The Israel Lobby

Shapiro claim that United States foreign aid to Israel increases stability and peace in the Middle East. This has been proving false in recent years. According to Princeton professor Steven Strauss, our goals no longer align with Israel. They do not want to maintain diplomatic relationships with Palestine. He states that “In exchange for $3 billion dollars/year in aid to Israel, the least the U.S. should expect is that the Israeli government be serious about negotiating peace with the Palestinians." Israel has been using U.S. money to annex more and more Palestinian land to their country. If the billions America spends on foreign aid is going to stop the creation of a stable Middle East then we must stop right

There is a tendency to characterize all Arab nations as being unilaterally on the same page when it came to the Israeli issue. In Rachel Bronson’s work Thicker than Oil demonstrates that nations like Saudi Arabia were capable of a great deal of leniency when it came to the issue.

“For the nation and kingdom that will not serve you shall perish; those nations shall be utterly laid waste” (ESV. Isa. 60:12). This is what God said to Israel through a prophet named Isaiah. Many people in this country believe that the relationship between the U.S. and Israel is hurting our relationship with other countries. They believe that Israel is conducting immoral behavior. As a result, they believe that the U.S. should stop supporting Israel. However, there are good reasons for the United States to support Israel. Israel is an ally that is constantly under threat from Arab nations and the United States should be there to help and support Israel when those threats arise. On the other hand, Israel is mistreating Palestinians and is about to become a full-fledged apartheid state; the U.S. should not support such actions (Mearsheimer). Although Israel is on the road to becoming and apartheid state, they

No one should fall under the illusion that declaring Jerusalem Israel’s capital will harm America’s alliances with most, or even many, Arab nations, argues Brookings Senior Fellow Shadi Hamid, Jordan being a notable exception. If Saudi officials, including Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman, were concerned with Jerusalem’s status, Hamid says they would presumably have used their privileged status as a top Trump ally and lobbied the administration to hold off on such a needlessly toxic move. Along those same lines, Ali Fathollah-Nejad explains that Trump’s announcement heightens the sense of alienation that many in the Middle East feel regarding Riyadh’s anti-Iran front forged with the Trump administration and the Netanyahu government.

The approach of the US strategy in the Middle East was to support Israel and to ensure status quo through endorsement of various autocratic leaders (Kivimäki 18). Thus, democracy was excluded

The US, as one of the most powerful actors in the world, has proved to be an important ally for Israel. The origins of this relationship between Israel and the US go back to WWII, when American Zionists began with an intensive propaganda campaign in 1943. Unlike the Zionists, the Arabs almost completely lacked any activity. The campaign proved to be pretty successful and the Jewish question was high positioned on the policy agenda one year later, when presidential elections were coming. Another important factor for the focus on Israel was the fact that the US also had strategic interests in the Middle East regarding the increasing exploitation of oil. American Jews, in contrast with the Arabs, had a considerable amount of political influence (Wilson, 1972). This made it easier for American presidents to carry out a more pro-Israel policy because, these Jews constituted a significant part of the

People are flawed. This is not new information. Ever since Eve took a bite of the fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, sin has constantly tainted every part of humanity. Violence, wars, bloodshed, and death are all side-effects of the sin-curse. When looking at foreign policy matters in the Middle East, many fail to remember the fallen state of humanity. Still peering through the rose-colored glasses, so many United States citizens continue to hope for “world peace.” Scripture says “and ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.” There will never be world peace until Christ returns. As such, opponents of America’s Pro-Israel stance should bear the terrible travesties of sin in mind before completely rejecting the current, Scriptural policy.

With internal conflicts escalating in the Middle East, the public opinion of these nations has become more complex and divided. Since its independence in 1948, Israel has been one of the epicenters of disorder in the Middle East as it connects Europe with Arabia. However, looking at the history of Israel could help in the establishment of a strong, stable state with better relations among its people and the nations around it. If Israel’s relations with its neighboring countries improves, respect among the Middle Eastern countries could be restored, prompting cooperation and a step forward in foreign relations and peace. In order to understand the recent development of Israel, it is important to look at the past influences of Middle Eastern and Western countries and how they have affected the borders and the Jewish population of Israel.

Few outside countries have more at stake in the evolution of Iran’s political situation than the United States, which has been in a state of open enmity with the Islamic Republic for more than three decades. Threats of Iran-backed terrorism, Tehran’s apparent nuclear ambitions, and its evident aim of destabilizing American allies—chiefly Israel—are perpetually high on the list of US concerns in the region. Why is Iran so important to the US? What explains the enduring animosity between the two countries? Answers to these and other questions about the United States’ position in the region today can be found by looking back to the Cold War.

