U.S. Nixes Israeli Attack on Iran: Dog Wags 
Tail?
  
  by John Spritzler 
  August 15, 2008
[newdemocracyworld.org]
 
  Recent events reported 
  Wednesday by 
  Haaretz relating to a possible Israeli attack on Iran shed light on a 
  key question that affects how we organize in the United States against our 
  government's support of Israel. 
 
  Is the United States' 
  pro-Israel foreign policy explained by the theory that Israel, through the 
  Israel Lobby, has hijacked the American government? Is the dog, i.e. 
  the American ruling plutocracy, being wagged by the tail, i.e. 
  Israel? Or does the American ruling plutocracy have immoral but perfectly 
  rational reasons of its own for supporting Israel's ethnic cleansing of 
  Palestinians?
 
  James Petras is one of the 
  leading advocates of the "tail wags dog" theory. He elaborated on that theory 
  in his article,
  "Israel's 
  War with Iran," written January 23, 2006. Petras said that any attack on 
  Iran will benefit only Israel: 
  
    "Conclusion: The only 
    possible beneficiary of a US or Israeli military attack on Iran or economic 
    sanctions will be Israel: it will seem to eliminate a military adversary in 
    the Middle East, and consolidate its military supremacy in the Middle East."
    
  
  And an Israeli attack on 
  Iran, Petras asserted way back in January of 2006, was "imminent":
  
    "Never has an imminent 
    war been so loudly and publicly advertised as Israel’s forthcoming military 
    attack against Iran."
  Adding to the likelihood of 
  an Israeli attack on Iran "in the immediate future," according to 
  Petras, was the fact that it was the number one priority of the Israel Lobby 
  in the United States:
  
    "Israel’s political 
    and military leadership have repeatedly and openly declared their 
    preparation to militarily attack Iran in the immediate future. Their 
    influential supporters in the US have made Israel’s war policy the number 
    one priority in their efforts to secure Presidential and Congressional 
    backing."
  In his concluding paragraph 
  Petras applied the logic of tail-wags-dog to assert that "we are doomed" 
  to a major confrontation with Iran because "there is no political 
  leadership to oppose the pro-Israel war lobby":
  
    "The problem is there 
    is no political leadership to oppose the pro-Israel war lobby within 
    congress or even in civil society. There are few if any influential 
    organized lobbies challenging the pro-war Israel lobby either from the 
    perspective of working for coexistence in the Middle East or even in 
    defending US national interests when they diverge from Israel. Although 
    numerous former diplomats, generals, intelligence officials, Reformed Jews, 
    retired National Security advisers and State Department professionals have 
    publicly denounced the Iran war agenda and even criticized the Israel First 
    lobbies, their newspaper ads and media interviews have not been backed by 
    any national political organization that can compete for influence in the 
    White House and Congress. As we draw closer to a major confrontation with 
    Iran and Israeli officials set short term deadlines for igniting a Middle 
    East conflagration, it seems that we are doomed to learn from future 
    catastrophic losses that Americans must organize to defeat political lobbies 
    based on overseas allegiances."
  And yet, here it is in 
  August of 2008, with Bush and Cheney and the same old gang still in the White 
  House, and not only has there been no attack on Iran, but according to
  Haaretz 
  (August 13, 2008), the Bush administration is using strong-arm methods to 
  prevent Israel from attacking Iran. The Haaretz headline reads: 
  
    U.S. puts brakes on Israeli plan for attack on Iran nuclear 
    facilities
Haaretz reports 
that: 
  
    "The American 
    administration has rejected an Israeli request for military equipment and 
    support that would improve Israel's ability to attack Iran's nuclear 
    facilities."
  and Haaretz also 
  reports that the Bush administration cited "American interests" as its reason 
  for nixing Israel's attack on Iran, something that does not fit into the 
  tail-wags-dog theory that the U.S. obeys Israel even when it conflicts with 
  "U.S. national interest" (a
  bogus concept, 
  by the way) to do so: 
  
    "The Americans viewed 
    the request, which was transmitted (and rejected) at the highest level, as a 
    sign that Israel is in the advanced stages of preparations to attack Iran. 
    They therefore warned Israel against attacking, saying such a strike would 
    undermine American interests."
 
