Neoconservatism is often described as a right-wing political philosophy that emerged in the USA, and which supports using American economic and military power to bring liberalism, democracy, and human rights to other countries as necessary. Although neoconservatives claim to be liberal on economic issues, the right shift of this movement seems entirely based on its radical foreign policy. The Bush Doctrine, for example, is a often perceived as a Neoconservative project and the Iraq War an example of its implementation after 9/11.
However, according to Harvard professor Stephen Walt, the Neoconservative movement is not what it seems to be, but that it has always been an Israel-centric movement to involve the US in foreign adventures that seem advantageous to Israel, and not for the idealist purpose of spreading democracy around the world. In this regard, there is plenty of evidence that the trillion dollar Iraq war was engineered by Neocons situated in the Defense Department, that it was done for Israel’s sake on falsified evidence of Saddam’s WMDs and terrorist connections.
But Neocon influences did not end with Iraq, but went on to push for an attack on Iran, and then, now, Turkey, which is being singled out for its criticism of Israel based on recent events. As Walt put it, “the critic of my friend is my enemy,” hence, the anti-Turkey focus of recent Neocon efforts to support Israel.
It couldn’t be more predictable. Back when Israel and Turkey were strategic allies with extensive military-to-military ties, prominent neoconservatives were vocal defenders of the Turkish government and groups like the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and AIPAC encouraged Congress not to pass resolutions that would have labeled what happened to the Armenians at the hands of the Turks during World War I a “genocide.” (The “Armenian lobby” is no slouch, but it’s no match for AIPAC and its allies in the Israel lobby). The fact that the ADL was in effect protecting another country against the charge of genocide is more than a little ironic, but who ever said that political organizations had to be ethically consistent? Once relations between Israel and Turkey began to fray, however — fueled primarily by Turkish anger over Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians — the ADL and AIPAC withdrew their protection and Congressional defenders of Israel began switching sides, too.
Last week Jim Lobe published a terrific piece at InterPress Service, detailing how prominent neoconservatives have switched from being strong supporters (and in some cases well-paid consultants) of the Turkish government to being vehement critics. He lays out the story better than I could, but I have a few comments to add.
First, if this doesn’t convince you that virtually all neoconservatives are deeply Israeli-centric, then nothing will. This affinity is hardly a secret; indeed, neocon pundit Max Boot once declared that support for Israel was a “key tenet” of neoconservatism. But the extent of their attachment to Israel is sometimes disguised by the claim that what they really care about is freedom and democracy, and therefore they support Israel simply because it is “the only democracy in the Middle East.”
But now we see the neoconservatives turning on Turkey, even though it is a well-functioning democracy, a member of NATO, and a strong ally of the United States. Of course,Turkey’s democracy isn’t perfect, but show me one that is. The neocons have turned from friends of Turkey to foes for one simple reason: Israel. Specifically, the Turkish government has been openly critical of Israel’s conduct toward the Palestinians, beginning with the blockade of Gaza, ramping up after the brutal bombardment of Gaza in 2008-2009, and culminating in the lethal IDF attack on the Gaza Freedom Flotilla. As Lobe shows, a flock of prominent neoconservatives are now busily demonizing Turkey, and in some cases calling for its expulsion from NATO.
Thus, whether a state is democratic or not matters little for the neocons; what matters for them is whether a state backs Israel or not. So if you’re still wondering why so many neoconservatives worked overtime to get the U.S. to invade Iraq — even though Osama bin Laden was in Afghanistan or Pakistan — and why they are now pushing for war with Iran, well, there’s your answer.
Walt goes on to re-evaluate the US-Israel relationship, and how detrimental it has been for both the US and Israel, but he also recommends the article by Jim Lobe, for which his commentary is merely an introduction: Neo-Conservatives Lead Charge Against Turkey. It can be read at the LINK.
What is perhaps the greatest detriment of the Neocon-AIPAC-UN Congress nexus is its total allegiance to the right wing Likud party of Israel, today represented by the return of Netanyahu to lead Israel, who apparently intends to implement, at last, A Clean Break, the Neocon prescription for the future of Israel.
