| Review of: | US Foreign Policy in the Middle East: The Role of Lobbies and Special Interest Groups by Janice J. Terry |
|---|---|
| Reviewed By: | Nathan Abrams |
| Reviewed in: | The Political Quarterly |
| Date accepted online: | 02/11/2007 |
| Published in print: | Volume 78, Issue 1, Pages 182-196 |
Book Reviews: The Jewish lobby
The idea of a pro-Israel lobby directing US foreign policy has long been considered axiomatic. But the topic is a minefield, loaded with claim and counter-claim. Most recently, it sparked off an angry debate, when two political scientists, John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt, at the Universities of Chicago and Harvard respectively, produced a working paper entitled 'The Israel lobby and U.S. foreign policy' (2006), a shorter version of which was published in the
Janice Terry, a Professor of Modern Middle East History at Eastern Michigan University, seeks to undertake this task by providing a 'disinterested' and 'historic overview with specific "case studies" to explain how policies are made and what role, if any, lobbyists and pressure groups have in influencing and guiding US policies in the Middle East'. The case studies referred to here are the Ford and Carter administrations which, she feels, provide interesting counterpoints in that both were one-term presidents, albeit one a Republican and the other a Democrat, who dealt with the same and similar issues in very different ways and from very different backgrounds, yet 'ended up adopting analogous policies in the Middle East'. In order to make this material more accessible, Terry takes operatic metaphors to explain the role of lobbies and special interest groups. Each of the eleven chapters is structured according to the logic of an opera: 'The Libretto', 'The Score', 'The Stage Set', 'Production Aspects', 'An Overture', 'The Cast' (× 2), 'Act One', 'A Major Production', 'Act Two' and 'Curtain Calls'. And here, Terry does succeed in producing a very readable and succinct book.
However, the alarm bells should have started ringing when I saw that the book is published by Pluto Press. The title of the book is disingenuous. It is not really so much an examination of the role of lobbies and interest groups as it is an argument that the Jewish-American/Zionist/pro-Israeli (the terms are used interchangeably) lobby
Thereafter, the book is littered with other problems. Chapter Two may give a useful and short primer on the representation and demonisation of Arabs and Muslims in US popular culture, yet Terry ignores the similar caricatures of some Jews, most notably the neo-cons since 2001, which has appeared in the mainstream media, academic books (including those published by Pluto), journals and the wackier reaches of the web.
Terry's use of language is particularly troubling. Her continued equation between 'Jewish lobby', 'Zionist' or 'Israel lobby' suggests that Jewish Americans are monolithic single-issue voters. If that sometimes seems the case, it is because Jews are often lumped in with and blamed for the actions of the Israeli government and/or populace. Conversely, Arabic and Islamic are also used synonymously in the book. The book continuously dichotomizes Jewish- versus Arab-Americans, as if there were no moderate voices, such as the 60-80 per cent of American Jews who routinely vote Democrat. In her analysis, hawks such as Daniel Pipes drown out doves such as Michael Lerner. And her use of the term 'Zionist' gives no sense of the breadth of that ideology.
I'm not sure that some of her claims are borne out. For example, she writes 'U.S. foreign policy is remarkably consistent under both Republican and Democratic administrations.' The evidence for this assertion is provided in a footnote: 'As this study attests, the documentation from the Ford and Carter Presidential libraries supports these conclusions.' But are the policies of two relatively inexperienced one-term presidents enough to support such a statement? In their cases, perhaps; but how would Carter feel, say, being compared to George W. Bush, whose Middle East policy is more influenced by the demands of the religious right, particularly evangelical Protestants? Terry notes how pro-Israeli reports and bulletins are frequently sent to the White House, but then assumes that they have some impact: What about the open letter sent by PNAC (Project for the New American Century, the neo-con think tank established in 1997 by William Kristol and Robert Kagan) to Bill Clinton, which seemed to have none? And I wonder if
Rather than shed any light on this topic, Terry's book only helps to muddy the waters further, reinforcing my own perception that conceptions of an 'Israeli Lobby' are deployed to explain away US foreign policy in the Middle East. Talk of 'lobbies' helps to hide the fact that the USA has not always been so friendly towards Israel, and that its policies in that region are primarily motivated by US interests first and foremost. The very idea of an Israel lobby, trotted out at almost every opportunity by some exasperated by America's support for Israel, implies a stranglehold over US foreign policy in which the executive has little room for manoeuvre. The reality, though, is far different and much more complex, and must be placed in a context that brings multiple factors into play. Past presidents have had to balance electoral politics and the intense pressure of Jewish organisations with other political and humanitarian motives and interests in the Middle East. While there is no doubt that a pro-Israel lobby exists in America and that various organisations such as AIPAC (the America-Israel Public Affairs Committee) rally for Israel's cause within the USA, the evidence of its power and influence is sketchier.
Terry has thus thrown further fuel on the fire of a debate that is currently raging. More temperate analyses are required at the present time, particularly those that seek to consider