John Mearsheimer: Israel lobby’s influence on US policy as powerful as ever | UpFront

as the United States is under Fire for its continued support of Israel's brutal war on Gaza and while it becomes further in mesed in a costly war in Ukraine many are asking how is this affecting Washington's Global standing is the US overstretched and could this signal the end of us unipolarity we'll ask renowned political scientist John mimer in an upfront special John Mir shamer thank you so much for joining us on UPF front my pleasure to be here uh it's been nearly 20 years since you co-authored your seminal piece uh titled the Israel Lobby uh dealing with the Lobby's undue influence on United States foreign policy uh have there been any major policy shifts or any other changes or developments since you wrote the piece well I think there two things have changed one is I think that we helped to open up the discourse about the lobby uh before we wrote the article and then the book uh not many people talked about the lobby explicitly and the Lobby's influence on US foreign policy and I think in terms of the discourse uh we had a significant influence uh in terms of actual policy I think we've had little influence at all uh I think that the lobby remains as powerful as ever uh and American foreign policy uh towards Israel and towards the greater Middle East remains greatly influenced by uh the lobby I mean one could argue you're you're you're being too hard on yourself that you're selling yourself a little bit short to the extent that there is at least resistance now and that resistance does matter I mean there's a campaign against the lobby group APAC the American Israel public affairs uh committee uh and and how they influence us politics specifically the target of Progressive Democrats according to one poll uh 62% of respondents who voted for President Biden in 2020 agree that quote the US should stop weapons shipments to Israel until Israel discontinues its attacks on the people of Gaza now President Biden certainly continues to provide military aid and financial support to Israel there's no doubt about that um but there's at least the perception of a risk that Biden is taken now that wouldn't have been there 20 years ago is that safe to say well I think there's no question that uh attitudes towards Israel and towards Israel's policies uh regarding the Palestinians has shifted in the body politic especially among young people and especially among Democrats and there's no question that causes problems for uh President Biden but the fact is that the lobby Still Remains uh exceedingly successful at influencing uh policy at the elite level uh the lobb's influence in Congress and the Lobby's influence on the white house uh remains uh as powerful as ever uh so what you have here is something of a disjuncture between public opinion on one hand and the Lobby's ability to influence policy on the other hand uh and how that plays out over time remains to be seen it could be the case that Biden is defeated in the fall in large part because he has supported Israel uh down the line uh up to now and that he continues to support Israel down the line and that comes back to bite him uh that may be the case and if that does happen then attitudes uh towards Israel and towards the lobby and towards the Israeli American relationship I think will change even more and maybe policy will change but that has not happened so far fair enough uh a dissenting memo organized by the US state department uh staffers which was leaked uh back in November early November uh warned that the US's failure to criticize Israeli war crimes quote contributes to Regional public perceptions that the United States is a biased and dishonest actor which at best does not advance and at worst harms us interests worldwide is the US's continued support for Israel affecting uh it's Global standing there's no question about it the United States is effectively complicit in the genocide that's widely regarded uh our ability uh you know to influence people around the world has diminished significantly as a result of this uh all of this makes a joke out of the concept of a rules-based order which we preach about all the time this is a disaster for the United States but I would point out to you that despite the fact it's a disaster the United States continues to support Israel down the line now the rejoiner to that at least the most reasonable rejoiner to that would be that this is absolutely a matter of National Security that Israel is not just the recipient of us LR J for philanthropic reasons or humanitarian reasons but that there's a strategic interest in the Middle East that goes beyond the money but it's actually directly tied to us uh National Security interest is supporting Israel vital to maintaining US National Security I I think your comments have it dead wrong Israel is a strategic albatross around their neck it's a liability uh we gain hardly any benefits from our relationship with uh Israel any strategic benefits and uh their significant liabilities as we're seeing now furthermore there's a powerful moral or ethical Dimension to this and the the idea that being joined at the hip with Israel is in our moral or ethical interest is not a serious argument as I said to you before the United States is complicit in a genocide uh this is certainly not in our interest so uh the idea that you know we're supporting Israel unconditionally uh because it's an our strategic and moral interest is not a serious argument in my opinion