University, if you dont have your heart set on working in the u. S. Government or if youre retired. [laughter] but its hard to find people inside the Foreign Policy establishment who are willing to say what they think on this issue out loud. Just look at how chuck hagel and Samantha Power had to contort themselves during their confirmation hearings, and you see the lob bys continued lob bys continued influence. And please dont forget were still a long way from a deal with iran or a twostate solution, and the lobby will be working 24 7 to make sure that the United States doesnt do anything israel doesnt want. In short, reports of the lobbys demise have been greatly exaggerated, and given that fact, what do i think we ought to do about it . Ill just give you, i hi, four basic lessons here. Lesson number one, its just politics, stupid. First lesson i would emphasize is this is all about politics. Israel lobby is powerful because it has all the features that make an Interest Group powerful. And it uses all the tools available in a democracy, direct lobbying, financial contributions, grass root organizing, pressure on the media, etc. There is nothing magical, nothing conspiratorial about this. Theyre also influential because they havent faced strong and well organized opposition. And if they are facing greater head headwinds today, say on iran, its because others are starting to play that political game more effectively. Lesson number two, its going to get worse before it gets better. The lob bys main goal is protecting the special relationship, and thats going to be harder to do as israel moves rightward and as it becomes obvious there is not going to be a twostate solution. Pressure to give the palestinians Political Rights is going to grow. One person, one vote is easy for americans to understand, and if you saw the on the poll by shuckly telhami, thats what americans overwhelmingly favor if they believe a twostate solution is no longer possible. Then they favor onestate democracy. Getting the United States to back a state that privileges one ethnic or religious group over others is going to be an increasingly hard sell over time. And to try and make that sell, groups like aipac are going to have to do even more to try and influence discourse, to try and discredit critics. But in my estimation, the more strident and heavyhanded their tactics are, the more resentment it will sow, and the more people will be turned off over time. Lesson number three, be realistic and build a big tent. Reversing politics policies that have been in place for decades does not happen overnight, and you dont do it by writing a single article or a single book. What one needs is a big tent for people who want a normal relationship with israel and a middle east policy that conforms to a broad conception of the American National interest. That doesnt mean that everybody in this room has to agree on everything. The israel lobby is a loose Coalition United by a couple of shared goals, and we should take a page from their playbook while making sure that our ranks are not filled with those who sow hatred or spread discredited conspiracy theories. Lastly, if we were to write the book today, how might it be different . Well, it would have to be a lot longer. [laughter] because a lot of new information has come to light since 2007, and you could even argue that the entire Obama Administration is a case study of the lobbys continued influence. So, you know, wed have to do volume two, and it would have to be just as long as the First Edition was. But to be perfectly honest, i dont think john or i would change our central arguments at all, because events since 20062007 have vindicated almost all of what we wrote. To repeat, we wrote the book to encourage a more open discussion of these issues, because we thought a more open debate would bring a lot of additional truths to light and would be better for everybody in the end. Now, i think thats precisely what has happened, though again we do not take all the credit for it. I just want to close by thanking those of you who have worked for many years, long before we got into this, to counter the lobbys arguments ands hasten the day and hasten the day when the american relationship with israel is guided primarily by Strategic Interests and moral principles and not by domestic politics. When that day arrives, its going to be better for us, but also better for israel and also for its neighbors as well. Thank you very much. [applause] next we have sorry. Next we have dr. Jeffrey [inaudible] director of the military History Center at the university of north texas and a professor of history at the university, and professor he was formerly professor of strategic studies at the u. S. Naval war college. Thank you. Well, the book, quick sand, it treats a lot of themes, imperialism, wars, terrorism, oil. But as regards to the u. S. israeli relationship, i charted the process using u. S. And british archives through which we becamen became engaged and allied with israel. The book was published in 2010. Well, in the beginning there was Woodrow Wilson. He ascented to the ball fordeclaration under political pressure from Supreme CourtJustice Louis brandeis who was the americanborn son of czech jews and president of the committee for zionist affairs. Wilson initially opposed the declaration because it contravened his own 14 points, particularly his emphasis on national selfdetermination. And wilson, of course, had sent a commission roverring around the middle east which surveyed 260 communities in palestine, none of which wanted jewish settlers or european powers defining their affairs. Today wanted to become an american mandate because they rather naively said the u. S. Would never let anybody else run our affairs. They would insist on majority rule. But Louis Brandeis showed wilson that shed gain politically by hed gain politically by supporting a jewish state. Between 1900 and 1914, 100,000 europeanjewish immigrants had settled in compact pockets in crucial cities like new york, chicago, st. Louis, cleveland, cincinnati. And anyone who wanted to dominate the Electoral College needed these places. As the Second World War wound down, fdr struggled with the question of palestine. The oppression of the 1930s and then the war and its aftermath had unleashed a flood of, first, jewish settlers, then refugees and displaced persons, increasing the Jewish Population of palestine from a very small amount to 30 of the total by 1945. Now, fdr didnt worry about palestine all that much was he had because he had much bigger things to to worry about at the time. But he worried about palestine because the king of saudi arabia worried about palestine, and fdr was planning to make the kingdom americas Strategic Oil reserve after the war. And he met with the king on the uss quincy in Great Bear Lake in the suez canal as he was returning from yalta, and one of the things fdr said afterwards is i cant understand why he keeps going back to the subject of palestine. At the same time, fdr was reminded by the zionist review that tilting toward the palestinians to appease saudis would be political suicide in america. The zionist review wrote new york is entitled to 47 electoral votes while only 266 are necessary to elect a president. Whether the state of new york dose to one party or the other by relatively few votes in a tightlycontested race will make the difference of 94 votes in the Electoral College. End quote. The same dynamic prevailed in the other key battleground states of the time which were new york, ohio, illinois, new jersey and massachusetts. They may swing to one party or the other by only a few thousand votes, and 90 of the Jewish Population of the United States is concentrated in these doubtful states, end quote. Truman got the message loud and clear. His secretary of state, burns and then marshall, and his secretary of defense were monitored and channeled by eddie jacobson, david lyles and Max Lowenthal whom they called the back room boys in the white house. George marshall convinced that strong support for israel would only weaken the coalition rued, as he put it the squalid political purposes of these back room boys. For their part, niles and lowenthal scorned the straight pant boys in the defense d. And showed truman the math. There are five million jews in america, theyre organized in pressure groups like the federation of american zionists and the American Jewish committee, and they vote. The back room boys demanded a House Cleaning at state, an appointment of somebody whos really trustworthy on palestine matters. People at state are really bitching things up, niles wrote lowenthal. President truman agreed saying to critics like marshall and forestal, im sorry, gentleman, but i have to answer to the hundreds of thousands who are anxious for the success of zionism. He took the palestine portfolio away from hendersons near eastern desk and gave it to clark gifford, niles and lowenthal. It would henceforth be managed for its domestic political dividends, strategy be damned. Lloyd henderson was then sent off to be ambassador to india. Marshall rebelled, telling the president that he was weakening the u. S. Globally by his uncritical support for the zionists. Marshall and henderson were for an arab state in the palestine with guarantees for a jewish minority. Truman and the back room boys wanted partition with the very best areas, 55 of the total land mass, to the jews which would, of course, imperil any cold War Coalition against the soviets. U. S. Policy, marshall scolded the president , has to be based on u. S. National interests. Three days before the british scuttle from palestine in 48, marshall spoke the sharpest rebuke ever delivered to a president in the oval office when he told truman he was putting the great office of the president at risk by so tamely supporting the zionist against the arab majority of palestine. The president , marshall said, was subordinating an International Crisis to a transparent dodge to win a few votes. Marshalls deputy called the emerging state of israel a pig in a poke, a state with high strategic costs and few be apparent benefits. Well, in the 1948 president ial election, tom dewey, projected to be the winner right up until election day, had a stout proisrael plank in his platform, and trueman felt he could do no less. He pledged full recognition to a jewish state despite its relatively small numbers, half as many jews at the time as arabs and until rated israels brutal expulsion of 5 of the arab 75 of the arab inhabitants in the war creating the Palestinian Refugees whose number has grown to five million today. The 1948 war, israels expulsion or liquidation of the palestinians and the assassination of the count, internationalized the palestinian question to americas great disadvantage. Now all Arab Governments in the region took this palestinian question as their touchstone and made it sort of the focus of all their relations with america. President eisenhower, who vowed to downgrade israel to improve americas total situation in the middle east, also keeled over under the lobbying pressure at home. There are five million Jewish Voters in the u. S. , he sighed, and very few arabs. Before the 1956 suez war, secretary of state dulles had warned the israelis they must make substantial concessions on borders and refugees to improve the continued existence of the free world. After the war when ike forced israel to disgorge sinai and gaza, the israelis used that concession to foreclose forever, apparently all talk of whittling down the 1949 borders or compensating refugees, which is the situation that prevails to this day. Senators of both parties, johnson, hum free, knowland piled on for shortterm political advantage in 1956 decrying the, quote, dulleseisenhower policy of squeezing israel and appeasing the arab, unquote, the same senseless rhetoric that from evils today. The british board in washington was astonished by this. The americans, he wrote, crave oil, but they refuse to coax the concessions from the israelis. Tel aviv demands and gets an American Security of their boards without any sacrifice at all, borders without any sacrifice at all, end quote. Well, that ambassador advised dulles to sell it for a usable price, land or refugees, but dulles replied he couldnt saying with israeli pressure and elections coming on, i cant any longer refrain from offering us legal arms israel arms and even a defense pact. To his disbelieving government in london, he reported the americans are going to guarantee israeli frontiers without any sacrifice at all on israels part, as we still do today. It made and makes no strategic sense whatsoever. In 1962 jfk had his own stab at a peace process. He tried to pressure israel into accepting the carnegie endowments johnson plan which would cash compensate palestines arab refugees whose number had now grown to 1. 3 million. Kennedy was dissuaded by his white house desk officer more israel, a man named meyer feldman, whose new position reflected the immense, growing power of israel in u. S. Decision making. Feldman said disengage from this plan, mr. President , or theres going to be a violent eruption in our relations with israel. Jfk not only disengaged, he rewarded israel with aid dollars, Early Warning radars and hawk sames, punching a whole on the sale of major Weapons Systems to the middle east that had been maintained until that time. With characteristic fearlessness, the israelis deployed the hawks around their Nuclear Weapons facility as if to mock kennedys efforts to shut it down. Well, the 1962 hawk sale set the precedent that created the u. S. israeli strategic relationship, a multibillion dollar business in cutting edge weaponry supplemented by militarytomilitary dialogues, joint exercises and cooperative r r d. That business has engaged the Defense Industry and its dependent congressmen in the already robust israel lobby. Thus it was that shortly before kennedys death, the president during meetings with golden in palm beach characterized it as no less intimate than our special relationship with britain. Privately, however, kennedy deplored the palestinian liberation movement, fatah and the plo which had now become the rallying cry of every Arab Government in the region, vastly complicating u. S. Initiatives and strategy in the middle eastment lbj, of course, paid little attention to the middle east. Everything to do with the middle east must be summit to events subject to events in Southeast Asia aziz he can stair of state said secretary of state said. Ive got three cones in my cabinet, lbj said. In ones going to do more for israel than i will. In 1965 u. S. Ambassador to israel wally barber warned that the idf, which now towered technologically and organizationally over all of its arab rivals, must be prevented from making any new annexations. Such annexations, barber argued in 1965, would do longterm damage to u. S. Interests. If israel attacks, the u. S. Is going to have to impose merciless sanctions. Its not enough to contain the arabs, barber said, we have to contain both sides. Well, in the 1967 sixday war, israel launched a surprise attack on egypt, jordan and syria and created 300,000 new refugees alongside the 1. 7 million old ones. Far from sanctioning israel for the annexations or the attack on the uss liberty, johnson sat on his hands, entrenching the forever war still puttering in israel and the occupied territories. Instead of rolling back the israeli annexations as ike had done in 1956, johnson approved them as well as the sale of f4 phantoms to israel, merely commenting that American Jews want lbj to send the sixth at fleet, but they wont send a god damn screwdriver to vietnam. Under attack for the 68 nomination, lbj didnt dare alienate the lobby. From lbj on, every president tolerated illegal israeli settlements in the territories, a process rabin called redeeming israels narrow hips, and the hips were narrow, of course, because despite israeli efforts to evict the palestinians in 1967, most of them have stayed put, i said creasing the antibiotic wrap population arab population. I just have a little bit more to get through here, i hope youll indulge me, was aimed by Scoop Jackson at filling up the west bank, the golan and gaza settlements with russian jews. 40,000 emigrants a year and 35 million a year in expenditures, enabled by u. S. Aid dollars, created new facts on the ground that we deal with today. We disagree with this policy, kissinger aide joseph cisco wrote in 1971, but we say nothing, so the israelis assume our acquiescence. Nixon called the failure of his predecessors to solve the Palestinian Land and refugee problems one of the major lapses of the postworld war ii era. His first secretary of state, william rogers, the first diplomat to use the term palestinian tried to roll back the israelis but was immediately stymied by golda meyer. Kissinger fared no better than rogers, he threw away washingtons best opportunity to wring major, gamechanging concessions from israel during the yom kippur war in 1973. Nixon and kissinger authorized a massive air lift to tel aviv. Instead of trading weapons and support for israeli concessions on land and refugees, the course actually advised by schlessinger gull my assumed that israeli gratitude would result in concessions after the war. Before the war even ended, nixon realized his error. Hed made the israelis as he put it, quote, more d