That America is a friend of Israel is well known. While this
is often explained as owing to an unrepresentative Israel lobby, the
underlying explanation is American public opinion. Pro-Israeli feeling
is very strong among ordinary Americans, who see in a fellow settler
nation a functioning democracy surrounded by hostile undemocratic
states. The record of American foreign policy is also clearly far from
slavishly pro-Israel and anti-Arab, with America often aiding other
nations in the region.
The myth of an all-powerful Israel Lobby If the notion of an all-powerful Israel
lobby dictating American foreign policy ignores the central fact
explaining why American policies have so often, though not always, been
pro-Israel.
It is received wisdom for many that Tony Blair’s desire to make
Britain a bridge between America and Europe, and to support the United States in the war
on terror, meant Britain was walked over. This was most commonly expressed as the idea of
Blair as President Bush’s ‘poodle’, who did as he was told and got
nothing in return. In reality, Blair requested and received much.
Myth: America did not support Britain during the Falklands War Fact:
To the frustration of Margaret Thatcher, the Reagan Administration was divided between
the ‘Atlanticists’ who favoured Britain and the ‘Latinistas’ who
opposed America coming out in support. But Thatcher succeeded in persuading President
Reagan that backing Britain had greater value than supporting the existential,
geographical pull of Argentina. US Defence Secretary Casper Weinberger led
America’s effort to support Britain and supplied the UK military with much needed
equipment such as submarine detectors, missiles and aircraft fuel.[1] That Britain was able to win this argument
when there were divisions within the US Government is evidence of British influence not
impotence.
Myth: With the United States
preoccupied by the war on terror and Iraq, ties with Latin America have deteriorated
substantially in recent years Fact: The US preserves strong
relations with the majority of nations in the Hemisphere. It has negotiated free trade
agreements with eleven of Latin America’s 34 nations and provides extensive free
trade access to most others. Nine of the agreements have been ratified and
implemented and the other two (with Colombia and Panama) are currently pending before the
US Congress. Assistance and funding have substantially increased for a wide range
of assistance programs. Strong support for Colombia, where the security situation
has improved dramatically, has helped bring this nation back from the brink of
failure. Despite differences on trade, relations with Brazil are on a solid
footing.
In
all of our briefings, our authors aim to make a reasonable case and
supply the facts and referencing to support the argument made. But some
briefings make a more controversial case than others. We consider this
one of our more controversial briefings.
Ten questions and answers on
America’s involvement in Iraq.
Did the US go to war for
oil? No. In fact the United States
imports only a small portion of its oil from the Middle East. Most US oil imports come
from secure sources in Canada and Mexico. The primary reason for resuming hostilities
against the regime of Saddam Hussein (halted after the ceasefire at the end of Operation
Desert Storm in 1991) was that Iraq failed to meet its obligations under the ceasefire
agreement, particularly with regard to declaring the state of banned weapons programs.
Iraq’s December 7, 2002 “full and complete” weapons declaration was
particularly troubling, recycling past denials and containing little new information,
making it clear that Saddam Hussein was unwilling to abide by the agreements signed in
1991. In the wake of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington
DC, the administration was deeply concerned that Iraq possessed nuclear, biological, and
chemical and might share them with transnational terrorist groups.
In the wake of Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay and the Bush Administration’s lack of clarity on practices such as ‘water-boarding’, considered by many to be torture, the United States has been widely criticised on human rights issues. The US has become regarded by many as somewhat hypocritical – and for the most strident anti-Americans, the US is talked of as a human rights abuser far more frequently than North Korea, Burma or Sudan.
That America is a friend of Israel is well known. While this
is often explained as owing to an unrepresentative Israel lobby, the
underlying explanation is American public opinion. Pro-Israeli feeling
is very strong among ordinary Americans, who see in a fellow settler
nation a functioning democracy surrounded by hostile undemocratic
states. The record of American foreign policy is also clearly far from
slavishly pro-Israel and anti-Arab, with America often aiding other
nations in the region.
