LOS ANGELES New York Israel Italy Chicago New Jersey Philly London San Fran

The God Blog

Email | Print | Text - Text +

July 1, 2008 | 12:07 pm

Joe Klein’s dual-loyalty assertion for Jews

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

Photo
Time’s Joe Klein

Yeah, I’m late to this story, but talk about shaking a hornet’s nest. Last week, Time’s Joe Klein made claims about the Iraq war that has bloggers buzzing, burning,foaming, fuming and, a few, applauding. The reason: his blog post’s penultimate paragraph included some juicy charges of Jewish dual-loyalties prompting an unnecessary war. The Commentary folks—the clearest target of Klein’s attack—took particular issue, and Anti-Defamation League chief Abe Foxman has since chastised Klein.

Here is what Klein, who is Jewish, wrote in that Swampland paragraph:

The notion that we could just waltz in and inject democracy into an extremely complicated, devout and ancient culture smacked—still smacks—of neocolonialist legerdemain. The fact that a great many Jewish neoconservatives—people like Joe Lieberman and the crowd over at Commentary—plumped for this war, and now for an even more foolish assault on Iran, raised the question of divided loyalties: using U.S. military power, U.S. lives and money, to make the world safe for Israel. And then there is the question—made manifest by the no-bid contracts offered U.S. oil companies by the Iraqis—of two oil executives, Bush and Cheney, securing a new source of business for their Texas buddies.

Later that day, Klein added this response to his critics:

You want evidence of divided loyalties? How about the “benign domino theory” that so many Jewish neoconservatives talked to me about—off the record, of course—in the runup to the Iraq war, the idea that Israel’s security could be won by taking out Saddam, which would set off a cascade of disaster for Israel’s enemies in the region? As my grandmother would say, feh! Do you actually deny that the casus belli that dare not speak its name wasn’t, as I wrote in February 2003, a desire to make the world safe for Israel? Why the rush now to bomb Iran, a country that poses some threat to Israel but none—for the moment—to the United States…

First off, the drumbeat for war with Iran, which I would argue had a lot more to do with protecting Israel than invading Iraq, has cooled. As for the issue of dual-loyalty, maybe Klein was ignorant about how sensitive Jews are to this charge, a major source of global anti-Semitism, long before Jonathan Pollard and even 1948. That, however, is not the question that needs to be answered. The real question is: Was Klein’s assessment correct?

Clearly, most of President Bush’s closest defense and foreign-policy advisers were neoconservatives. Many also were Jewish. But to say that Wolfowitz and Feith were neoconservatives because they were Jewish is as strained an argument as saying Tonya Harding became a screwed up skater/person because her mom allegedly dragged her off the ice by her hair (and as strained as that analogy). The Joint Chiefs of Staff, not Jewish. Donald Rumsfeld, not Jewish. Dick Cheney, not Jewish. You get the picture.

More importantly, American foreign policy for the past almost four decades has held that Israel’s best interest is in the U.S.‘s best interest. In other words, if the protection of the Jewish state from Saddam’s whims played a role in the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq—an ill-advised act at that—it likely has as much to do with American policy as American Jewish interest or, as Joe Klein called it, dual loyalty.

This foreign-policy finger-pointing makes a column my editor wrote in 2002 seem all the more prescient. It was titled, “The Jewish War,” and it wasn’t about Judas Maccabeus. It was about my editor, Rob Eshman, noticing a lot of mainstream voices—not just conspiracy theorist Pat Buchanan but “Hardball’s” Chris Matthews and The Nation, for example—referring to Bush’s pro-war advisers mainly as Jews.

Whether you agree with the planned invasion of Iraq or not, to call it a war fomented by American Jewry to serve Israel’s interests is ludicrous. For one, American Jewish legislators are divided on the issue. While Sen. Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn.) is a strong supporter, Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), who chairs the important Senate Armed Services Committee, has consistently urged caution. Jewish groups are divided as well. All strongly oppose Saddam, but no major group has reached a consensus on the use of force to bring about his downfall or on unilateral action against him. And it’s fair to point out—as long as Matthews and others are checking IDs here—that the focus on Iraq is the policy of a Christian president, his mostly Christian advisers, his Christian Cabinet and a largely Christian Congress acting at the behest of a majority of their Christian constituents.

(skip)

But should America get sucked into a debilitating conflict, if Israel appears to have gained strategic ground at the expense of large numbers of American lives, the fringe will move onto center stage, and the calls to label Bush’s policy a Jewish war will rouse us, sharply and painfully, from our couches.

As I’ve written before, Jews clearly have mixed emotions when it comes to the place they call home. This is not a radical statement; it is reality. American Jews since the time of Haym Solomon have been blue-blooded patriots. But Israel, for many, will always be their spiritual home. Does this mean American Jews are loyal to both this country and that country? Of course. But does it mean that, as a point of policy, that Jews sacrifice one for the other? I don’t believe that for a minute—unless we are talking about giving up on Israel for the U.S. That is a quite common phenomenon.

