From jad@ckuxb.att.com Ukn Jan 28 10:47:33 1993 Received: from att-out.att.com by css.itd.umich.edu (5.67/2.2) id AA29307; Thu, 28 Jan 93 10:47:32 -0500 Message-Id: <9301281547.AA29307@css.itd.umich.edu> To: pauls@css.itd.umich.edu Date: Thu, 28 Jan 93 10:40:46 EST From: jad@ckuxb.att.com Status: RO X-Status: Article 19802 of alt.conspiracy: Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.mideast,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.arabic Subject: Part 1, MID-EAST REALITIES NEWSLETTER from JCOME -- January, 1993 Message-ID: <1993Jan27.203243.26530@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> Followup-To: talk.politics.mideast,soc.culture.arabic Keywords: MID-EAST REALITIES NEWSLETTER from JCOME -- January, 1993 Sender: usenet@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU Organization: UVA. FREE Public Access UNIX! Lines: 162 ****************************************************************************** ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ " M I D - E A S T R E A L I T I E S " A UNIQUELY INDEPENDENT NEWSLETTER PUBLISHED IN ASSOCIATION WITH THE JEWISH COMMITTEE ON THE MIDDLE EAST (JCOME) AND HUNDREDS OF MIDDLE EAST SCHOLARS AND WRITERS THROUGHOUT THE UNITED STATES. (202) 362-5266 P.O. Box 18367; Washington, DC 20036 Fax: (202) 362-6965 E-MAIL: MCIMAIL to JCOME ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Volume 2; Issue 1 January 1993 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ****************************************************************************** " D R E A M A G E N T S " CNI - THE PHANTOM LOBBY By Mark A. Bruzonsky [Washington - 1 Dec] Just a year and two ago there were many here telling their colleagues in the Middle East that things were getting alot better in Washington in terms of the Israeli-Arab quagmire. ......AIPAC IS MORE IN CHARGE TODAY THAN EVER." George Bush, they said, was really serious about pushing Israel into a deal with the Palestinians. American allies -- especially Saudi Arabia and Egypt -- were on top in the region in the wake of the unprecedented U.S.-led international defanging of Iraq and would now exert an important new influence in the upcoming "peace process". And public support for Israel was on the wane. Furthermore, these voices kept insisting, George Bush and Jim Baker were riding high in the polls and likely to be reelected, especially if the Arab regimes and the Palestinians would just show further "moderation" in dealing with Israel and engaging themselves in the "peace process." Of course it was in this overall context that the Madrid Conference, so we were also told, was to be a major historic watershed. And the subsequent Arab-Israeli talks were sure to lead, so we were further told, to a process of Palestinian autonomy and eventual independence. The Israeli/American-approved Palestinian delegation itself said it had definite assurances of a firm one-year time-table for the talks to show significant progress. New "cause" groups, some clearly pro-Arab and Arab funded, others more independent but showing signs of being at least more balanced in their concerns about the region than had been the case in the past, were back then expressing themselves more vocally than ever before. Then came the debate over extending billions of dollars in "loan guarantees" to Israel, there was a chorus of opposition (beginning in the White House), and then much self-congratulating when the "guarantees" were put on hold. But even on this one, the temporary victory eventually became another grand defeat. Those who had gloated before hardly muttered a wimper in the end. It was all quite foreseeable from the start, actually, in view of the actual line-up of political forces fighting these battles -- except, that is, if one listened to the "wisdom" of those who were preaching that things had changed. At the head of this cacophony of political dreamers was a small chorus of defeated liberal Republicans with close ties to the Arab establishment in the Middle East who had banded together into an organization calling itself The Council On The National Interest (CNI). More on the order of a small political club than a real lobby (which is what it misleadingly purports to be), CNI's leaders -- former Congressmen Pete McCloskey and Paul Findley along with once Presidential candidate John Anderson -- were all beating the Bush/Baker drums with great enthusiasm back then. How the world turns. Bush is history, a tarnished one-term President. The "peace talks" -- other than buying Israel still more time to swallow what's left of the Palestinian homeland and make a real peace all but impossible -- have gone nowhere except to further Israeli designs in the region. And a new American President clearly oriented toward domestic issues has come to Washington -- arriving at the White House in part precisely because the pro-Israeli forces worked overtime to push Bill Clinton forward and pull King George down. Make no mistake about it. Clinton owes them; and both they and Clinton know it. For one thing that's why he was willing to appoint one of AIPAC's men to his National Security Council -- an in-house representative to watch over things and make sure the new President doesn't stray from what he's told. (See MER #4 - upcoming) AS FOR CNI... IN THAT IT PURPORTS TO BE A LOBBY AT ALL, IT IS A CRUEL, DECEPTIVE JOKE. Yet in today's new situation in Washington many of those who were so wrong and misleading just a short while ago are at it again. They are joined, just as was the case before, by a number of prominent Arab-American spokesman -- among them James Abourezk, Jim Zogby, and Khalil Jahshan and associated Jewish groups that these Arab-Americans work with including Peace Now, the Jewish Peace Lobby, and the American Jewish Congress -- who keep telling their flocks, year after year, that things are gradually improving (thanks to their efforts of course) when in fact the opposite is really the case. Example. Even in 1992, after decades of efforts, just getting one important Congressman or Senator (even a former one!) to an Arab-American event is heralded as a major triumph; when it fact it simply reflects the continuing political impotence of all of the Arab American groups in toto, regardless of what useful work they might do in other non-political areas of concern. Simply put, abit of progress in learning how to hold banquets and writing letters protesting slurs and ethnic stereotypes does not equate with serious political power. Example. When the Arab American University Graduates (AAUG) recently met in Washington -- even though well-known and well-respected Professor Edward Said gave an exceptionally provocative round-up of the state of the Arab world and the "peace process" at the Banquet -- quite literally no one from the media, surely no one with political stature, and not even a single camera, were there to take note of what he had to say. Moreover, these same ever-optimistic voices that were touting Bush and Baker not so long ago urging forward the "peace process" -- an approach which in reality was mostly designed by Israel and her Washington chums in the first place, as should now be more clear since the main Bush foreign policy that President-elect Clinton is loudly supporting is this very same "peace process" -- are at it again. With the same self-styled anti-AIPAC "phantom lobby" called CNI in the lead -- in reality that small collection of defeated liberal Republican politicians who have very little clout here at home (as opposed to their overseas image) -- these voices are now attempting to convince their followers that AIPAC is somehow on the ropes while they are continuing to come on strong. George Bush, of course, tried to do the same -- to convince us that Clinton was falling and he, Bush, was going to pull an upset victory afterall. But we can and should forgive him as that's the way of political campaigns. After all even Ross Perot kept telling us he was going to win "all 50 States". Yet in the context of an election such hyperbole isn't taken seriously. It's alot harder to forgive those out-of-power personalities who in a sense mislead for profit and glory. No longer competing for votes they purport to be telling the truth not only about what's really happening in the Middle East but also about the real situation within American politics. But in another sense they are still competing, now for the largess of those willing to back them. And this situation creates a corrupting atmosphere in which too many people more and more say, and write, what is useful and profitable for them to say, and write, rather than what is really happening. (to be continued) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *