|
Today's
Stories
July 20, 2006
William S. Lind
Why Hezbollah is Winning
Robert Jensen
Florida Puts History on Probation
John Ross
AMLO Presidente!
Tom Hayden
I Was Israel's Dupe
Paul Craig Roberts
The Unfolding Horror Show
July 19, 2006
Patrick Cockburn
Massacres Soar in Central Iraq: Maliki Government Discredited
Trish Schuh
Israel Targets, Flattens Beirut TV Station HQ
Jonathan Cook
Is Israel Using Arab Villages As Human Shields?
Vicente Navarro
The Spanish Civil War, 70 Years On: The Deafening Silence on Franco's Genocide
July 17 / 18 2006
Mike Whitney
Israel's Shameful Attack on Gaza
Kathleen Christison Atrocities in the Promised Land
July 14 / 15,
2006
Weekend Edition
Alexander Cockburn
How
Venice is Dying
Tanya Reinhart
The IDF is Hungry for War
Robert Fisk
Beirut Waits: Is Damascus the Key?
Daniel Cassidy
How the Irish Invented Jazz
Winslow Wheeler
Pentagon Budget Gimmickry: When a Cut is Actually an Increase
Hugh O'Shaughnessy
In Amazonia: Slavery and Deforestation
M. Shahid Alam
Israel, the US and the New Orientalism
William S. Lind
Two Signposts in Iraq
Ramzy Baroud
Racism Plagues Media Coverage of Gaza Assault
Gilad Atzmon
Echoes of the Wehrmacht
Elizabeth Weill-Greenberg
Railroading Your Rights
Samar Assad
A History of Israeli-Palestinian Prisoner Exchanges
Ron Jacobs
Japan and Pre-Emptive Strikes: Why Would They Want to Go There?
Lee Ballinger
A New Kind of Jim Crow?
Walter Brasch
A World Without Fajitas?: the Rightwing's Language Police
Dave Lindorff
The Bush Swingers?: They Broke the Law and People Died
Clifton Ross
Up from Below in Oaxaca
Tom Crumpacker
Planning for the Re-Colonization of Cuba
Ricardo Alarcon
The Mad Annexationist
William Hughes
Rev. Billy Graham: A War-Monger in the Pulpit
Susie Day
Bugging Hillary
Farrah Hassen
The Road to Gitmo: Dramatizing the Banality of Evil
Poets' Basement
Smith-Ferri, Engel and Davies
July 13, 2006
Saul Landau
Lies as Patriotism?
Youmans / Erakat
Divestment, Corporate Engagement
and Israel
Dave Lindorff
Cut and Run: a Winning Strategy
Ron Jacobs
Dogs of War Barking at the Moon
Col. Dan Smith
Iraq: Fool Me Twice
June 22, 2006
Marjorie Cohn
Friendly Fire Ambush
Winslow T. Wheeler
Lockheed, the Senator and the F-22
Tanya Reinhart
A Week of Israeli Restraint
Mike Marqusee
The Forest Gate Raid
William Blum
Why Bush's Iraq is Worse Than Saddam's
June 21, 2006
Ramzy Baroud
Zarqawi's Death: Myth vs. Reality
Patrick Cockburn
Embassy Work as Death Sentence
Gary Leupp
Making the Case for Impeachment
Greg Moses
Elite Logic at the Border
June 20, 2006
Fred Gardner
The Long War on Aspirin
Omar Waraich
Ode to Joy: Watching Blair Sink
Christopher Reed
Japan Nixes Payments to Its Wartime
Slaves
CP Newswire
Coca Cola Takes a Hit
Jonathan Cook
Israel Engineers Another Cover-Up
June 19, 2006
Bill Quigley
HUD's Bulldozers and the Poor of
New Orleans
John Walsh
Tears of a Clown: Al Franken's War
Mike Whitney
The Zoom Lens War: Bush's Baghdad
Photo Op
Alexander Cockburn
The Left and the Blathersphere
June 16 / 18, 2006
Weekend Edition
Kathy / Bill Christision
The
Power of the Israel Lobby
Joseph Nevins
On the Migrant Trail: No More Walls, No More Deaths
Farrah Hassen
An Interview with Syria's Ambassador to the US, Dr. Imad Moustapha
Greg Moses
The Real Mission of the Uniformed Ghost at the Border
Nicole Colson
"There's No Hope at Gitmo"
John Scagliotti
How MoveOn Wastes Its Donors' Money
Mokhiber / Weissmann
Corporate Democrats
June 15, 2006
Kathy Kelly
Look
Them in the Eye: Honest Abe and the Residents of Ramadi
Norman Solomon
Premature Triangulation: Hillary's Big Problem
Ron Jacobs
Publicity
Stunts as Public Policy
Sam Bahour
Cover Up on Gaza Beach
Ramzy Baroud
Palestine on the Brink
CounterPunch Wire
Death Squads at Colombia's Universities
Gabriel Kolko
Why
a Global Economic Deluge Looms
Website of the Day
Antje Duvekot: Music You've Been Waiting Years to Hear
June 14, 2006
Nicole Colson
"They
Want the Fear Level at a High Pitch": An Interview with Lawyer
Lynne Stewart
Jonathan Cook
Israeli
Law and Order
Joseph Schechla
Bulldozing Palestine: an Open Letter to Caterpillar, Inc.