10 Comments — Leave your comment

Share this post: del.icio.us Favicondel.icio.us Digg FaviconDigg Facebook FaviconFacebook Google FaviconGoogle Reddit FaviconReddit StumbleUpon FaviconStumbleUpon Technorati FaviconTechnorati YahooMyWeb FaviconYahooMyWeb

COMMENTS

We welcome your feedback.

Privacy Policy

Your information will not be shared or sold without your consent. Get all the details.

I can’t get that excited anymore about this kind of merde. Joe Klein, ‘who is Jewish’ is subordinate to Time Magazine, which is and has always been antisemitic. Klein simply doesn’t care about his ewish aspect or anyone else’s in any significant way. If is makes for a good article, for controversy, for a brownie point, for political waves, that’s a good issue. Joe Klein - hey, I knew him in the cattle car!

But it’s a cheap shot that will never be punished. A case could be made for regime change and democratizing Iran, and the fact that it was doomed is no reflection on its intentions. Some people have suffered, hopefully who deserved it, and many more were speared suffering, also hopefully deserving. The regime in Iran will likewise be a small loss if and when.

As for Israel, there is no time or room to play out how very valuable and necessary Israel is to the past, present and future of the world and civilization. There is plenty I myself disagree with regarding israel’s policies as anyone who reads me here knows. But rate tiny Israel on a case by case basis down the line against the ENTIRE Muslim world, you pick the terms, and Israel has fifty, a hundred times the gravitas, and that does not even count the Diaspora population. There is no reason to imagine that Iraq and Iran as constituted will be remmebered any more than the last dozen empires to threaten the Jewish people.

Comment by Ben Plonie on 7/01/08 at 5:12 pm

Thank you for calling me prescient. But in this case I would have rather been wrong.
r

Comment by Calendar Guest on 7/01/08 at 5:13 pm

Iraq. Dang, we need an edit function here.

Comment by Ben Plonie on 7/01/08 at 5:13 pm

Keen observers have long known that ‘neocon’ is a code word for ‘Jew’. But keen observers also know that Joe Klein is just the flip side of Wolfowitz and Feith and so forth. These are Jews that have attained to positions of prominence on behalf of their sponsors, regardless of their Jewishness in other respects. The are not defined by Jewishness, which is a continuing objection of mine to attaching the term to them. Neither takes Israel into their calculation except insofar as their sponsors do.

There is a certain chicken-and-egg quality to the whole discussion. I am more inclined to believe that the ‘neocons’ were not the source but the support staff and cheerleaders for the Bush policy.

The direct response to the ‘dual-loyalty’ charge is that, to the extent that we understand the just and moral case for Israel’s permanent existence as a Jewish State, it is literally impossible for a benign and ethical American policy to compromise Israel’s safety. I understand the potential circular nature of the argument, but if we ever find ourselves on a course endangering Israel, we should not shrink from opposing that policy with no fear of disloyalty to the United States. There is no such thing for Jews as ‘my country, right or wrong’. As the Hebrew National ad has it, we answer to a higher authority. There is no dual-loyalty in advocating for good and right and moral and just policies for every State.

Such as Pat Buchanan do not believe the should be a Jewish State of Israel. Such as Joe Klein don’t especially care. The neocons care only in a cold, short-term pragmatic way.

And if for lazy or careless or cowardly reasons we concede any impropriety in Israel’s existence as a Jewish State, then THAT is the opening for charges of dual loyalty.

Comment by Ben Plonie on 7/01/08 at 7:32 pm

Brad, I just discovered The God Blog and have very much enjoyed going through the archives (although I’m neither Jewish or prescient).

I am more current on Iran’s drumbeats than you seem to be, though. grin Seymour Hersh has a new article this week, ominously subtitled “The Bush Administration steps up its secret moves against Iran”.

To be fair to Klein, I don’t think he meant that Wolfowitz and Feith are necons because they are Jewish, although I’m at sea over what he actually does mean. But as you so accurately point out, Wolfie and Fefe had a lot of company in the non-Jewish Bush, Cheney, Rummy, Scooter and the spineless lot of the JCS. Each apparently had their own motives for invading Iraq and as long as shock and awe was the ending point, they didn’t seem to concern themselves much with symmetry of purposes, except in their propaganda, of course.

About the only one that might fit Klein’s description is Feith, and if there is any justice in this world, he is one of a kind in his own dim right.

Also, wasn’t the “benign domino theory” a rerun from the Viet Nam War? The only changed part of the theory seems to be the religion/politics of the dominoes. Has shock and awe ever knocked over any dominoes?

Comment by cjames on 7/03/08 at 12:57 am

It’s easy to forget that theories and commentary are only words. Sometimes events overtake them.

