From the editorial board: Hungary is considered to be a country that conducts pro-Israeli politics, which is expressed, among others, in support of Budapest's Israeli operation in Gaza. The relation between Viktor Orban and Benjamin Netanjah is almost friendly. However, this support is not completely uncritical. This is evidenced by the following article, which was published in the government paper “Magyar Hirlap”:
“John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt wrote an article and then a book under that title in 2006 and their ideas are inactive up to date
John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt wrote an article and then a book on this title in 2006, which may seem past times, but questions posed by 2 authors, the first prof. of political discipline at the University of Chicago, and the second prof. at John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard, are inactive up-to-date due to Israel's ongoing war against Hamas, but besides more generally, due to the eternal past of natural lobbying.
The authors' starting point is that Israel receives disproportionately large financial and political support from the United States, which does not match the national interests of America, and this is due to the impact of the "Israeli lobby" on American abroad policy. The authors mention that another interest groups managed to influence US abroad policy, but no another lobby convinced Americans that Israel's interests were besides US interests.
The secret to the success of the Israeli lobby is that it implements 2 comprehensive strategies to advance American support for Israel. Firstly, with a crucial impact in Washington on both legislature and executive power to support Israel, the lobby is trying to convince that support for Israel is simply a "smart" political decision. Secondly, the lobby seeks to guarantee that the public discourse on Israel looks affirmative and does not let critical comments on Israel to be heard in political space.
One of the pillars of the effectiveness of the Israeli lobby is its impact on the U.S. Congress. any key members of legislature are “Christian Zionists” for whom protecting Israel is number 1 priority. Another origin of lobby strength is the pro-Israeli staff of Congress. The authors quote Morris Amitaya, the erstwhile chief AIPAC (American-Israeli Public Affairs Committee), He noted: “There are many members of legislature who are judaic and who look at certain issues from the position of being Jewish. These are people who can prepare decisions for senators. There are quite a few things that can be achieved at staff level."
AIPAC itself is simply a base for influencing Congress. His success stems from his ability to reward candidates for legislature who support his program and punish those who argue him. Money is crucial in the U.S. elections, and AIPAC ensures that Israel's friends receive financial support, while those who are considered hostile to Israel can be certain that AIPAC will supply support in the run to their political opponents. AIPAC besides conducts letter writing campaigns and encourages paper editors to support pro-Israeli candidates.
Israeli lobbying besides has a crucial impact on executive power. Despite the fact that judaic Americans make up only 3 percent of the population, large sums of run money are donated to candidates of both parties. ‘Washington Post" erstwhile estimated that Democratic presidential candidates receive 60 percent of the run money from judaic organizations. Pro-Israeli forces besides guarantee that judaic critics do not receive crucial positions in abroad policy.
In addition to straight influencing government policy, the lobby besides seeks to form the public perception of Israel and the mediate East. Pro-Israeli organizations are working hard to influence the media, think tanks and academic institutions that play a key function in shaping public opinion. The lobby's position towards Israel is broadly reflected in mainstream media, mostly due to the fact that most of the American commentators are pro-Israeli.
In fresh decades, pro-Israeli forces have become dominant in respective American think tanks, including the American Enterprise Institute, Brookings Institution, Center for safety Policy, abroad Policy investigation Institute, Heritage Foundation, Hudson Institute, Institute for abroad Policy Analysis and the judaic Institute for National safety Affairs.
Lobby was the hardest to choke the debate on Israel on university campuses as academic freedom is simply a fundamental value in the US and professors find it hard to endanger or silence them. erstwhile the Oslo peace process broke down and anti-Israeli criticism intensified, the lobby formed pro-Israeli student groups and invited Israeli speakers. AIPAC has more than tripled its expenditure on monitoring the activities of universities and training programmes for young lawyers in Israel. Lobby besides monitors what they compose and teach professors, and encourages students to study comments or behaviors that may be considered anti-Israeli.
But the lobby's strongest weapon is anti-Semitism charges.. Anyone who criticises Israel's policies or claims that pro-Israeli groups have a crucial influence on US policies in the mediate East will most likely be considered anti-Semite. This maneuver is very effective; Anti-Semitism is considered disgusting and no liable individual wants to be accused of it.
Mearsheimer and Walt's survey met with fierce criticism from pro-Israeli forces. Benny Morris, prof. of mediate East past at Ben Gurion University, said their work was and full of dirty lies. Alan Dershowitz, Harvard University professor, called both authors enemies of Jews. erstwhile Secretary of State Henry Kissinger He said that the article did not have much influence on public opinion and that American public opinion continued to support opposition to any threat to Israel's survival. Abraham H. Foxman, the national manager of the League Against defamation, wrote a book titled "The Deadliest" in consequence to Mearsheimer and Walt's research.
An article published in the Financial Times called paper criticism moral blackmail and intimidation: “moral blackmail – fear that any criticism of Israeli politics and US support will lead to accusations of anti-Semitism – is simply a powerful deterrent. Threatening Americans to force them to scope a consensus on Israel's policy is bad for Israel and prevents America from articulateting its own national interests.”
In a fresh article Stephen Walt He blamed America for the current outbreak of war, saying that for the past 30 years the United States had been the main power controlling the mediate East, so it had the possible to bring peace. For example, the Oslo peace process should not have failed. Instead, the consequence is simply a catastrophic war in Iraq, hidden Iran's atomic potential, the emergence of ISIS, a humanitarian disaster in Yemen, anarchy in Libya.
If Walt and Mearsheimer were right, America, doing its own business, would yet give Israel what he needed most: lasting peace.
Károly Lóránt
Pictured: US embassy beginning in Jerusalem in 2018 (photo Wikipedia)
The author is an economist, consultant of the National Forum
behind: Magyar Hirlap
