The Citizen conversation with … Stephen Walt
by Ben Branham on September 19, 2007 in Citizen Conversation with...
On August 27, Prof. Stephen Walt published The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy (Farrar, Straus and Giroux), which he co-authored with John Mearsheimer and that expands upon a 2006 article they wrote for the London Review of Books. The book’s premise that the pro-Israeli lobby exerts a negative and damaging influence on U.S. policy has generated a controversial debate that has seen Walt accused of anti-Semitism and vigorously attacked by his opponents. He recently sat down with the Citizen to talk about the experience:
Q: You’ve been a busy man lately. Have you started screening your calls?
A: The response to the book is actually less disrupting than one might think. … The correspondence I’ve received so far has been almost entirely positive. And I think the reactions to the book have been—for the most part—more serious and measured than the response to the original article. That’s not entirely the case, of course, and there have been some pretty vitriolic reactions from some quarters.
Q: When you first wrote the article and then the book did you have a sense that it might cause some of the more, in your own words, “vitriolic reactions”?
A: This is a subject that ignites some pretty strong feelings on lots of different sides, and we knew the original article would be somewhat controversial. … We had seen what had happened to other people who had written on this subject or who were critical of certain aspects of Israeli policy, and we knew that trying to smear people in various ways was one of the standard tactics that some groups used. Of course, this isn’t really all that different from some other highly controversial topics.
Q: Do you think it¹s possible in this country to talk in a comprehensive way about U.S.-Israeli relations without the risk of being labeled or called an anti-Semite?
A: Not at present. I think anyone who is critical of Israeli actions or critical of unconditional American support for Israel runs the risk of being called an anti-Semite, even when there is no basis whatsoever for the charge. The same thing happened to Jimmy Carter, for example, a man who has done more to encourage peace in the Middle East than almost anyone. Yet look what happened to him when he published a book that was critical of Israeli policy in the occupied territories. … First of all, the charge is almost never true. Second, the charge distracts people from the real issue, which is what American policy ought to be; what policy would be best for the United States, for Israel, and for other countries in the region? And finally, the tactic silences people. That’s not really what democracy is supposed to be about.
Q: Is there any kind of ironic, academic badge of honor in having a presidential candidate publicly distance himself from you? (Note: The Obama campaign recently removed an ad it had placed as a sponsored link on Amazon.com’s page for Walt’s book)
A: I don’t think it’s a badge of honor or dishonor. I do think that particular incident is more evidence that the book’s main argument is correct. This remains a subject that American politicians cannot talk about freely. We would be better off, and I believe Israel would be better off, if the United States had a more open and candid discussion of American policy, which has in my view not been good for the United States but also not been good for Israel in recent years.
Q: Have you read your own Wikipedia entry?
A: Not for months. I found out I was on Wikipedia a few months ago but I haven’t looked at it in a long time. Is there something there I should be aware of?
Comments
Got something to say?



