.
By Charles W. “Chas” Freeman Jr.
The Israel Lobby is taking aim at another prospective Obama administration appointee deemed insufficiently supportive of Israel’s Likud policies, ex-Nebraska Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel. A similar campaign of vilification was waged against Ambassador Chas Freeman in 2009, as he recalls.
History is indeed repeating itself with Sen. Chuck Hagel; this time,
as Marx predicted, as farce. All of the elements I noted in my statement
of withdrawal in 2009 are there:
“The tactics of the Israel Lobby plumb the depths of dishonor and
indecency and include character assassination, selective misquotation,
the willful distortion of the record, the fabrication of falsehoods, and
an utter disregard for the truth. The aim of this Lobby is control of
the policy process through the exercise of a veto over the appointment
of people who dispute the wisdom of its views, the substitution of
political correctness for analysis, and the exclusion of any and all
options for decision by Americans and our government other than those
that it favors.”
None of this has changed, including the effort to make the campaign
appear to be about something other than obeisance to Israel. (China in
my case; so far gay rights — with more likely to come — in Sen.
Hagel’s.) [For details, see below “Hagel: Neocons’ Last Stand?”]
There are some differences, however. I had been appointed. Hagel has
not yet been nominated. Unlike Secretary of Defense, the head of the
National Intelligence Council is not subject to Senate confirmation. If
nominated, Sen. Hagel faces hearings in which he has the opportunity to
clear his name and a process of voting in which politicians must take a
stand rather than hide behind the Lobby.
Neither were available to me. The campaign against Hagel is also more
open than the internet and corridor-whispering campaign against me.
The Secretary of Defense is a policy official, the head of the NIC is
responsible for analytical input but not for policy decisions. The NIC
is a subcabinet position, with a supervisor who reports to the
President. The Secretary of Defense has no superior other than the
President, who cannot disclaim responsibility or leave the decision
whether to stand or fight to a subordinate.
Finally, Sen. Hagel appears actively to want to return to government
service. I agreed only reluctantly to do so. Sen. Hagel’s appointment as
Secretary of Defense would cap an honorable political career by
elevating him to higher office. My return to government at the same
level as my last position in it would have been an invisible afterward
to 30 years of dignified but obscure public service.
The stakes seem at first glance to be surprisingly similar. In 2009, I
noted that “the outrageous agitation … [over my appointment casts]
doubt on [the President's] ability to consider, let alone decide what
policies might best serve the interests of the United States rather than
those of a Lobby intent on enforcing the will and interests of a
foreign government.”
As I and others foresaw, my defeat was the first of many setbacks to
Obama’s declared objective of righting U.S. policies in the Middle East
and repairing our relations with the Muslim world.
The controversy over my appointment also politicized appointments to
the intelligence community. But that over Hagel is far more important
and potentially far-reaching in its effects. It threatens to extend the
process of “borking” from the Supreme Court to the Cabinet appointment
process and, if it appears to deter the President from nominating Hagel,
it will confirm the domestic and international impression of President
Obama as someone who confuses following from the front with leadership
and who habitually yields rather than stands his ground. Continue Reading
Friday 28 December 2012
Israel Lobby Takes Aim Again
Posted @ 17:38
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment