On Joe Klein and the Jewish Neoconservatives

You may have missed it, but renowned Time columnist Joe Klein and the Jewish neoconservative blogosphere are at war with one another. The reason this is more important than an argument on who sits where in shul is that Klein has refused to cower, and as a respected member of the mainstream media is pushing back against one of the uglier and more debate-restricting phenomena of recent years. Here is what Joe had to say on 'Swampland', his blog on the Time website:

There is a small group of Jewish neoconservatives who unsuccessfully tried to get Benjamin Netanyahu to attack Saddam Hussein in the 1990s, and then successfully helped provide the intellectual rationale for George Bush to do it in 2003... Happily, these people represent a very small sliver of the Jewish population in this country...I remain proud of my Jewish heritage, a strong supporter of Israel...But I am not willing to grant these ideologues the anonymity they seek...I believe there are a small group of Jewish neoconservatives who are pushing for war with Iran because they believe it is in America's long-term interests and because they believe Israel's existence is at stake. They are wrong and recent history tells us they are dangerous. They are also bullies and I'm not going to be intimidated by them.

It came in response to the latest outburst from Podhoretz Jr. at the Commentary blog: "As for his [Klein] use of classic anti-Semitic canards, I am happy to report that the Jewish people will long survive Joe Klein". Mazal Tov, Joe, you have became a thing that the Jewish people will survive, no less.

All of this came on the heels of an earlier and none-too-friendly exchange of letters between Klein and the Anti-Defamation League, when the latter saw fit to attack Klein over his characterization of the role of the Jewish neoconservatives in the run-up to the Iraq War. Joe stood his ground then, too, effectively dismissing the claim of anti-Semitism and explaining that "most Jews disagree with their [the Jewish neocons] politics and many Jews are disgusted with their behavior." Klein expanded upon these themes in an interview on Jeffrey Goldberg's blog that is well worth reading.

I would suggest that this is not just Klein's private kerfuffle: it matters to Jewish America, to America and Israel too, and to being able to have a more serious conversation about anti-Semitism in the future.

The Klein thesis shared by a great many commentators and analysts (this writer included) goes something like this: Bush administration policies in the Middle East have had disastrous consequences for the US; Israel too is in a less secure and worse place as a result of these policies; ultimate responsibility for all this lies with the president himself and his hawkish and close group of senior aides--principal among them Veep Cheney; the neoconservatives played an important role in providing an ideological framing for these policies; within that neoconservative world there operates a prominent and tight-knit group of Jewish neocons who are ideologically driven in part by an old school Likudist view of Israeli interests.

Were the Jewish neocons in control and did they make the fatal decisions? No. Are all Jews neoconservatives or are all neoconservatives Jews? Please! Are the Jews or Israel to blame for the Bush Middle East debacle? Get outta here.

Something did happen though -- there was a failure within the mainstream, Jewish and non-Jewish, to identify the existence of a particular Jewish neoconservative narrative and then to challenge that narrative as being fundamentally flawed in its reading of both American and Israeli interests. One of the causes of that vacuum was the abuse and cheapening of the term anti-Semitism as it was hurled at many who went after Podhoretz, Perle, Feith, and co. They tried, and sadly rather successfully, built a wall of untouchability. Klein is taking his shofar or trumpet to that wall, as many have done before, but Joe is particularly MSM, and therefore important.

Too many Jewish communal leaders and institutions made the mistake of not standing up and speaking out more against the right-wing excesses of a small minority of their co-religionists. Some even embraced and feted the neocons -- a mistake AIPAC particularly excelled in and something I get the impression that AIPAC is at least partially trying to walk itself back from. Israeli leaders, interestingly enough, appear to be less enthusiastic -- there is evidence that Prime Minister Sharon thought the Iraq War not to be a good idea and outgoing Prime Minister Olmert has begun proximity talks with the Syrians.

Similar mistakes are being made with the far-right Christian Evangelical Zionists, and John Hagee's group CUFI. Can there be a more vile poster-boy for Israel than Hagee?!

Polls consistently show that American Jewish opinion is in a very different place. Over a decade ago, J.J. Goldberg described how what he called the "new Jews", who were out of sync with the majority, assumed the mantle of leadership in the American Jewish community. In his book Jewish Power: Inside the American Jewish Establishment, Goldberg claimed that a set of facts had emerged by the mid-1970s that transformed organized Jewry, based around the 1967 Israeli military victory, the role of the Soviet Jewry campaign in Soviet-US relations, and the belated rise of popular Holocaust awareness with its attendant "never again" maxim. This created the counter-revolution of the "new Jews" -- a passionate minority of defensive nationalists, driven by a terrible vision, living amidst an overwhelming majority of still optimistic Jewish liberals. To quote J.J. Goldberg, "their defiance was so strident, and their anger so intense, that the rest of the Jewish community respectfully stood back and let the new Jews take the lead."