yeah the the moral side was more saying if we cast aside the more argument against supporting Israel uh is there still a strategic interest that trumps that and and some people would argue whether it's whether it's uh being wary of Iran whether it's proxy wars that there might be some vital military reason for being there and being so staunchly tied to Israel but you say there's no there's no credible argument there no I don't buy that argument for one second and uh Stephen I lay out the case against that argument in both the article and in the book and by the way with regard to Iran I believe we would have much better relations with Iran today were it not for the lobby uh in our chapter on uh Iran in in the lobby book we make it quite clear that Iran tried to improve relations with the United States on a number of occasions in the 80s and the 90s and the lobby moved in and uh killed our efforts to accommodate uh the Iranians in any way and furthermore if you look at the jcpoa which is the uh nuclear agreement between basically the United States and Iran that I think effectively shut down the Iranian nuclear program in the short term uh it was Israel and the lobby that put enormous pressure on the United States uh to put an end to that agreement which I don't think was in our interest so help me understand why we end up in this place if there's no legitimate moral argument here uh to your point and if there is no legitimate strategic interest and it's certainly a financial burden we're talking three or four billion dollars a year and we're talking about in post October 7th an attempt to get even more tens of billions of dollars uh to Israel it's certainly a financial burden why does the United States continue to double down in this way in the 60s we'd say it's Hawk missile sales perhaps you know we might say that it's a it's it's an attempt to leverage uh a geopolitical standing in order to access oil more but now in 2024 what what good reason does the United States have to do this they're not doing it blindly there there must be a reason what is it well let me just point out that the United States just doesn't give Israel lots of weapons and lots of money uh and support it diplomatically it does it unconditionally there is no relationship between any two countries in world history that looks like this relationship the United States again supports Israel no matter what it does uh this is truly remarkable we don't treat Israel like a normal country and help it because it's to our benefit strategically that's the argument you're basically making this is a strategic asset for the United States it's a normal country and we take advantage of it that's not what's going on here so help me get to the why what is the organizing principle behind this special relationship then I it's a fascinating argument you're making but why then why is the us doing it because of the lobby the United States has a political system that is set up in ways that allow interest groups to have great influence just think of the National Rifle Association uh when you look at polls and terms of how Americans think about gun control what you see is that there are lots of Americans who are interested in some serious gun control but it's almost impossible to get any meaningful gun control because of the National Rifle Association the National Rifle Association is an interest group that wields enormous power when it comes to legislation involving gun control well the Israel Lobby is one of the most powerful lobbies if not the most powerful Lobby in the United States and the lobby goes to enormous lengths to make sure that American foreign policy supports Israel unconditionally and it is wildly successful uh truly impressive how good the lobby is at getting uh US foreign policy makers uh to support Israel hookline and sinker do you have any optimism that it's you know is the invincibility of APAC that aura of invincibility breaking down uh I think that's a little too strong I think it's eroding somewhat what the future looks like for sure is hard to say let me make two points there first of all the lobby now has to operate out in the open uh and it has to engage in what I call Smashmouth politics uh before we wrote the article in the book The Lobby could operate uh behind closed doors and for any interest group the ideal situation is to operate uh behind closed doors and not out in the open but when you're out in the open like the lobby is now and you're engaged in Smashmouth politics uh it's going to cause you all sorts of problems that's Point number one point number two that Israel's Behavior has gotten more outrageous over time and a good manifestation of this point is what's happening in Gaza today and this situation is not going to get any better with the passage of time it's widely recognized that Israel is an apartheid state and furthermore it is engaging in a genocidal campaign at this point in time all of that tells you that the lobby has really got a difficult job confronting it it has to work overtime these days to defend Israel and it will have to work harder and harder with the passage of time because more and more people are aware of what's going on in the Middle East they see what Israel is doing but I would never underestimate the ability of the lobby uh to adjust to the circumstances and uh and Prevail in the long run that may not happen but you don't want to underestimate the lobby that's my basic Point understood let's move on to Ukraine a bit uh and October of last year President