Re: Bush mideast policy

On Mon, 26 Mar 2001 Threehegemons@aol.com wrote:

> Boris--I'm not following what you think the roots of Bush's policy are.  As 
>this article notes, it represents a striking departure from his father's, 
>which tended to be influenced by the oil industries desire for closer 
>relations with the Arab states (besides, as James Baker famously noted, Jews 
>don't vote for Republicans anyway).  W's policy seems in line with his other 
>foreign policy--macho militarism (Sharon seems like his type) plus hostility 
>to 'wimpy' interventionism (we don't want to get overly involved in 'peace 
>processes'--we have missile defense systems to build!).  Furthermore, given 
>the importance of Florida, even though most Jews don't vote for them, the 
>Republicans can't risk losing any of the votes of those who do (the same sort 
>of considerations are likely to mean no progress on Cuba during this 
>administration).  As the New York Times is clearly distancing themselves from 
>Bush's policy, it seems hard to argue that embracing Sharon represents a 
>consensus amo!
ng t!
> he American capitalist class--am
>  I misunderstanding you?

I'm certainly not saying that.  There was an argument made here at some
point that the true interests of US capital are in establishing better
relations with oil-producing states, and the only thing that keeps the US
state maintain its uncritical support for Israel is its being beholden to
the Zionist lobby.  Here now we have a president who is an oilman if
nothing else, and whose support among US Jewry is not that strong.
Seemingly, he would push for a settlement harder than the previous
administration given this understanding of US interests (which is clearly 
what the Palestinian leadership expected, not without reason). Instead, he
gives carte blanche to Sharon - in spite of the fact, incidentally, that
the majority of Jews in the US do support at least some kind of
settlement.  It's true that part of Bush's policy is to machoize foreign
relations and to reject "wimpy internationalism".  But it seems to me that
an eschatological interest in Jewish control of Palestine, and especially
Jerusalem, is the cornerstone of a significant part of the US elite,
especially that part of it that proclaims itself as born again (as W.
does).  To assume that policy is driven solely by the Zionist lobby (an
opinion which must necessarily be compounded by the assumption that the
lack of critical discussion of Mideast politics stems from the Zionist
control of the mass media as well) is to fall into racialist
conspiratorialism.


-- 
Boris Stremlin
bc70219@binghamton.edu