The "new Jews" of Goldberg's 1997 book are today's Jewish neoconservatives, and the reason this is so important right now is the issue raised by Joe Klein -- their aggressive advocacy of a military strike against Iran, a position that again places them out of step with the majority of American Jews. There have been a series of articles advocating such military action. It is true that such voices are also heard in Israel (and some even appear in the New York Times op-ed page, most notably this truly horrific and pathetically argued piece by Benny Morris).

I would argue that Israel has made a strategic mistake in making the gevalt approach so central in its response to suspected Iranian nuclear ambitions. Israel is stronger than that and it also has the capacity to deter Iran. It also has U.S. support. It is worth remembering that Israel, evidently, has not attacked Iran, so in practice, at least so far, the military is not the preferred option. In their declarations, Israeli leaders express a preference for a diplomatic solution to the Iranian nuclear question. And prominent ex- and even current officials have endorsed American engagement with Iran as the best option, including ex-Mossad chief Efraim Halevy and ex-Foreign Minister Shlomo Ben-Ami. In private, Israeli leaders are apparently more circumspect. This report appeared some time ago in Haaretz about Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni:

Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni said a few months ago in a series of closed discussions that in her opinion that Iranian nuclear weapons do not pose an existential threat to Israel...Livni also criticized the exaggerated use that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is making of the issue of the Iranian bomb, claiming that he is attempting to rally the public around him by playing on its most basic fears.

I will not go too deeply into the Iran policy debate, but a more compelling case than that of Podhoretz and co. is that military action would be a disaster for Israel, for America, and for the American Jewish community, too.

The problem for the American Jewish community would not seem to be with exposing the objectionable positions of Jewish neoconservatives and then having a debate. The danger is in the opposite approach -- in creating the impression that the Jewish neoconservative voice is the Jewish voice, or that of the "pro-Israel" lobby, and in drowning out, or more accurately, suppressing the voice of the majority. That would be a way to not only increase the risk of an extremely dangerous policy being pursued and to make support for Israel the partisan domain of the far-right bomb-bomb-bomb Iran crowd, but it would also cede the ground to those who are emptying the charge of anti-Semitism of all meaning. And those are good enough reasons for Joe Klein's cause to be our cause too.

Comments

[kantcould]

FYI, I have emailed a link to this piece to all of my family and Jewish friends with the following cover:
"I'm sending you this link to Daniel Levy's piece in the Huffington Post because I think it is critical for every Jew in America to read and discuss. Be sure and click-to-read the hyperlinks in the article. Levy puts in perspective the unfolding dust-up between TIME uber columnist Joe Klein and the powerful neocon establishment invoking, in the bargain, accusations of anti-Semitism from the magisterial Abe Foxman of the ADL. If anyone ever dared "beard the lion in his den", Klein has and he deserves high marks for chutzpah, indeed, Yankee guts. He has raised an issue most American Jews have simply abdicated responsibility for dealing with -- to their/our peril. Either we risk the anti-Semitic label for cleaning our own house or, rest assured, non-Semites will do the job in a very ugly way. "

[calbears]

I'm afraid it's not all about money but about money and anti-Arab racism in the U.S. Unfortunately, it is not only neo-cons who have propagated anti-Arab racism but also liberals as well. It's tragic, because that racism has allowed the American people to sleep walk while their leaders tortured people and while Israeli soldiers murder and imprison Palestinian children. It's also allowed the American public to not do anything particularly to stop the death of the two state solution, as the Bush administration has allowed Israel to keep expanding beyond the 1967 borders. It's the Bush administration that has permitted the Occupied Territories to become Somalia-like, but it's Barak Obama who just marched over to Jerusalem and did the usual song and dance about America and Israel, a song and dance designed for some elderly Jewish voters in Florida and New York whose interests are first Israel's, the America's. Yet this group is dying out, and eventually some American leader will have to have enough courage and brains to see that we, as the sponsoring superpower of Israel, have allowed a situation in which it is no longer possible to have a Palestinian state. Then, that person may be forced to have the guts to tell the American people that our government let it happen.

[Adamwestiii]

I certainly concur with your remarks. Additionally when Palestinians attack they are called "Terrorists" but when the IDF attacks Palestinians they are referred to as: "Commandos". Yet, in my opinion the Palestinians are fighting for their land that is being taken away from them as the Israeli government continues building settlements on stolen land. One must not forget since 1948, the US in grant form annually gives to Israel $1400.00 per year for every man, woman and child living in that country. This grant is in addition to foreign aid. Iran has never attacked any country in over 200 years. Yet, they have a right to defend their sovereignty. One can hear anytime something being factual about Israel's attacks on Palestinian people, they are referred to as anti-semitic.