Biden had uh asked Congress to authorize $61 billion in Ukrainian assistance uh in addition to another 14 billion for Israel uh which for now Still Remains stalled in the US House of Representatives uh the US Department of Defense and early February stated that without us funding uh Ukraine's defense will likely collapse uh given that the funding is now stalled what do you believe the impact will be uh for Ukraine and for us policy well I believed that Ukraine was going to lose this war to Russia whether they got that 60 plus billion dollars or not the fact is that the ukrainians need Weaponry uh and furthermore they need Manpower because they're badly outnumbered in terms of troop levels well we can't do anything to help them with troop levels and in terms of Weaponry we don't have the Weaponry to give them when you listen to people talk about this 60 plus billion you would think that this is going to allow us as soon as this Aid is provided to take all these weapons off the shelf and ship them to Ukraine and that's going to go a long way towards redressing the imbalance and weaponry over there but that's not true we can't we can't give them the weapons they need in large enough numbers because we don't have those weapons and that we includes the Europeans as well as the United States so we can give them dollar bills or Euros but that's not going to do them much good so we can't number one redress the Weaponry imbalance and number two we cannot redress the Manpower imbalance all of that so is this money largely ineffective to the point that it it's a legitimate argument for not sending any no it's worse than that what it does is it encourages the ukrainians to continue fighting which means they'll lose more territory and more ukrainians will die when if we cut off the aid and let Ukraine go its own way and become a neutral country Ukraine could cut a deal now and get a better deal today than it will get tomorrow if we give it the aid to continue fighting that feels a little bit like I won't call it appeasement but to to effectively yield uh significant portions of your land because you can't win uh when there's an entire Global community that could offer support feels like a tough decision to make if you get into a fight with Muhammad Ali and you go two rounds with him and it's quite clear that he has the ability to kill you what are you going to do quit after two rounds or continue to fight and allow him to kill you well if he if I'm wearing gloves and he's not I've been yelling to somebody hey is there a ref there that can put some gloves on the guy I feel like Russia's fighting without gloves and no everyone's just watching well in the International System there is no higher authority that can rescue you when you get into trouble and the ukrainians are in big trouble and there's no referee no no higher authority no whatever up there that can rescue them and my point to you is that what the ukrainians should do now is they should uh cut all security ties cut all security ties with the West right and declare neutrality and work with the Russians to make it clear that they are a neutral State and have no interest in joining NATO and then the United States should cut off all Aid to Ukraine and the ukrainians should rely on economic aid from Europe in its place uh former Russian president Dimitri medv uh who's now Deputy uh chairman of Russia Security Council was recently asked at what point Russia should stop its Invasion and he stated it probably should be ke if not now then after some time maybe in some other phase of the development of this conflict uh President Putin himself also stated that Russian troops would push further into Ukraine after Russia's success in taking over the town of abiva uh do you think uh Putin's goal is to take over all of Ukraine uh and is Russia even capable of doing this I I think that despite the conventional wisdom in the west he is not determined uh and never has been determined to conquer all of Ukraine uh and indeed he would be foolish to do that and furthermore despite the conventional wisdom in the west there has never been any evidence that he's interested in conquering other countries in Eastern Europe as well the idea that he's trying to recreate the Russian Empire or create a greater Russia uh is not a serious argument but but much of the argument isn't that he's trying to take over the rest of Europe but maybe just the rest of Ukraine no I don't believe that there's no evidence to support that he'd be a fool to try to conquer all of Ukraine because the Western half of the country is filled with ethnic ukrainians who would resist Russian occupation might he'd have a serious Insurgency on his hands and that's the last thing he needs and as I said to you before they would be foolish in the extreme to try to do that let's move on because there's there's another thing I want to ask you about uh in December uh of uh 2023 us defense secretary Lloyd Austin stated Russia's military is badly weakened uh and last year the head of the defense intelligence agency said that it would take somewhere between 5 and 10 years for Russia to rebuild the capabilities of it Armed Forces some argue that Ukrainian resistance with Western support was in fact important to prevent further aggression from Russia what do you make of that I think it's just dead wrong I think the Russian military today is much more formidable that it w than it was when the war first started armies at the start of a war rarely look like armies Midway through a war or