The Israel Formal Lobby in the United States - Report Example

The Israel formal lobby in the United s and its different influences over US foreign policy regarding Iran The term Israel lobby has been used in the United States to refer to a loose coalition of those individuals as well as organizations whose main aim is to ensure that American foreign policy favors the protection of Israeli interests as well. The Israel lobby, despite having a direct interest in the serving of Israeli interests, is not a unified movement, and in fact, many of those who are involved in it tend to have very different opinions concerning the means through which they can handle diverse issues. The Israeli lobby has long been associated with conspiracy but this is not the case mainly because its activities have can be seen to be consistent with the tradition of how interest groups operate in the political life of the United States. The main part of the Israel lobby is made up of American Jews who make it their duty to ensure that the foreign policy of the United States, especially concerning Iran as a major threat to Israel, is advanced in Israel’s interests (Bolan, 2013). To achieve a foreign policy which is aimed at containing Iran, these lobby groups go beyond voting for those candidates who are pro-Israel. They further write letters, contribute money, and generally show their support, both moral and financial to those organizations that are pro-Israel. While this may be the case, however, these groups are not umbrella organizations for all the Jews in America, and it has been found that not all American Jews support the existence of Israel or the positions taken by the lobbies. In addition, in the formulation of American policy on Iran, there has also been the involvement of Christian Zionists, who are mainly evangelicals that have an ulterior motive in the maintenance of the security of Israel. It has been found that in some instances, Jewish-Americans more often than not, tend to take a different stance on Iran from Israel. Many of the main organizations that are involved in the Israel lobby are headed by those who can be considered to be hardliners who have tended to support the expansionist policies of Israel as well as its aggressive stance against Iran. This is against the opinion of a majority of American Jewry, who feel that the best means of dealing with the Iranian nuclear program is through dialogue. While there may be differences concerning how to handle the Iranian issue, the majority of the individuals and organizations that consist the Israel lobby are of the opinion that there should be continued United States support for Israel to ensure the security of the latter (Salt, 2010). The Israel lobby early came to the reality that American foreign policy was a major shaper of events throughout the world. There is no other region in the world which is shaped by the policy decisions made in Washington than the Middle East, and this is mainly because of its strategic significance (Cirincione, 2006). In recent years, the United States has attempted to transform the countries of this region into democracies and this has been attributed to its attempts to secure its long term interests. The Israel lobby groups have taken advantage of the American involvement in the Middle East by trying to secure Israel’s security interests as well. This has been through convincing the American government that Iran, one of the most powerful anti-Israel nations of the Middle East, is a direct threat to American interests in the region. According to many Americans, the American foreign policy should be aimed at securing the national interests of the country. However, this has not been the case in recent decades as powerful lobbies have come into the scene, attempting to sway foreign policy to suit their own specific interests. The Israel lobby is one of the most powerful and well coordinated lobbies in the United States and it has used its influence to ensure that American foreign policy is compatible with the interests of Israel. As a result, the main focus of the Middle Eastern policy has been the relationship between Israel and the United States (Joyce, 2008). In the Middle East, Iran is considered to be the biggest threat to the existence of Israel and the lobby supporting this country in the United States has worked hard to ensure that there is a constant anti-Iran policy in Washington. In recent times, the main focus of American Middle East policy has been the ending of the Iranian nuclear program before the latter is able to develop a weapon capable of targeting Israel. The result of the actions of this lobby has been the inflammation of Iranian public opinion, which has been counterproductive to American interests (Ayoob, 2012). The policy of the United States against Iran’s nuclear program and the sanctions that have been leveled at this country can be said to have no equal in American political history. This has been mainly because of the fact that the United States has adopted a hostile stance towards a country which poses no direct threat to its interests. It can be said that the adoption of policy against a nuclear Iran is because of the efforts