Michael Carmichael
Bolton at Oxford: Jeered and Taunted
Evelyn Pringle
Karl and George, the Teflon Partnership
Ward Churchill
My Trial By Media: Turning Quibbles Over Footnotes into Felonies
Rev. William E. Alberts
Decoding the Coders of Christ: Jesus the Political Insurgent?
Website of the Day
Marines Iraq Snuff Film
June 13, 2006
Medea Benjamin
Take
Back America Suppresses Anti-War Dissenters at HRC Speech
Anthony Alessandrini
The
Evil of Banality: the General, the New York Times and the Gitmo
Suicides
Paul D'Amato
The
Meaning of Haditha
Dave Lindorff
The Strange Death of Zarqawi: Was He Killed So He Wouldn't Talk?
John Ross
Elections and the World Cup: If Team Mexico Advances, Will Anyone
Show Up to Vote for Lopez Obrador?
Gabriel Garcia
Venezuela and Drug Trafficking: Bush Bashes Chavez Despite Positive
Results
Hilton Obenzinger
DIvestment is a Stand for Equality in Israel
Yitzhak Laor
The Secret of Authority
Juan Antonio Ocasio
Rivera
Puerto Rico at the UN
Jennifer Van Bergen
The
Story Behind Zarqawi's Death: What's the Legality of the Assassination?
Website of the Day
Paul Wright: a Real American Freedom Fighter
June 12, 2006
Paul Craig Roberts
Bush's
Armageddon Wish: a Final End to History?
Patrick Cockburn
The
US Already Misses Zarqawi
Mike Marqusee
Rebranding
a Team: English Nationalism and the World Cup
Lee Sustar
"I
Never Had the American Dream:" Left with No Future by GM and
Delphi
Robert Fisk
Has
Racism Invaded Canada?
Michael J. Smith
Enter Sandman; Exit Kosland
Felice Pace
NPR's Warped Covereage of the MIddle East
Jennifer Loewenstein
Setting
the Record Straight on Hamas
Website of the Day
Our Way Home
June 10 / 11, 2006
Weekend Edition
Robert Fisk
Zarqawi's
End is not a Famous Victory
Diane Christian
Zarqawi's Face
Joe Allen
The American Way of Atrocities: Marine Corps' Killer Virtues
Ralph Nader
Let Us All Praise the Dixie Chicks
Fred Gardner
Tylenol Toxicity Terror
Dave Lindorff
Nothing New About Haditha
Dave Zirin / John
Cox
Will Racism Spoil the World Cup?
Dennis Perrin
Death is Patriotic: Necro-Porn, Live on CNN
Greg Moses
Militarizing the Border: Why Operation Jump Start Worries Me
John Chuckman
Terror in Toronto or Tempest in a Teapot?
Michael J. Smith
Babes in Kosland: Dem Blogfest, Day Two
Roger Burbach
Bachelet in DC: Chilean President Refuses to Back Down to Bush
Ira Moskowitz
Israeli Court Finds Mad-Dog US Prof Libeled CounterPuncher Neve
Gordon
Sam Bahour
The Gaza Air Strikes: Begging for a Response
Seth Sandronsky
Grocery Chains and Bush's Ownership Society: Profits Fall, Stores
Close
Michael Berg
A Father's Day Message: Both Parties Have Betrayed America
Kirsten Roberts
Desmond Dekker and the Music of the Shantytowns
Ron Jacobs
Who's Fooling Who?
Jeffrey St. Clair
Playlist: What I'm Listening to This Week
Poets' Basement
Jones, Davies, Engel and Louise
Website of the Weekend
Miles and Trane, So What?
| July 20, 2006
Hayden Revisits Sharon’s 1982 Attack on Beirut and His and Fonda’s Trip of Shame
I Was Israel’s Dupe
By TOM HAYDEN
Alexander Cockburn writes: Twenty four years ago Ariel Sharon’s artillerymen bombarded Beirut, causing huge terrible civilian casualties, just as Israel’s bombs are doing today. The destruction was so savage that NYT’s Beirut correspondent Thomas Friedman complained bitterly in an indiscreet in-house memo when his editors axed the word “indiscriminate” which Friedman had used to describe the bombing. I published that internal memo in the Village Voice and Friedman thought he was going to lose his job. Standing next to those Israeli gunners and cheering them on were Tom Hayden and Jane Fonda, eager to promote Hayden’s political career in California. It was one of the most disgusting political spectacles of the 1980s and I wrote angrily that “in the halls of the National Gallery in Washington DC there are 54 portraits of Benedict Arnold. None look alike. All resemble Tom Hayden.” Now, amid another Israeli onslaught Hayden makes amends, with a mea culpa for that trip and an important glimpse of how what’s loosely called “the lobby” really works, when it comes to electing its chosen politicians.
Twenty-five years ago I stared into the eyes of Michael Berman, chief operative for his congressman-brother, Howard Berman. I was a neophyte running for the California Assembly in a district that the Bermans claimed belonged to them.
“I represent the Israeli defense forces,” Michael said. I thought he was joking. He wasn’t. Michael seemed to imagine himself the gatekeeper protecting Los Angeles’ Westside for Israel’s political interests, and those of the famous Berman-Waxman machine. Since Jews represented one-third of the Democratic district’s primary voters, Berman held a balance of power.
All that year I tried to navigate the district’s Jewish politics. The solid historical liberalism of the Westside was a favorable factor, as was the strong support of many Jewish community leaders. But the community was moving in a more conservative direction. Some were infuriated at my sponsorship of Santa Monica’s tough rent control ordinance. Many in the organized community were suspicious of the New Left for becoming Palestinian sympathizers after the Six Day War; they would become today’s neoconservatives.
I had traveled to Israel in a generally supportive capacity, meeting officials from all parties, studying energy projects, befriending peace advocates like the writer Amos Oz. I also met with Palestinians and commented favorably on the works of Edward Said. As a result, a Berman ally prepared an anti-Hayden dossier in an attempt to discredit my candidacy with the Democratic leadership in the California state capital.
This led to the deli lunch with Michael Berman. He and his brother were privately leaning toward an upcoming young prosecutor named Adam Schiff, who later became the congressman from Pasadena. But they calculated that Schiff couldn’t win without name recognition, so they were considering “renting” me the Assembly seat, Berman said. But there was one condition: that I always be a “good friend of Israel.”
This wasn’t a particular problem at the time. Since the 1970s I had favored some sort of two-state solution. I felt close to the local Jewish activists who descended from the labor movement and participated in the civil rights and anti-Vietnam movements. I wanted to take up the cause of the aging Holocaust survivors against the global insurance companies that had plundered their assets.
While I believed the Palestinians had a right to self-determination, I didn’t share the animus of some on the American left who questioned Israel’s very legitimacy. I was more inclined toward the politics of Israel’s Peace Now and those Palestinian nationalists and human rights activists who accepted Israel’s pre-1967 borders as a reality to accommodate. I disliked the apocalyptic visions of the Israeli settlers I had met, and thought that even hard-line Palestinians would grudgingly accept a genuine peace initiative.
I can offer my real-life experience to the present discussion about the existence and power of an “Israel lobby.” It is not as monolithic as some argue, but it is far more than just another interest group in a pluralist political world. In recognizing its diversity, distinctions must be drawn between voters and elites, between Reform and Orthodox tendencies, between the less observant and the more observant. During my ultimate 18 years in office, I received most of my Jewish support from the ranks of the liberal and less observant voters. But I also received support from conservative Jews who saw themselves as excluded by a Jewish (and Democratic) establishment.
