The tilt away from Israel
Christopher Hitch ens
Washington On 4 December 1948, just a few months after the foundation of the state of Israel, a letter was published in the New York Times. It criticised the visit which Mr Menachem Begin was then paying to the United States. It described his Herut (Freedom) Party as:
closely akin in its organisation, methods, political philosophy and social appeal to the Nazi and Fascist parties. It was form- ed out of the former Irgun Zvi Leumi, a terrorist, right-wing, chauvinist organisa- tion in Palestine.
After giving a brief summary of the political record of Mr Begin and his party, the authors of the letter added: Within the Jewish community they have preached an admixture of ultra- nationalism, religious mysticism and racial superiority in which terrorism (against Jews, Arabs and British alike) and misrepresentation are means, and a 'Leader State' is the goal.
The signatories of the letter ended by saying that: It is all the more tragic that the top leadership of American Zionism has refused to campaign against Begin's ef- forts or even to expose to its own consti- tuents the dangers to Israel from support of Begin.
The letter was signed by Albert Einstein, Seymour Melman, Rabbi Jessurun Car- dozo, Sidney Hook, Hannah Arendt (who probably wrote it) and two dozen other leading Jewish scholars, lawyers and com- munity leaders. In those days, the ranks had not closed.
Today, the 'top leadership of American Zionism' is hardly less conformist. But, ominously for them and for others, there are signs that the tide of political opinion is turning against America's compact with Mr Begin. It would be nice to report that this chance was a result of conscience or high principle. In reality, it is the very change that sceptical and independent Jews have long feared. Faced with the sheer ruthlessness and opportunism of Begin, and his apparent disregard for 'our' interests in the Middle East, large elements of the American establishment are looking for ways to placate the increasingly nervous Arabs of the Gulf. This tendency first became marked after the 1973 oil embargo fell dormant after Camp David, and has now re-emerged. Needless to say, its spokesmen do not give a damn for the Palestinian and Lebanese refugees (any more than do most of their counterparts in the Arab elite). But they do care about be- ing more 'even-handed' in their dealings with clients in the Gulf.
Two recent developments have underscored this trend. The first was a public exchange between George Ball and an American Jewish leader. The second was the appearance before the Senate of George P. Schultz, now the Secretary of State. George Ball is no bleeding heart. He was Undersecretary of State in the unsentimen- tal years of 1961 to 1969. Last month, dur- ing an interview on the record, he was asked if he believed that American Jews were 'able to cause the United States to act in its own disinterest [sic]'. He replied: I think that's putting it very bluntly, but I think it is not far from the truth.
He added a little later that: I think that the American Jewish com- munity have put the United States' in- terest rather secondary in many cases. This drew an immediate response from Ball's old friend Morris Abram, a leading Wall Street lawyer, former representative of the United States at the UN Human Rights Commission, and ex-President of the American Jewish Committee. He flatly accused Ball of being an anti-semite. Nor- mally this charge is enough to make any American politician wilt like a salted snail. But George Ball came back with an even sterner letter. He accused Israel of misusing American weaponry, of committing outrages against civilians, of 'launching adventures at moments chosen because our attention is focused on other matters'. He denied that he supported the PLO and said that 'I have never known any Arabs more than casually: I have done no business for them'. But he was firm on the American connection, and the need for Israel to see itself as a subordinate partner:
I do not think any nation can, with self-
respect, continue to lay out seven million dollars a day of public money to help a nation that embarrasses it and compels it to defend actions to which it was not alerted but for which the world holds it responsible.
Even on its own, such a duel in public would have been significant. But it came in the immediate wake of the disappearance of General Haig, who had been accused, among other things, of excessive credulity in the face of Begin's assurances over Lebanon. We still do not know exactly whY Haig 'resigned' (President Reagan told questioners at his last press conference that it was none of their business). But certainly he numbered among his enemies those who favour a 'tilt' towards the Arabs. Among these is Caspar Weinberger, Secretary of Defence and former Vice-President of the Bechtel Corporation. Last week, his old friend and Bechtel colleague George Schultz became a member of the team. Habemus a new Secretary of State.
His confirmation process, which was in- decently brief and unanimous, still manag- ed to raise a number of queasy Middle Eastern questions. When Schultz was at Bechtel, the company was complying with the Arab-sponsored economic boycott of Israel. US law forbids such compliance, even by privately-owned and non-quoted outfits like Bechtel. When Schultz was at Bechtel, the company became a huge lobbY for the sale of AWACS planes to Saudi Arabia, passionately opposed by Israel and its many partisans. Bechtel, as all the world now knows, is so heavily committed in the Gulf that it is almost a principality in its own right. Bechtel is also a nuclear power in its own right, having built numerous reac- tors in the United States and having, In 1975, offered Brazil the very facilities in nuclear development which the then Ford administration was trying to embargo. Schultz was president of the corporation at that stage, and his comment on the effort was to say that 'salesmen are always en- thusiastic'. Reassuringly, Kenneth Davis, Deputy Secretary for Energy in this ad- ministration, was also a senior Bechtel ex- ecutive. So there's no need for conspiracies. Common interest should do the trick.
When he's been in the saddle for a few weeks, Schultz will discover that a 'tilt' awaY from Israel is even harder than it looks. With every throne in Arabia at hazard, the loyalty and tenacity of the Israelis will con- tinue to be rewarded even if their frequent promiscuity is deplored. But for American Jews, life has become that little bit harder. The irony of their position is that, having been loyal members of the American establishment, they now risk becoming dispensable. There are certain members of that establishment who would shop the Jews for a few barrels of oil. Some of the 'top leadership of American Zionism' MO wish they had listened to Albert Einstein in 1948.
A uberon Waugh is on holiday. He Will resume his column next week.
Previous page