being made by the Israel lobby, which has resulted in the United States putting its own security in jeopardy while serving the interests of Israel. The main determinant of current American foreign policy on Iran has been domestic politics, through the activities of the lobby in support of Israel. While it is a fact that other special interest groups have managed to turn American foreign policy in their favor, the Israel lobby has managed to outdo them all. This is because it has managed to convince the American government and people that Israeli national interests are tied to those of the United States; a claim that has no tangible grounds whatsoever (Mearsheimer & Walt, 2006). It is for this reason that it has managed to bring the United States into the Iranian affair, because the latter’s attainment of nuclear weapons is a direct threat to Israel but not the United States. The massive funding that this lobby commands has ensured that it has influence on which candidates get elected to Congress as well as on the media, where comments against the injustices committed by Israel are normally censored; being labeled anti-Semitic. It is a fact that the officials in the Israeli government often use the Israel lobby to further their agenda through influencing American policy in the Middle East. This lobby often describes any threat to Israel in the starkest terms, making the threat seem bigger than it actually is to ensure public sympathy. It is for this reason that Iran has been described as the most dangerous enemy of Israel mainly because of its potential capability of acquiring nuclear weapons (Amuzegar, 1997). This stems from the belief among many Israelis and those who support them that any Islamic country that has nuclear weapons poses a continuous threat to the security of Israel. This is the reason why Israeli leaders often put a lot of pressure on the American government to take a more confrontational stance against Iran as this, they believe, is the only way through which Iran can be deterred. The Israel lobby in the United States has taken up the stance of the Israeli government against Iran, often describing this country as the center of world terror with an ambition of acquiring nuclear weapons (Özcan & Özdamar, 2009). The Israel lobby has promoted the need for the United States to take firm action against Iran, not ruling out the military option, despite the fact that such action would not be in American interests. After the overthrow of the Saddam Hussein led Baathist regime in Iraq, there were widespread calls from both the Israeli government as well as the Israel lobby in the United States for America to take military action in Iran to ensure regime change. For individuals in these groups, the war against Iraq was not enough and they stated that the United States had to follow this victory with an attack on Iran to counter the potential threats that would likely come from this country. The United States government has in recent years resisted these calls for military action against Iran, and has instead attempted to appease the Israel lobby through the implementation and tightening of sanctions against many sectors of the Iranian economy. In order for the Israel lobby to secure its objectives against Iran, the various groups within it often sponsor conferences where only those speakers who are known to be strongly pro-Israel are allowed to speak (Gordon, 2008). In addition, those within this lobby use mainstream media to air their views writing articles to make the case for going after Iran, often stating that it is the moral duty of the United States to contain the potential nuclear capabilities of this nation. For these groups, anything short of military action against Iran is not enough to ensure that there is a complete end to its nuclear program as well as its support for such anti-Israel organizations such as Hezbollah. The American administration, due to pressure from the Israel lobby, has taken a lot of time in the formulation of policies which are designed to ensure that Iran shuts down its nuclear program. Despite the immense pressure from the most powerful country in the world, however, the Bush and Obama administrations have had little success because Iran has remained determined to obtain nuclear competence. As a result, the Israel lobby has increased its pressure on the United States government to take firmer action against the Iranian government (Porter, 2010). With the recent election of the political moderate, Hassan Rouhani to replace the more conservative Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as the president of Iran, there have been positive steps towards the attempt of the American administration to halt the Iranian nuclear program. While this has been the case, however, the Israeli government as well as the Israel lobby has not been pleased with the results of the negotiations taking place between the United States and Iran. The lobby is of the opinion that a warming of relations between the America and Iran would mean that the former might choose to stop tying its interests in the Middle East to those of Israel. For this reason, the Israel lobby is using all its resources to ensure