However, all these rank-and-file constituencies were attuned to the question of Israel, even in local and state elections, and would never vote for a candidate perceived as anti-Israel or pro-Palestinian. I had to be certified “kosher,” not once but over and over again.
The certifiers were the elites, beginning with rabbis and heads of the multiple mainstream Jewish organizations, especially each city’s Jewish Federation. An important vetting role was held as well by the American-Israel Political Action Committee (AIPAC), a group closely associated with official parties in Israel. When necessary, Israeli ambassadors, counsels general and other officials would intervene with statements declaring someone a “friend of Israel.”
In my case, a key to the “friendship issue” was the Los Angeles-based counsel general Benjamin Navon. Though politics drew us together, our personal friendship was genuine enough. I think that Benny, as he was called, wanted to pull me and my then-wife, Jane Fonda, into a pro-Israel stance, but he himself was an old-school labor/social democrat who personally believed in a negotiated political settlement. We enjoyed personal and intellectual time together, and I still keep on my bookshelf a wooden sculpture by his wife, of an anguished victim of violence.
The de facto Israeli endorsement would be communicated indirectly, in compliance with laws that prohibit foreign interference in an American election. We would be seen and photographed together in public. Benny would make positive public statements that could be quoted in campaign mailings. As a result, I was being declared “kosher” by the ultimate source, the region’s representative of the state of Israel.
Nevertheless, throughout the spring 1982 campaign I was accused of being a left-wing madman allied to terrorism and communism. The national Democratic leader Walter Mondale commented jokingly during a local visit that I was being described as worse than Lenin. It was a wild ride.
I won the hard-fought primary by 51% to 45%. The Bermans stayed neutral. Willie Brown, Richard Alatorre and the rest of the California Democratic establishment were quietly supportive. I easily won the general election in November.
But that summer I made the mistake of my political career. The Israel Defense Forces invaded Lebanon, and Benny Navon wanted Jane and me to be supportive. It happened that I had visited the contested border in the past, witnessed the shelling of civilian Israeli homes, and interviewed Israeli and Lebanese zealots—crazies, I thought, who were preaching preventive war. I opposed cross-border rocket attacks and naively favored a demilitarized zone.
Ever curious, and aware of my district’s politics, I decided we should go to the Middle East—but only as long as the Israeli “incursion,” as it was delicately called, was limited to the 10-kilometer space near the Lebanese border, as a cushion against rocket fire. Benny Navon assured me that the “incursion” was limited, and would be followed by negotiations and a solution. I also made clear our opposition to the use of any fragmentation bombs in the area, and my ultimate political identification with what Israeli Peace Now would say.
There followed a descent into moral ambiguity and realpolitick that still haunts me today. When we arrived at the Israeli-Lebanon border, the game plan promised by Benny Navon had changed utterly. Instead of a localized border conflict, Israel was invading and occupying all of Lebanon—with us in tow. Its purpose was to destroy militarily the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) haven in Lebanon. This had been Gen. Ariel Sharon’s secret plan all along, and I never will know with certainty whether Benny Navon had been deceived along with everyone else.
For the next few weeks, I found myself defending Israel’s “right” to self-defense on its border, only to realize privately how foolish I was becoming. In the meantime, Israel’s invasion was continuing, with ardent Jewish support in America.
Finally, a close friend and political advisor of mine, Ralph Brave, took me for a walk, looked into my eyes and said: “Tom, you can’t do this. You have to stop.” He was right, and I did. In the California Legislature, I went to work on Holocaust survivor issues while withdrawing from the bind of Israeli-Palestinian politics. When the first Palestinian intifada began, I sensed from experience that the balance of forces had changed, and that the Israeli occupation was finished. Frictions developed between me and some of my Israeli and Jewish friends when I suggested that Israel must make a peace deal immediately or accept a worse deal later.
It is still painful and embarrassing to describe these events of nearly 25 years ago, but with Israel today again bombing Lebanon and Israeli officials bragging about “rolling back the clock by twenty years” and reconfiguring the Middle East, I feel obliged to speak out against history repeating.
How do I read today’s news through the lens of the past?
What I fear is that the “Israeli lobby” is working overtime to influence American public opinion on behalf of Israel’s military effort to “roll back the clock” and “change the map” of the region, going far beyond issues like prisoner exchange.