[ErnestineBass]

THANK YOU, Daniel, for speaking truth to power. Brilliant article!

[nypoet22]

y'know, as a people so renowned for our financial acumen, it's unnerving how easily fooled many of us (especially among the orthodox) have been by the neo-con rhetoric. one would think that more jews would realize most of the chest-beating on israel's apparent behalf was a political feint to trick them into abandoning their own economic interests (as well as those of israel, by the way). yes folks, IT'S ALL ABOUT THE MONEY, and it's downright scary that so much of the jewish community has been so easily fooled.

in truth, the judeo-con agenda is barely about israel at all, it's about building a community to support anti-union and pro-oil business interests. the cons have spent decades refining their message to mislead patriotic jews against their interests. part of the problem is that the Left tend also to have a very flawed view of the Israeli conflict, which the judeo-cons exploit to win converts to their side.

[ched]

Thanks, Daniel, for an illuminating post. It's important that you and Joe Klein, and of course, Glenn Greenwald, continue to expose the backroom dealings of the neocons, and their lobbying arms, AIPAC and even the ADL for the overly influential minority that they are. Until everyone realizes that they are the lunatic fringe, and not the majority, sane voices like those of Mearshimer, Walt and Juan Cole will be stifled and derided as "anti-semetic."

[aleco]

I'm glad we're finally having a dialogue on this subject, thanks to you Mr. Levy and Joe Klein.

Bush and Cheney used the neo-cons to scam America. I don't believe Bush and Cheney give a rat's ass about Israel. Cheney's connection with Halliburton was the driving force for instigating the war with Iraq. No one will ever convince me otherwise. 9/11 presented a golden opportunity for Bush and Cheney to make millions of dollars for Halliburton and themselves. Why do you think Bush wants to stay in Iraq indefinitely? The longer the U.S. stays in Iraq the more money Halliburton makes. The more money Halliburton makes the more money Bush and Cheney and now McCain make.

Cheney admitted on "Meet the Press" in 2003 that he knew Halliburton would be a major benefactor if the U.S. went to war with Iraq. Need I say more. Of course his statement has been suppressed by the media. You never hear any reference to it. Tim Russert was asking him to respond to allegations that as former CEO of Halliburton, Cheney had used his influence with the Department of Defense to award Halliburton with major contracts. Cheney replied that he didn't have to because Halliburton was the only company qualified to undertake said contracts and that Halliburton was selected in the normal course of business. I rest my case.

[Simone]

I'm pleased Klein is finally doing more than being his usual talking points windbag, but you lost me in the first sentence when you called him "renowned Time columnist Joe Klein" and "a respected member of the mainstream media".

Well, maybe he's respected among the mainstream media, but he has a long way to go before he's rspected outside that too powerful little club.

[Rog49Thomas]

I am constantly surprised and saddened by the perception that "Jews" are some monolithic bloc.

It may surprise many out there -but gasp "they" are just like you and me.

There are rich ones and poor ones, smart ones and dumb ones, liberals and conservatives. observant and non observant.

Those who support Israel and those who for religious reasons oppose it.

I've even seen people of color who claim membership in the tribe.

[Ruraljuror]

This is a fantastic article, a great analysis of the diversity of Jewish opinion when it comes to the defense of Israel and to the relationship of Israel's security to US national interests. Israel has long faced forces hostile to its integrity, and so it is not surprising that there is a sizeable faction of hard-liners in Israel and in the Diaspora who favor pre-emptive first strikes and "enhanced interrogation" techniques.
9/11 provided our autocratic tough guys, who had little use for international dialogue and a mistrust of civil rights, with a chance to snuggle up to Jewish neo-cons in public. "Hmmm," they thought. "They want Saddam gone...we want his oil fields...this could really work!"
This marriage of like-minded souls has produced a monstrous foreign policy, which, yes indeedy, the same folks would like to take to Iran. They would like to take out another government that yells about Israel for the sake of its base, but that doesn't really want to duke it out with the US or anybody else about it. And, oh yeah, they too have a lot of oil.
The great thing about the article (and Joe Klein's statements) is that this analysis makes it easier to critique neo-con policies without seeming to dabble in anti-semitism.

[Mykel]

Joe Klein: an American Hero.