that even though Iran has softened its stance on its nuclear program, Congress is still pressured into expanding the sanctions that exist over Iran. Articles related to the Israel lobby have been critical of the warming of American-Iranian relations, cautioning against the conciliation with a ‘terrorist’ regime, as well as giving dark hints of taking precautionary measures should the diplomatic approach fail (Kheirabadi & Moghaddam, 2012). In order to keep the Obama administration focused on the Iranian issue, the Israel lobby has made assertions that if the United States does not take further action to ensure that Iran cancels its nuclear program, Israel might be forced to take preventative action to defend its interests. It can be argued that the Israel lobby might not have as much influence of the American foreign policy on Iran as it is believed, and this may be because the United States might also have its own interests in keeping Iran from attaining nuclear weapons. While this argument can be said to be true in part, it is a fact that the Iranian ambitions of nuclear capability does not pose an immediate threat to the United States. This is mainly because there are quite a number of countries which pose a greater threat to the United States because of having nuclear weapons yet they do not even consider using them. Russia, China, and even North Korea have nuclear weapons yet are not considered to be a direct threat to the United States (Rajiv, 2012). In fact, at one time, these states were considered to be undeterrable, yet the United States lived, and continues to live side by side with them, not considering them to be a direct threat to it national security. Despite this being the case, because of pressure from the Israel lobby, the United States has adopted a harsh nuclear policy towards Iran, although the latter has yet to develop any nuclear weapons of its own. One would state that if the United States could live with a nuclear North Korea, it could also live with a nuclear Iran since the latter does not pose any threat to its national security. It can be concluded that it is because of Iran’s not being a serious threat to the United States that the Israel lobby has to keep on pressure on the American political elite to ensure that its administration adopts a confrontational stance against Iran. Such a stance is designed for the purpose of securing Israel from any threats from the Islamic state, which has been most vocal in recent years concerning the numerous atrocities committed by Israel against the Palestinian people. Because of the criticism leveled against it by the Iranian government, the government of Israel as well as its lobby in the United States perceives Iran as an enemy which should be dealt with swiftly for the security of Israel. While Iran and the United States would still not have been friends if the Israel lobby did not exist, it is possible that American policy towards Iran would have been more reasonable, so that the overtures made by Iran in the past would have been pursued and there would have been no conditions being set for a military confrontation. References Amuzegar, J. 1997, "Irans economy and the US sanctions", The Middle East Journal, vol. 51, no. 2, pp. 185-199. Ayoob, M. 2012, "Was Huntington Right? Revisiting the Clash of Civilizations", Insight Turkey, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 1-11. Bolan, C.J. 2013, "The Iranian Nuclear Debate: More Myths Than Facts", Parameters, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 77-88. Cirincione, J. 2006, "Controlling Irans Nuclear Program", Issues in Science and Technology, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 75-82. Gordon, G.S. 2008, "FROM INCITEMENT TO INDICTMENT? PROSECUTING IRANS PRESIDENT FOR ADVOCATING ISRAELS DESTRUCTION AND PIECING TOGETHER INCITEMENT LAWS EMERGING ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK", Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, vol. 98, no. 3, pp. 853-920. Joyce, A. 2008, "EDITORS NOTE", Middle East Policy, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 2-III,IV. Kheirabadi, R. & Moghaddam, S.B.A. 2012, "The Linguistic Representation of Iranian and Western Actors of Irans Nuclear Program in International Media: A CDA Study", Theory and Practice in Language Studies, vol. 2, no. 10, pp. 2183-2188. Mearsheimer, J.J. & Walt, S.M. 2006, "THE ISRAEL LOBBY AND U.S. FOREIGN POLICY", Middle East Policy, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 29-87. Özcan, N.A. & Özdamar, Ö. 2009, "IRANS NUCLEAR PROGRAM AND THE FUTURE OF U.S.-IRANIAN RELATIONS", Middle East Policy, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 121-133. Porter, G. 2010, "THE IRAN NUCLEAR "ALLEGED STUDIES" DOCUMENTS: THE EVIDENCE OF FRAUD", Middle East Policy, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 23-39. Rajiv, S.S. 2012, "INDIA AND IRANS NUCLEAR IMBROGLIO: NAVIGATING THE CONSEQUENCES", Middle East Review of International Affairs (Online), vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 37-43. Salt, J. 2010, "ISRAELS NUCLEAR WEAPONS: THE WHITE HOUSE FACTOR", Middle East Policy, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 23-35. Read More