What happened when Obama met Netanyahu?
So what really happened when Obama met Netanyahu last week?
You’d never know from reading The New York Times‘ account. The Times (like much of the corporate media) is often a mouthpiece for pro-Israeli propaganda and David Bromwich explains how it distorted its coverage of the meeting to support Israel’s rush to attack Iran. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-bromwich/inew-york-timesi-falsifie_b_205201.html. Perhaps you remember how The Times led the charge for war with Iraq by endlessly repeating the Cheney-Bush clique’s lies about Iraq’s WMDs? Looks like The Times is signing up to handle Israel’s propaganda offensive against the “Iranian threat.” [Note: Israeli nukes: 200-400. Iran’s nukes: 0]
The Washington Post did better, correctly focusing on Israeli settlements as the key issue of the meeting. The Post noted that Netanyahu was “stunned” not only by the Obama administration’s strong position against further Israeli settlements on Palestinian land, but also by the “harsh and unequivocal” criticism from usually reliable pro-Israeli Democrats in Congress. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/23/AR2009052301536.html
Another good account came from Uri Avnery, a founder of Israel, former member of the Knesset (parliament) and now leader of Israeli’s peace bloc. He has been a keen observer of Israel’s relations with every US administration since Harry Truman. http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/en/channels/avnery/1243115086.
Some of the congressmen who “stunned” Netanyahu are usually faithful water-carriers for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), one of the most powerful lobbies in Congress. AIPAC’s ability to mobilize thousands of well-to-do supporters to make or withhold campaign contributions, pressure the corporate media to toe the Israeli line, etc., puts it right up there with the US Chamber of Commerce, the farm lobby, Big Pharma and the insurance industry. (There is one difference. The goal of these other giant lobbies is to maximize corporate profit. AIPAC’s goal is to advance the interests of a foreign government whose policies often – I would say usually – don’t coincide with the interests of the American people.) For decades, AIPAC has been able to keep billions of American dollars flowing to the Israeli military, guarantee US vetoes of UN condemnations of the Israeli occupation and invasion of neighboring countries, and torpedo most attempts to pressure Israel into halting the settlements or engaging in good-faith negotiations with the Palestinians. But AIPAC is definitely feeling the heat these days. Note the defensive tone of this year’s keynote speaker at the recent AIPAC meeting: http://aipac.org/about_AIPAC/Learn_About_AIPAC/2841_24635.asp .
Also read Code Pink’s Medea Benjamin’s account of how she was treated when she tried to cut thru the AIPAC propaganda with a simple question: How about Gaza? http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/05/06-14
AIPAC is feeling the heat not only from the growing crescendo of condemnation of Israel, especially in the wake of the Gaza massacre, but also from the rapid growth of several American Jewish groups who are challenging AIPAC’s claim to speak for American Jews. Groups like J Street http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/5178883/US-Jewish-lobby-challenged-by–pro-peace-rival.html, Jewish Voice for Peace http://www.jewishvoiceforpeace.org/ and several others support Israeli statehood, but oppose the occupation and support an independent Palestinian state.
New winds are blowing — in the Middle East, in Washington and among American Jews. But the outcome of this struggle between the forces of war and occupation and the growing chorus for peace based on justice for Palestinians is still very much in play.