What if, by attempting to prevent a second Holocaust, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert--in collusion with AIPAC, the powerful American Israel Public Affairs Committee known as "America's Israel Lobby"-- encourages the Bush administration to launch a catastrophic war against Iran? And how is it that many well-meaning, mostly war-opposing American Jews are being convinced that a war with Iran might be necessary for Israel's survival?
Preventing Iran from getting nuclear weapons was the number one agenda item for AIPAC's 2007 Annual Policy Convention in Washington last week. Ironically, a Congress mandated to end the war in Iraq is being pressured by the lobby identified with the American religious group most opposed to that war to support actions likely to produce yet another war--predicted to provoke cataclysmic consequences, including the use of nuclear weapons--all for the purpose of preventing the development of nuclear weapons.
The highly choreographed dance between the Bush administration, the unpopular Prime Minister Olmert, AIPAC, and Congress is paving the way for a war that, in the name of Israel's security, would unwittingly pose grave threats to Israel's survival--physically, spiritually and morally. Prime Minister Olmert was awakened at 4 AM Israel time to address AIPAC's Gala Banquet audience of 6,000, including 48 U.S. Senators and 245 U.S. House members via satellite. He said, "At the end of the day, we must recognize that President George W. Bush is the only leader, and the United States is the only country, that can be enormously influential on what Iran will do. I am sure you will not hamper or restrain that strong leadership unnecessarily." Then, after a massive lobbying day on March 13, Congress voted to allow Bush to go to war without asking for authorization.
This is understandable, though horrifying just the same. It seems the fear is that Iran will threaten Israel with nukes and that the U.S. Congress will restrain President Bush from "protecting" Israel. That is how mostly well-meaning, war-opposing American Jews convince a mostly well-meaning, war-opposing Congress to walk into a trap that opens the door to producing the catastrophe they are trying to prevent. At the annual Herzliya Conference earlier this year, Olmert said, "The Jewish people, with the scars of the Holocaust fresh on its body, cannot afford to let itself face the threat of annihilation once again.... We will stand up against nuclear threats and even prevent them." Failing to learn from history (even as recent as the Iraq and Lebanon wars), observation, or social science, and gripped by existential fear, decision-makers are driven by emotions, concrete black-and-white short-term thinking, and overconfidence. Higher level thought processes go out the window, with little awareness of the psychology of the Other, of predictable long-term disastrous consequences, or creative, strategies for nonviolent conflict transformation.
Understanding the psychological imprint of the Holocaust and fear-based belief systems, and recognizing the grip of AIPAC on Congress and the intimidation of being labeled as anti-Semitic for anyone challenging the "military option," a new group of Jewish professionals has emerged to try to rescue this dangerously flawed debate. Members of this group called JAIPAC, Jewish Analysts Investigating Peace and Conflict, are professionals who work in areas of political science, international relations, conflict analysis and resolution, psychology, history, Middle East studies, and other relevant fields devoted to developing strategies for reducing tension, preventing violence, and transforming conflict. This group is committed to the security and survival of Israel, and the elimination of anti-Semitism around the world, and nonviolent resolution of conflicts with Israel's neighbors.
JAIPAC has written "A Respectful Open Letter to President Bush, Prime Minister Olmert, the US Congress, AIPAC, and Others on the Dangers of War with Iran." They fear that military action against Iran taken for Israel's security would unleash a cascade of catastrophic consequences greatly endangering Israel and the U.S., and escalating anti-Semitism and global terrorism, in addition to innocent Iranians. Based on their collective expertise and interdisciplinary consensus, members of JAIPAC unanimously predict that military action against Iran is likely to produce unintended consequences that would serve to:
* escalate instability and cycles of violence
* increase the popularity of those attacked
* undermine popular movements for peace, democracy, and acceptance of Israel in the Muslim world
* increase incentives for nuclear weapons development
* increase trauma, fear, humiliation, despair, and rage
* provoke desires for revenge, and the motivation and rationales for increased recruitment and terrorist actions
* alienate Israel from its neighbors and make it more dependent upon the U.S.
* cause irreversible environmental catastrophe and health crises from radiation and oil fires
* desensitize people to the taking of human life on all sides
JAIPAC predicts that an assault on Iran would produce immediate retaliation against U.S. and British troops in the region, attacks on shipping in the Straits of Hormuz, sharp increases in the worldwide prices of oil and gas, and an explosion of violence against Israel, Jews, and United States interests around the globe. Israel could be subject to missile attacks by Iran or Hezbollah, and the war could become regional, spiraling out of control. The continuing toll of innocent life will play into extremists' hands, creating another generation of anti-American, anti-Israel terrorists, motivating attacks here and abroad.
In addition to this, JAIPAC claims the need for a paradigm shift, and offers insights from their collective professional experiences in the little known field of conflict studies regarding underlying principles for a tension-reducing paradigm, and practical strategies for reducing enmity, violence, terrorism, and transforming conflict. JAIPAC is post-partisan, and the approach in their letter, which can be found on www.consciouspolitics.org, is neither hostile nor confrontational.
They reframe the meaning of "unwavering support for Israel," which to date has been equated with military support. Such "support" in the Lebanon war has rendered Israel far more vulnerable, as they bombed their adversaries into popularity and escalation. The military approach precludes the awareness and use of more effective, nonviolent strategies that have been demonstrated to produce greater stability and enduring security. Avoiding the trap of criticizing the oxymoronic "pro Israel" position, JAIPAC reframes it as "New Pro Israel" in their commitment to supporting Israel in ways that include non- zero-sum, win-win approaches necessary for Israel to live safely, cooperatively, and productively as part of an East Mediterranean community. In light of post 9/11, 21st century security realities, JAIPAC introduces a policy of Mutually Assured Survival as necessary to reverse cycles of violence to protect Israel, the region, and the U.S. from escalating threats.