These papers seeks to explain the significance of Iran’s nuclear program and show how other countries react and are affected by it. Israel does not only have a particular outlook of the Iranian nuclear program, but it also has an independent way of taking evasive action to reduce its fears (Eiran & Malin, 2013). If Israel were to launch attacks on Iran to push back their nuclear program, the cause and effects of this could ripple across the region and beyond. Meir Dagan, former head of Israel’s external intelligence agency was warned numerous times that an Israeli attack on Iran would “ignite a regional war” (p. 76). Also Israel’s concerns over Iran could make a chain of defensive outcomes that could get out of control in a way that

Unlike most Europeans countries, the United States of America enjoyed a rather healthy relationship with Middle East nations during the 19th and beginning of the 20th century. Possibly, this was due to the fact that the US had little or no interest in colonizing countries in the region. On the contrary, it largely participated in philanthropic and educational activities therefore attracting positive perception among the Middle East people. However, after the world war II the situation begun to change. The US, after fully appreciating the strategic value of the region, opted to increase its interest there. Particular to ensure it does not lose control of the region’s natural resources (chiefly oil), protecting Israel (which

Israel has complex security concerns that include both Palestinian and Syrian concerns. The roots of the problem are complex and vast. To deal with these, this essay, therefore, focused on the prime challenges, as well as obstacles to resolving them. This essay then propounded a list of five policies that can be grafted in order to endeavor to craft a solution in each of these areas. It is recommended too that America actively involve herself since, by so doing, America is simultaneously working towards ameliorating her own terrorist concerns. The essay is only a rough draft for security in the area. It needs to be worked on, and more needs to be done in order to ensure a lasting peace.

Between 1948 and 1978 conflict erupted between the Israel and numerous Arab states such as Egypt, Syria, and Jordan. The conflict of the Middle East began shortly after Israel was declared a nation by the United Nations after world war two. The Middle East is an area of great strategic importance. It contains vital trade routes such as that of the Suez Canal, and is rich in oil or “black gold”, one of the most important resources of the world, and vital for a country to operate. The two super powers of the world at that point in time were engaged in the cold war, The USSR and USA therefore found the Middle East to be of great importance. They would not fight each other directly as atomic weapons would most likely be used, and therefore mutually assured destruction would come into being. They therefore used the Middle East conflict as an opportunity to fight war by proxy, done by supplying aid, weapons, training and advice to their supported countries and expanding their sphere of influence within the Middle East, so as to try get that area under their control. The USA was a great supporter of Israel due to her many Jewish links, her strong Jewish lobby, and thereby used her to increase her influence within the region. While the USSR supported the Arab states, in an attempt to increase her sphere of influence. Both the Arabs and Israelis were happy to have a greater superpower supporting them, as it gave them the resources to destroy the other side. However when Israel was

Critics of Systemic theory, as a result, argue that the overall thrust of U.S. policy in Syria and the Middle East in its entirety, is due primarily to the supremacy of interest groups in American domestic politics, specifically, the "Israel lobby." In IR theory, the primacy of interest groups, is understood in international relations as Society-centered. Society-centered explanations focus on domestic interest groups: a group of people that seeks to influence public policy based on a common interest or concern. From this lens, U.S. support for Israel, thanks to Israeli interest groups, has been justified by the claim that both states are threatened by terrorist groups originating in the Arab or Muslim world, like Bashar al-Assad in Syria. Israel is thus seen as a crucial ally in the war on terror because its enemies are America's enemies. The claim that the Israel lobby diverts U.S foreign policy from the American national interest by convincing American politicians that U.S. and Israeli interests are essentially identical, does not stand up, as American foreign policy under Donald Trump prioritizes fighting terrorism in Syria, not the Assad regime, which is an enemy of Israel.

Post-Cold War era is marked by the dominance of peace negotiations in international security, and Middle-east (ME) being a conflict area for a long time, got adequate focus. Tale of oil rich ME is a story of conflicts having Israel-Palestine issue at the core, and the stability and peace of this region largely hinged on to the solution of this issue. So far, a number of unsuccessful initiatives have been taken by world community for the solution of the issue. ‘Roadmap for peace’ was one of such initiative, initially coined by USA, which calls for a two state solution. Like other past initiatives this also turned into a failure. Though the share of blame for failure goes to all stake holders, however, USA got the large share of blames from international community due to her bias stance towards Israel. This biasness is driven from long drawn USA-Israel relationship built upon factors like sympathy for Israel within USA, mental alikeness, strategic importance of Israel, influences of Israeli Lobby etcetera. Though all these factors have their role in shaping US foreign policy in ME but many argue that Israeli Lobby plays the most dominant role. In this essay an endeavour will be made to discuss biasness of USA towards Israel in Israel-Palestine peace process and discuss USA-Israel relationship as the basis of such biasness, using Roadmap (2003) as case study. In the process, it will first discuss peace negotiation in general, followed by discussions on Roadmap and the role and