupation. So we empower the right wingers who do not seek peace but expansion and conflict, and moderates are lost.
dbriz
May 8th, 2009 at 3:26 pm
Let us share Justin's scepticism and good wishes for Ms. Gottemoeller.
Taking on AIPAC by the Obama folks would be in the best interests of israel and the USA. Does Obama have the cojones? Two words; Rahm Emanuel. It is most unlikely that this Pit Bull son of a former Irgun member will be a part of anything not ordained by AIPAC.
eileenfleming
May 8th, 2009 at 5:01 pm
AIPAC currently has 515 lobbying appointments scheduled on Capitol Hill.
"Foreign Agents: The American Israel Public Affairs Committee from the 1963 Fulbright Hearings to the 2005 Espionage Scandal" exposes how US Middle East policy has been formulated and thrives due to the dearth of relevant reporting on AIPAC's activities. This book should be read by every American tax payer, Congress and foreign policy maker.
It begins with Senator Fulbright's on target questions to Jewish-Agency-funded US foreign agents who did not register with the Justice Department or disclose their true financing, funding flows and covert activities and illuminates how AIPAC: the American Israel Public Affairs Committee operates "within a murky nexus regulated by four important but seldom enforced US laws." [1]
The lax enforcement of The Logan Act, The Foreign Agents Registration Act/FARA, the 1917 Espionage Act, Thompson Memorandum guidelines for prosecuting corporate crime coupled with the fear of being labeled anti-Semitic and a media who have failed at their commission to seek and report the truth have all colluded to exert an undue influence over Congress and thus; we the people of America to be "under the de facto influence of a powerful foreign interest." [2]
Smith documents how AIPAC-a constellation of individuals and organizations that make up the "Israel lobby" continue to actively steer USA foreign policy in a militant and pro-Israel only direction.
Senator Fulbright's concerns over activities of unregistered foreign agents who worked to influence public opinion and policy resulted in the 1963 Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearings to investigate the Jewish Agency and uncovered the "conduit" operation run by the American Zionist Council. In 1959, The American Zionist Council was renamed AIPAC.
Within eight years, the Council received over a half a million "from the Jewish Agency to create a favorable opinion in this country for Israeli government policies. The Senate investigation closed down the conduit, but the extensive propaganda activities still go on…[and] by 1998, "US aid to Israel exceeded $3 billion a year, the highest amount of US aid given to any country." [3]
"AIPAC's illegal tactics harm America…[and] corporate crime inflicts far more damage on society than all street crime combined…Harvard economist Thomas Stauffer estimated the total cost of [the] prolonged conflict in the Middle East at $3 trillion [in 2002 USA dollars and he] lays a good deal of the blame for this at the doorstep of AIPAC." [4]
The Rest:
Patriot Follows the Money and Exposes Foreign Agents
July 7, 2008:
http://www.wearewideawake.org/
RickR30
May 8th, 2009 at 10:36 pm
I'm glad to see the right kind of leadership coming out of this administration- the kind of leadership that would at least try to express some curiousity about the "special relationship." All politicians claim to be leaders, but here is the test: will they stand up for the interests of America or will they continue to place the interests of Israel, the Global Moloch, and Mexico ahead of America's?
While everyone was in rapture about the new president's skin color, I suspected that it would indeed take someone from a different ethnic background to look at the special relationship from a different perspective. Some diversity was needed, not so much in color of skin, but in ways of thinking. But it became clear that a new way of thinking that would not unconditionally glorify Israel could never come from inside the rich Caucasian guys camp.
JTV
May 9th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/israel/documents/exc...
I think you will find this link interesting. It shows the letter Kennedy wrote to Eshkol just three days after he was elected and indicates that Kennedy was not going to tolerate Israel having weapons of mass destruction without any control. It also indicates that Kennedy was not told the truth by Ben Gurion.
eileenfleming
May 9th, 2009 at 11:52 pm
What Mordechai Vanunu [the whistel blower of Israel's WMD Program] told me in June 2005:
“Did you know that President Kennedy tried to stop Israel from building atomic weapons? In 1963, he forced Prime Minister Ben Guirion to admit the Dimona was not a textile plant, as the sign outside proclaimed, but a nuclear plant. The Prime Minister said, ‘The nuclear reactor is only for peace.’ Kennedy insisted on an open internal inspection. He wrote letters demanding that Ben Guirion open up the Dimona for inspection.
"The French were responsible for the actual building of the Dimona. The Germans gave the money; they were feeling guilty for the Holocaust, and tried to pay their way out. Everything inside was written in French, when I was there, almost twenty years ago. Back then, the Dimona descended seven floors underground. In 1955, Perez and Guirion met with the French to agree they would get a nuclear reactor if they fought against Egypt to control the Sinai and Suez Canal. That was the war of 1956. Eisenhower demanded that Israel leave the Sinai, but the reactor plant deal continued on. Kennedy demanded inspections.
"When Johnson became president, he made an agreement with Israel that two senators would come every year to inspect. Before the senators would visit, the Israelis would build a wall to block the underground elevators and stairways. From 1963 to ’69, the senators came, but they never knew about the wall that hid the rest of the Dimona from them. Nixon stopped the inspections and agreed to ignore the situation. As a result, Israel increased production. In 1986, there were over two hundred bombs. Today, they may have enough plutonium for ten bombs a year. Who knows?”
e
http://www.wearewideawake.org/
My Free Gift Card
May 10th, 2009 at 9:24 pm
Hello. Great job. I did not expect this on a Wednesday. This is a great story. Thanks!
Twitter Apps
May 13th, 2009 at 11:30 pm
I searched on google and I had a hard time located the right info….until I found your blog.
LANDON
May 14th, 2009 at 1:44 am
Thanks, keep on posting