Foreign Policy In Focus, June 11, 2008 by Stephen Zunes [source]
Reposted in Huffington Post, Jun 20, 2008 | Updated May 25, 2011
In many respects, presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama has played right into the hands of cynics who have long doubted his promises to create a new and more progressive role for the United States in the world. The very morning after the last primaries… in a Clinton-style effort at triangulation – he gave a major policy speech before the national convention of the America-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Embracing policies which largely backed those of the more hawkish voices concerned with Middle Eastern affairs, he received a standing ovation for his efforts…
Category: Israel and Palestine
Israel and Palestine
Still No Peace
Foreign Policy In Focus, January 16, 2008 [source]
By John Feffer and and Stephen Zunes
President George W. Bush has been using somewhat stronger language than he has uttered previously about the Israeli-Palestinian situation and has made some optimistic predictions of a peace agreement within a year. Nevertheless, there is little reason to hope that the president is any more serious about or is any more likely to be successful in bringing about a negotiated settlement to the conflict.
Barack Obama on the Middle East
Foreign Policy in Focus (FPIF.org) January 10, 2008 [source]
By Emily Schwartz Greco, Stephen Zunes
The strong showings by Senator Barack Obama of Illinois in the early contests for the Democratic presidential nomination don’t just mark a repudiation of the Bush administration’s Iraq policy and “war on terrorism.” They also indicate a rejection of the Democratic Party establishment…
The Israel Lobby Revisited
The Israel lobby revisited, Dec. 20, 2007, by Stephen Zunes
Also at theFreeLibrary.org, Foreign Policy in Focus (FPIF.org), CommonDreams.org, Proquest.com, Ameinu.net, and Tikkun.
It has been 21 months since John Mearsheimer and Steve Walt published their article “The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy” in The London Review of Books and four months since their publication of a book by the same name. Their main arguments are that unconditional U.S. support for the Israeli government has harmed U.S. interests in the Middle East and that American organizations allied with the Israeli government have been the primary influence regarding the orientation of U.S. Middle East policy…
The Failure of Annapolis
Foreign Policy In Focus, Dec. 5, 2007, By Stephen Zunes
Also at Antiwar.com and AmericanTaskForce.org
Despite the best efforts by the Bush administration of putting a positive spin on the recently-completed summit in Annapolis to restart the “Performance-Based Road Map to Peace,” there is little reason to expect that it will actually move the Israeli-Palestinian peace process forward as long as the United States insists on simultaneously playing the role of chief mediator and chief supporter of the more powerful of the two parties.
Broken Peace Process
Foreign Policy In Focus, November 26, 2007, By Stephen Zunes [source]
There’s little reason to hope for a breakthrough at the Middle East peace summit in Annapolis, unless there is a fundamental shift in U.S. policy in addressing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. And there’s little evidence to suggest such a change is forthcoming.
The U.S. Role in the Gaza Tragedy
Foreign Policy In Focus | June 26, 2007
By Emily Schwartz Greco, Stephen Zunes
There is much blame to go around regarding the tragic turn of events in the Gaza Strip. While Hamas is the most immediate culprit, responsibility also rests with Fatah, Israel – and the United States… [source]
The Peace Movement Addresses Israel-Palestine (Finally)
Foreign Policy In Focus | June 14, 2007
In my Inbox last Friday was an email from Peace Action, the country’s largest peace group, encouraging its members to join the thousands of peace and human rights activists from across the country in the June 10 march in Washington against the Israeli occupation. This otherwise unremarkable letter served as an important reminder that U.S. support for the Israeli occupation is finally becoming an issue for the mainstream of the peace movement… [source]
Jerusalem: Endorsing the Right of Conquest
Foreign Policy In Focus, June 8, 2007, By John Feffer, Stephen Zunes
Also at Antiwar.com, lucistrust.org, and TheSaker.si
In a flagrant attack on the longstanding international legal principle that it is illegitimate for any country to expand its territory by military means, the U.S. House of Representatives, by an overwhelming bipartisan majority, passed House Concurrent Resolution 152 congratulating Israel for its forcible “reunification of Jerusalem” and its victory in the June 1967 war…
The Democrats and the “Human Shields” Myth
Foreign Policy In Focus, May 17, 2007, by Stephen Zunes
Also at Common Dreams and TheFreeLibrary.com.
Israelis from across the political spectrum, emboldened by the interim report from the government’s Winograd Commission, which investigated Israel’s ill-fated assault on Lebanon, are expressing regrets over last summer’s conflict with their northern neighbor. Uproar over the way a relatively minor border incident managed to escalate into a full-scale war is leading to demands for Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s resignation…
U.S. Blocks Israel-Syria Talks
Foreign Policy in Focus/Institute for Policy Studies, May 1, 2007
By John Feffer, Stephen Zunes [source].