[berkeleygirl1962]

As a perusal of the editorial pages of Ha'aretz will tell you, there is more dissent among Jews in Israel than is "allowed" by the Jewish establishment in the U.S. But the tradition of American Jewish criticism of the Israeli government is as old as Israel itself (see Einstein, Bellow, Arendt et al, http://www.physics.harvard.edu/~wilson/NYTimes1948.html ), and Mr. Klein is right to encourage the silent majority of American Jews to stand up to the Likudnik bullies; we must assert our vision for a secure Israel that includes justice for Palestine. The ongoing settlement activity in the occupied territories, enabled with a wink and a nod (and a blank check) from the U.S. government, is one of the biggest obstacles to negotiating a workable peace in the region.

[campaignman]

First, a few Jews are blamed for the Iraq war.

Then, they are blamed for actions all over the world, as if they control the world.

Then, AIPAC is blamed for damaging the image of all American Jews.

Then, when Jews express concern that all Jews will be blamed for the recommendations and ideas of a few, someone chimes in that Jews aren't entitled to the word anti-Semitism because, after all, alot of peoples are Semites.

By the way, what is AIPAC? It is an organization that encourages American citizen supporters of Israel to meet with and write letters to their legislators to support the survival and success of Israel and to support funding for Israel. They also encourage opposition to things like arms sales to Arab nations threatening to harm Israel. Shocking! Oh yeah, it is barred by law from donating money to legislators.

Some of the people who supported the war in Iraq were Jewish and had not only written about the need to go to war but were given a base within the Pentagon to push that view. Were they all Jewish? No. Were the ones that were Jewish speaking for all Jews? No. In fact, aren't most Jews liberal Democrats who opposed the Bush administration? Yes. Did the Israeli people or embassy ever request the United States go to war in Iraq? No. Did AIPAC ever put the war on its legislative lobbying agenda and urge our Congress to vote for it? No.

[GZLives]

Well said Campaignman - I'm shocked the censor let it thru

[Eduardodelazul411]

The thing is, AIPAC is Likud-esque in its approach at times, and demonizes dissenting opinions as anti-Semitism.

[CTPatriot]

AIPAC recently sent some 7000 people to lobby congress in favor of H.Con.Res.362, a resolution that would result in a naval blockade of Iran, an act of war. If enacted, this would likely provoke retaliation from Iran providing Bush and the neocons the excuse they have been looking for to attack Iran.

There is no defense for AIPAC's wrong-headed influence over US foreign policy over the last 8 years unless you are either one of their paid propagandists or simply too naive to understand the critical role they have played in supporting the worst of the neocon desires.

As for your claims that the author implicated Jews solely, or as a whole for the war in Iraq, you need to read the article again, this time a little more carefully. The author was very careful to point out that was not the case.

[Janelynne]

This is very illuminating. The neocons are bullies. They have exploited Jews and worn Israel like a lapel pin, while using the USA as their personal lap dog. The necons are power mongering elitists who consider themselves "the smartest guys in the room."

They manipulate the world stage, drunk with power like a bunch of sophomoric frat brothers, pulling off the big caper. It is all vanity, with no ethics, and no responsibility taking. None of the neocons was elected, none of them has sworn to uphold The US or the Israeli Constitutions, and none of them has to face any of the music. They are self appointed puppeteers, operating outside of any sovereign nation, eschewing any Constitution. They are salesmen, peddling influence, using humanity as their currency.

[Dap]

Eloquently expressed, and quite colorful indeed Janelynne, kudos.

[TomR]

----
Well-said and well-reasoned. It always puzzled me how increasing the Middle East's endemic instability by invading Iraq benefitted Israel's security.
----

Because it's never been about security--that's their cover story. It's about the oil Lebowski!
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/presidentbush/2008/07/neo-con-richard.html

It's about the Shock Doctrine and Disaster Capitalism.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0revJOnjfXk

They think nothing of causing death and destruction to hundreds of thousands of people's lives if they can make a buck off of it. Worst of all, Straussian Neocon philosophy mandates that their elite group tell "noble lies" to the American people in order to forward their self-serving agenda.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article5010.htm

They are disgusting, beneath our contempt, chickenhawks.

- Tom

[UrbanInterloper]

It is amazing to watch Joe Klein make this argument. I never would have predicted it, but I'm glad to see it. He just might pull it off, too.

Oh, and great article, but you forget Lieberman in your neo-con lineup. A simple oversight, I'm sure.

[Egalitare]

He cannot pull it off by himself. Others have to, at minimum, say he is not a lonely voice howling in the darkness. The small but very well connected cadre of NeoCons that Klein is pushing back against is not going to suffer this assault of reason in a civilized manner. I hope people of strong fortitude are prepared to stand up with Klein.

Bullies, like wolves, isolate their prey from the herd, simultaneously menacing any assistance from the herd as they fall upon their intended victim.