What I fear is that the progress of the American peace movement against the Iraq war will be diverted and undermined, at least for now, by the entry of Israel from the sidelines into the center of the equation.
What I fear is the rehabilitation of the discredited U.S. neoconservative agenda to ignite a larger war against Hamas, Hezbollah, Syria and Iran. The neoconservatives’ 1996 “Clean Break” memo advocated that Israel “roll back” Lebanon and destabilize Syria in addition to overthrowing Saddam Hussein. An intellectual dean of the neoconservatives, Bernard Lewis, has long advocated the “Lebanonization” of the Middle East, meaning the disintegration of nation states into “a chaos of squabbling, feuding, fighting sects, tribes, regions and parties.”
This divide-and-conquer strategy, a brainchild of the region’s British colonizers, is already taking effect in Iraq, where America overthrew a secular state, installed a Shiite majority and its militias in power and now portrays itself as the only protection for Sunnis against those same Shiites. The resulting quagmire has become a justification for American troops to remain.
What I fear is trepidation and confusion among rank-and-file voters and activists, and the paralysis of politicians, especially Democrats, who last week were moving gradually toward setting a deadline for U.S. withdrawal from Iraq. The politics of the present crisis favor the Republicans and the White House in the short run. How many politicians will favor withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq under present conditions? Isn’t this Karl Rove’s game plan for the November elections?
What I know is that I will not make the same mistake again. I hope that my story deepens the resolve of all those whose feelings are torn, conflicted or confused in the present. It is not being a “friend of Israel” to turn a blind eye to its never-ending occupation.
One might argue, and many Americans today might agree, that Hezbollah and Hamas started this round of war with their provocative kidnappings of Israeli soldiers. Lost in the headlines, however, is the fact that the Israelis have 9,000 Palestinian prisoners, and have negotiated prisoner swaps before. Others will blame the Islamists for incessant rocket attacks on Israel. But the roots of this virulent spiral of vengeance lie in the permanent occupation of Palestinian territories by the overconfident Israelis. As it did in 1982, Israel now admits that the war is not about prisoner exchanges or cease-fires; it is about eradicating Hezbollah and Hamas altogether, if necessary by an escalation against Syria or even Iran. It should be clear by now that the present Israeli government will never accept an independent Palestinian state, but rather harbors a colonial ambition to decide which Palestinian leaders are acceptable.
In 1982, Israel said the same thing about eliminating PLO sanctuaries in Lebanon. It was after that 1982 Israeli invasion that Hezbollah was born. I remember Israeli national security experts even taking credit for fostering Hamas and Islamic fundamentalism as safe, reclusive alternatives to Palestinian secular nationalism. I remember watching Israeli soldiers blow up Palestinian houses and carry out collective punishment because, they told me matter-of-factly, punishment is the only language that Arabs understand. Israelis are inflicting collective punishment on Lebanese civilians for the same reason today.
It is clear that apocalyptic forces, openly green-lighted by President Bush, are gambling on the impossible. They are trying to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat in Iraq through escalation in Lebanon and beyond. This is yet another faith-based initiative.
If the American people do not see through the headlines; if the Democrats turn hawkish; if the international community fails to intervene immediately, the peace movement may be sidelined to a prophetic and marginal role for the moment. But we can say the following for now:
Militarism and occupation cannot extinguish the force of Islamic nationalism. Billions in American tax dollars are funding the Israeli troops and bombs.
There needs to be an exit strategy. The absence of any such exit plan is the weakest element of the U.S.-Israeli campaign. Just as the White House says it plans to deploy 50,000 troops on permanent bases in an occupied Iraq, so the Israelis speak of permanently eliminating their enemies, from Gaza to Tehran. The result will be further occupation, resistance and deeper quagmire.
The immediate conflict should not become a pretext for continuing the U.S. military occupation of Iraq. American soldiers should not be stuck waist-deep in a sectarian quagmire. Congressional insistence on denying funds for permanent military bases is a vital first step. Otherwise we will witness a tacit alliance between Israel and the U.S. to dominate the Middle East militarily.
Most important, Americans must not be timid in speaking up, as I was 25 years ago. Silence is consent to occupation.
This article first appeared June 18 on the truthdig site, edited by Robert Scheer.
|