at the end of a war and by almost all accounts in the Ukrainian media this is in the UK Ukrainian media media the Russian army has gotten much better with the passage of time they've mobilized lots of troops they've trained them up the equipment is much better and most importantly the tactics and strategy are smarter which is what you would expect in any army that fights a protracted War it gets better in most cases with the pass with the passage of time I I think the concern was the wiping out of ground troops and that to replenish those troops it would take 5 to 10 years but I hear what you're saying loud and clear which is that those numbers are inflated and that and that they're they've replenished troops much more quickly and efficiently than that I think that's exactly right the numbers of Russian casualties are inflated and furthermore Putin has mobilized a huge number of troops they've trained them up and they now have a quite effective military fair enough uh you recently stated that the US is in trouble in regards to the Middle East and Ukraine on Ukraine you said uh quote we were committed to beating the Russians in Ukraine we were were committed to Wrecking the Russian economy and knocking the Russians out of the ranks of the great Powers we failed this is a devastating defeat for the West you said um from your standpoint is this the end of American unipolarity no unipolarity in my opinion ended in 2017 with the rise of China and the fact that uh Putin brought the uh Russians back from the dead uh between the period of 2000 when he took over and 2017 the unipolar moment lasted from roughly December 1991 when the Soviet Union collapsed until about 2017 we were the only great power on the planet and it was the ideal strategic situation to be in but the world that we live in today is not unipolar it's multipolar there's China there's Russia and there's the United States and uh let let me push back on that just a little bit because the US Still Remains the largest economy uh in the world according to GDP and GDP per capita uh in 2023 and in 2024 the US was still ranked as the most powerful military in the world with the world's largest defense budget uh in excess of I believe $750 billion there we have military bases in well over 70 countries right now uh can other countries really threaten the unipolar strength of the United States well I would point out to you that you're absolutely correct that we are the most powerful State on the planet but to break free of us Orthodoxy they faced the Wrath of the US government some countries today are still enduring a ferocious array of sanctions others in the past were victims of regime change operations uh that were supported by the United States or other Western uh governments does the US still have the same ability to threaten Nations that go against them or have things changed well I think things have changed somewhat uh I I think that uh other countries uh like Iran for example examp Le and North Korea uh which uh were in a much lonlier position during the unipolar moment uh can now cozy up to the Chinese and the Russians who are willing to Cozy up to them and this just goes to tell you that weaker countries in the system uh can find allies who will help to protect them uh from the United States and it's pensant for regime change so before you go let me ask you one more question so if I accept your argument that us unipolarity is over uh what comes next are we going to see a genuinely multipolar kind of political environment here or are we going to see a situation where China eventually takes the US's place and imposes a new kind of imperialism we're in a genuinely multipolar system and there's no evidence that it's going to end anytime soon one can make an argument that for demographic reasons moving forward we will eventually go back to a unipolar world and the reason I say that is it's quite clear that the Chinese and the Russians but especially the Chinese have Wicked demographic problems uh and that their populations are going to shrink in significant ways over time the United States has a bit of a demographic problem itself but we have one great advantage that they don't have and that is that we're an immigrant culture so we can import all sorts of people to redress the demographic problems that we have and I think an argument could be made that you know 50 years from now the United States may be back to unipolarity in large part because of demographic reasons because you understand the two principal building blocks of military power are wealth and demography you have to be rich and you have to have lots of people and China and Russia are in a very precarious situation over the long term because they have declining populations Johnn M I want to thank you for your time thank you so much for joining us on a front with your insights this is my pleasure thanks for having me on the show I enjoyed it thank you all right everyone that is our show up front we'll be back next [Music] week

Channel: Al Jazeera English

Views: 260,551

Keywords: Benjamin Netanyahu, China, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, Dmitry Medvedev, Gaza, Hamas, Iran, Israel, Joe Biden, Kiev, Marc Lamont Hill, Mearsheimer, NATO, National Rifle Association, Palestine, Russia, US foreign policy, Ukraine, United States, Vladimir Putin, Zelenskyy, demography, financial support, genocide, lobby, military aid, proxy war, unipolarity, upfront, war

Id: vqQsqVkboMs

Length: 24min 59sec (1499 seconds)

Published: Fri Mar 29 2024