This morning on Google News, a top headline is as follows:
Don’t bomb Iran, Bush warns Israel
New York Daily News - 5 hours ago
BY RICHARD SISK WASHINGTON - President Bush and the top US military commander warned Israel Wednesday against bombing Iran, suggesting the US doesn’t want to get involved in a third war.
US admiral warns Israel against opening Iran ‘third front’ guardian.co.uk
US Admiral Warns Against Attacking Iran AHN
Washington Post - eFluxMedia - Voice of America - Reuters
all 839 news articles

So there go all your Jews, Neocons, plots, influence, hidden agendas.

Here is what will happen. If Israel decides that it faces an existential threat, it will act to neutralize it. It will take all the political cover and goodwill it can get, but that won’t be the deciding factor. The USA will likewise do what it wants. Iran will also do what it wants and thinks it can get away with, just as they are doing today and they did yesterday. And we will all be left sorting out the chips. But the ‘warnings’ under the circumstances are just silly, if politically necessary for somebody’s political cover.

Comment by Ben Plonie on 7/03/08 at 6:25 am

“...Here is what will happen. If Israel decides that it faces an existential threat, it will act to neutralize it. It will take all the political cover and goodwill it can get, but that won’t be the deciding factor.”

Go look in the back of a comic book and get a new crystal ball, victor. The Israel of Ben Gurion, Meir, Menachem Begin, and Yitzhak Rabin would act decisively in their country’s interest. The current crop of sh*tbags have been irrevocably compromised. An Olmert, a Netanyahu, or a Barak will primarily act in the interests of their financial and political masters. If they have any political capitol left after giving unto Caesar, they might throw a bone or two to their constituency, but if the last 20 years or so has been any indication, I doubt it. The fact that AIPAC and their Jewish neocon fellow travellers havn’t yet jumped on the “negotiating with Iran” bandwagon, is only a function of being behind the curve politically. As soon as they realize that its in their (American Jewish) best interests to do so, they will. I give it 3 months at the outside.

No, Israels security will be sacraficed for the sake of the oil market and the American economy. Instead of facing an existential threat and acting to neutralize it, the more likely scenario will be an Israel(in its function as a supplicant client state)forced by its master to accept the reality of an Iranian bomb and the attendant concept of mutually assured destruction.

Comment by Shoded Yam on 7/03/08 at 8:56 am

AIPAC and the ‘neocons’ each have their own agendas, neither specifically Jewish. As you know, AIPAC was for the ‘Disengagement’ which was anti-Jewish and anti-Zionist, because they are the Israeli government PAC. They will advacate negotiating with Iran if and when the Israeli government does. The neocons will do what they do independant of Isreal’s security, something the radicals and antisemites don’t understand. Neither of these will have a direct effect on policy or events in Israel.

I still say the biggest nuclear threat will be an Israeli Manhattan Project (call it a Brooklyn Project if you like) to radically exploit the freely available ambient energy so as to eliminate the need for fossil fuels, and reduce the Arabs to a feeble little KKK.

You are completely right about the current bogus ‘leadership’ in Israel including Netanyahu. I just hope it is more than wishful thinking that the Israelis will refuse to absorb a nuclear strike or another massive rocket barrage for political or diplomatic reasons. They can’t be that indoctrinated. Can they?

Comment by Ben Plonie on 7/03/08 at 10:19 am

“..They will advacate negotiating with Iran if and when the Israeli government does”

Now we’re cooking with gas. Exactly correct. The Israeli government will only do what the American gov’t and its subsidiary economic interests allow them to do. Ultimately since AIPAC’s interests have more to do with advancing the political and social agenda of American Jews rather than that of anything having to do with Israel per se, this is convenient.

Comment by Shoded Yam on 7/03/08 at 11:32 am

This guy has it right
http://www.jewishjournal.com/opinion/article/a_timid_proisrael_lobby_doesnt_work_20060203/
February 2, 2006
A Timid Pro-Israel Lobby Doesn’t Work
By Neal Sher
“...Unhappily, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) is in peril of becoming a modern-day version of the ancient court Jew.”

(Sher is former Executive Director of AIPAC)

By trying to play it safe, they fail to accomplish anything.

Allow me to digress: New Hebrew verb detected by recent olim, L’Condol, defined as “flitting from place to place, accomplishing nothing.” (derivation from Condoleeza)

Comment by Ben Plonie on 7/06/08 at 2:00 am

Post a Comment

Name:  
Email:  
URL:  

Type the word you see below:

Comment:

About this Blog

Blog Home
About the Blogger(s)
Contact

RSS


Blog Archive

Newspaper

Serving a community of 600,000, The Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angles is the largest Jewish weekly outside New York City. Our award-winning paper reaches over 150,000 educated, involved and affluent readers each week. Subscribe here.

© Copyright 2010 The Jewish Journal and JewishJournal.com
All rights reserved. JewishJournal.com is hosted by Nexcess.net. Homepage design by Koret Communications.
Widgets by Mijits. Site construction by Hop Studios.

counter fake hit page