  Israel and/or the 
  U.S. May Indeed Attack Iran, But Not Because the Tail Wags the Dog
 
  The American ruling 
  plutocracy supports Israel's ethnic cleansing of Palestinians because it 
  foments a non-class war (Jew versus non-Jew) in the Middle East that helps 
  both 
  Jewish and non-Jewish 
  elites
  
  control "their own" people and prevent a genuine democratic revolution 
  from overthrowing the ruling elites in the region. Keeping elites in power and 
  ordinary people out of power everywhere in the world is the American 
  plutocracy's number one strategic goal (they call it "spreading democracy"), 
  and Israel's ("the only democracy in the Middle East") ethnic cleansing 
  project serves it. 
 
  Orwellian wars of social 
  control, like World War I,
  World War II, 
  the Cold War and the War on Terror, are elite strategies, and it is quite 
  possible that the United States and/or Israel will indeed attack Iran to 
  further such a strategy; it would be one way to keep the War on Terror going. 
  But if such an attack occurs, it will not be necessary to rely on the 
  inherently far-fetched theory of tail-wags-dog to understand why. The dog has 
  reasons of its own for its warmongering and support of ethnic cleansing. 
 
  Let us not provide the 
  dog--the American ruling plutocracy--with a fig-leaf ("Israel made me do it") 
  to hide behind. The Israel Lobby is an instrument of the American plutocracy. 
  The Lobby doesn't control the plutocracy; the plutocracy controls the Lobby, 
  using it to keep its hired hands, the politicians, in line and to push 
  pro-Israel lies on the public. Our task is to defeat the American plutocracy 
  to win real democracy. The last thing we need is to let the plutocracy use the 
  Israel Lobby as a bullfighter uses a red cape--to deflect the bull's charges 
  away from doing real bodily harm.
 
  The point we need to make to 
  the American public about the Israel Lobby is not that it has taken control of 
  our government. The government was never "ours" to begin with. From 1776 it 
  has been "theirs"--the upper class's. Wealthy property owners are the only 
  ones that were represented by George Washington, and it's been that way ever 
  since. The point we need to make is that the Israel Lobby is morally and 
  factually wrong. It defends ethnic cleansing. It spreads the racist lie that 
  non-Jews are inherently anti-Semitic and therefore Jews need a purely Jewish 
  state to be safe, even if it requires violent ethnic cleansing to make it 
  "secure."
 
  The shame is that condemning 
  the Israel Lobby for having supposedly hijacked the American government 
  detracts from the important message--that the Lobby is morally and factually 
  wrong. The American ruling elite is quite appreciative of this. They no doubt
  love it when 
  people like Petras and
  
  Walt and Mearsheimer shift attention away from Israel's ethnic cleansing 
  to focus on the bogus question of whether U.S. support for Israel is in the 
  "national interest." They must love it when Petras, insisting that
  "In fact the 
  US-Middle East wars prejudice the oil interests in several strategic senses," 
  argues that true blue proud-to-be-American Big Oil is our friend in the fight 
  against the Lobby. They must love it when Petras directs our anger away from 
  the dog and towards the tail, or as Petras puts it, "political lobbies 
  based on overseas allegiances." 
 
  But Big Oil is not our 
  friend, and the American public, if not Petras, understands that pretty well. 
  While it is excluded from mainstream public discourse, more and more Americans 
  are coming to understand that the real conflict in society has nothing to do 
  with the bogus concept of "national interest." The real conflict, the one that 
  affects people everyday in every aspect of their lives, is the class 
  conflict--the conflict between working class values and aspirations for a 
  world based on real democracy, equality and solidarity versus the elite values 
  of inequality and top-down control and pitting people against each other. 
  Americans are starting to see that people who speak of "national interest" are 
  not to be trusted. They are right. And if we tell them that the problem with 
  the Israel Lobby is that it goes against our "national interest," then they 
  will be right not to trust us. Is that what we want?
 
  The last thing we should be 
  doing is helping the American plutocracy to control Americans by confusing 
  them with a debate ("Supporting Israel: is it or is it not in our national 
  interest?") in which both sides embrace the phony "national interest" 
  mythology that all Americans, rich and poor, share a common interest that our 
  politicians try to pursue. Instead we need to reach out to the public by 
  championing their class values. Otherwise, we will never win the class war, 
  and the likes of Bush and Cheney and Obama and McCain will continue to carry 
  out war crimes in the name of "spreading democracy" and defending "the only 
  democracy in the Middle east."
  
  John Spritzler is the author of 
  
  The People As Enemy: The Leaders' Hidden Agenda In World War II, and a 
  Research Scientist at the Harvard School of Public Health.
  
   
  
  Back 
  to "World At War"
  
  www.newdemocracyworld.org
  
  
  Other 
  articles by this author
  
  This article may be copied and posted on other websites. 
  Please include all hyperlinks.