Even as American officials reluctantly agreed last month to include Syrian representatives in multiparty talks on Iraqi security issues, the Bush administration continues to block Israel from resuming negotiations with Syria over its security concerns. In 2003, President Bashar al-Assad offered to resume peace talks with Israel where they had left off three years earlier, but Israel, backed by the Bush administration, refused. Assad eventually agreed to reenter peace negotiations without preconditions, but even these overtures were rejected…
Falling In Line on Israel
TomPaine.com Nov. 15, 2006, by Stephen Zunes
[Source link is no longer available]
The election of a Democratic majority in the House and Senate is unlikely to result in any serious challenge to the Bush administration’s support for Israeli attacks against the civilian populations of its Arab neighbors and the Israeli government’s ongoing violations of international humanitarian law…
The United States, Israel, and the Possible Attack on Iran
Foreign Policy In Focus, CommonDreams.org,
and Z Network, May 2, 2006
With even mainstream media outlets like the Washington Post and The New Yorker publishing credible stories that the United States is seriously planning a military attack on Iran, increasing numbers of Americans are expressing concerns about the consequences of the United States launching another war that would once again place the United States in direct contravention of international law. The latest National Security Strategy document published earlier this year labeled Iran as the most serious challenge to the United States posed by any country. This should be an indication of just how safe the United States is in the post-Cold War world, where the “most serious challenge” is no longer a rival superpower…
How Washington Goaded Israel
Foreign Policy In Focus, Aug. 18, 2006,
by John Feffer, Stephen Zunes [source]
There is increasing evidence that Israel instigated a disastrous war on Lebanon largely at the behest of the United States. The Bush administration was set on crippling Hezbollah, the radical Shiite political movement that maintains a sizable block of seats in the Lebanese parliament. Taking advantage of the country’s democratic opening after the forced departure of Syrian troops last year, Hezbollah defied U.S. efforts to democratize the region on American terms. The populist party’s unwillingness to disarm its militia as required by UN resolution?and the inability of the pro-Western Lebanese government to force them to do so?led the Bush administration to push Israel to take military action…
Why the Dems Have Failed Lebanon
Foreign Policy In Focus, August 9, 2006, by John Feffer, Stephen Zunes
The Bush administration’s unconditional support for Israel’s attacks on Lebanon is emblematic of the profound tragedy of U.S. policy in the region over the past five years. The administration has relied largely on force rather than diplomacy. It has shown a willingness to violate international legal norms, a callousness regarding massive civilian casualties, a dismissive attitude toward our closest allies whose security interests we share, and blatant double standards on UN Security Council resolutions, non-proliferation issues, and human rights. A broad consensus of moderate Arabs, Middle East scholars, independent security analysts, European leaders, and others have recognized how?even putting important moral and legal issues aside?such policies have been a disaster for the national security interests of the United States and other Western nations. These policies have only further radicalized the region and increased support for Hezbollah and other extremists and supporters of terrorism… [source]
Jihad Against Hezbollah
Foreign Policy In Focus, Aug. 4, 2006, By John Feffer, Stephen Zunes,
and Alternet Aug. 8 as ‘Was Hezbollah a Legitimate Target?’ [source]
The Bush administration and an overwhelming bipartisan majority of Congress have gone on record defending Israel’s assault on Lebanon’s civilian infrastructure as a means of attacking Hezbollah “terrorists.” However, unlike the major Palestinian Islamist groups, Hamas and Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah forces haven’t killed any Israeli civilians for more than a decade. Indeed, a 2002 Congressional Research Service report noted, in its analysis of Hezbollah, that ?no major terrorist attacks have been attributed to it since 1994….
Israel Will Create More Terrorists Than It Kills
Foreign Policy In Focus, July 24, 2006, By Stephen Zunes [source]
This op-ed also ran in the South Florida Sun-Sentinel on July 22, 2006.
The Bush administration’s contempt for the United Nations Charter, the Fourth Geneva Convention and the other fundamental principles of international law has once again been laid bare by its defense of the ongoing Israeli assault against Lebanon…
Congress and the Israeli Attack on Lebanon: A Critical Reading
Foreign Policy In Focus, July 22, 2006
By John Feffer, Stephen Zunes [source]
On July 20, the U.S. House of Representatives, by an overwhelming 410-8 margin, voted to unconditionally endorse Israel’s ongoing attacks on Lebanon and the Gaza Strip. The Senate passed a similar resolution defending the Israeli attack earlier in the week by a voice vote, but included a clause that “urges all sides to protect innocent civilian life and infrastructure.” By contrast, the House version omits this section and even praises Israel for “minimizing civilian loss,” despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. The resolution also praises President George W. Bush for “fully supporting Israel,” even though Bush has blocked diplomatic efforts for a cease-fire and has isolated the United States in the international community by supporting the Israeli attacks…
Congressional Legislation Aimed at Isolating Hamas is Likely to Backfire
Foreign Policy In Focus, June 14, 2006,
By John Gershman, Stephen Zunes [source]
Since the Palestinian Legislative Council elections earlier this year, in which the Islamist group Hamas captured a majority of seats, the Bush administration has suspended U.S. economic assistance to the Palestine Authority (PA) and has led an international effort to impose sanctions against the Palestinians. This has meant enormous hardship for ordinary Palestinians, with reports that hospitals in Gaza have difficulty providing immunizations for children or dialysis machines for kidney patients. The World Health Organization warns of a “rapid decline of the public health system … toward a possible collapse…”
The Israel Lobby: How Powerful is it Really?
Mother Jones & Foreign Policy In Focus, May 18, 2006
By Stephen Zunes [source]
Since its publication in the London Review of Books in March, John Mearsheimer and Steve Walt’s article “The Israel Lobby”—and the longer version published as a working paper for Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government—has received widespread attention from across the political spectrum. These noted professors put forward two major arguments: the first is the very legitimate and widely acknowledged (outside of official Washington) concern that U.S. Middle East policy, particularly U.S. support for the more controversial policies of the Israeli government, is contrary to the long-term strategic interests of the United States. Their second, and far more questionable, argument is that most of the blame for this misguided policy rests with the “Israel lobby”…