OBAMA JOINS THE MEARSHEIMER-WALT TEAM Richard Baehr    1-22-15 http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=11311 More than a few analysts and political writers have noted that U.S. President Barack Obama ‎seems to enjoy driving his political opponents up a wall. On the domestic front, the strategy has been to get ‎under the skin of Republicans, so the political battles are waged on Obama's ‎chosen playing field, and his opponents come off as angry if not crazy when they ‎fight back. ‎ At times, the president has sounded like a Chicago gang ‎leader, including this memorable comment at a Philadelphia fundraiser during his initial ‎run for the White House in 2008: "If [the Republicans] bring a knife to the fight, we bring a ‎gun. Because from what I understand, folks in Philly like a good brawl. I've seen Eagles fans."‎ This kind of "elevated" discussion of campaign strategy (often with ‎sports associations) fits with a broader strategy Obama has put ‎into place as president of appearing to consciously shrink the ‎dignity of the office he serves by regularly appealing to the ‎audiences of the lowest common denominator talk shows and ‎interview programs, such as "The View." On Thursday, two days ‎after delivering the annual State of the Union address, the president will follow up with sure to be weighty discussions with a ‎trio of popular young YouTube filmmakers.‎ Last week, the president was back in his preferred mocking, ‎scornful mode, but this time the bile was directed at a member of ‎his own political party, Democratic Senator Robert Menendez of ‎New Jersey. The setting was a meeting the president was holding ‎with the greatly diminished ranks of Democratic Senators ( a group ‎that has gone from a commanding 60 to a minority share of 46 ‎since Obama took office). The president was previewing his new ‎domestic agenda -- basically a reprise of his first term agenda -- raise ‎taxes on the rich, move the money around to groups Obama likes ‎better, and spend more money at the federal level. But things got ‎heated when the discussion moved on to the administration's ‎negotiations as part of the P5+1 with Iran over its nuclear ‎program. The president warned Democrats not to stray from the ‎president's directives, and to delay passage of any additional ‎sanctions resolutions while the talks continue. That will allow the ‎administration and its partners to continue to try to find a way to ‎make enough concessions to Iran so at long last the mullahs will ‎say yes to something, and the president can claim victory (by ‎perhaps extending the time for Iran to cancel any agreement it ‎signs and then break out to becoming a nuclear power by a few ‎weeks). ‎ The president reportedly let forth a charming piece of slander directed at Menendez and others who are with him ‎in backing new sanctions: ‎"According to one of the senators and another person who was ‎present, the president urged lawmakers to stop pursuing ‎sanctions, saying such a move would undermine his authority ‎and could derail the talks. Mr. Obama also said that such a ‎provocative action could lead international observers to blame ‎the Americans, rather than the Iranians, if the talks collapsed ‎before the June 30 deadline.‎ "The president said he understood the pressures that senators ‎face from donors and others, but he urged the lawmakers to ‎take the long view rather than make a move for short-term ‎political gain, according to the senator. Mr. Menendez, who ‎was seated at a table in front of the podium, stood up and said ‎he took 'personal offense.'‎ "Mr. Menendez told the president that he had worked for more ‎than 20 years to curb Iran's nuclear ambitions and had ‎always been focused on the long-term implications. Mr. ‎Menendez also warned the president that sanctions could not ‎be imposed quickly if Congress waited to act and the talks ‎failed, according to two people who were present."‎ It is worth unpacking this off-the-cuff remark by the president, ‎since it fits a pattern. First there is the arrogance: I take the ‎long view, you are concerned only with short-term political ‎gain. But then comes the clincher: You (Mendendez and ‎others who back new sanctions) are basically just responding ‎to the pressure from donors and others. You are, in other ‎words, bought and sold by Israel and the Jews. There is, after ‎all, not a lot of doubt as to who these donors or the "others" ‎might be. ‎ At its core, Obama is simply parroting the views of Professors John Mearsheimer and ‎Steven Walt from their book "The ‎Israel Lobby." The professors argued ‎that America was off the reservation of the international ‎community (e.g., the Europeans and the other deep thinkers ‎at the United Nations) by sticking in Israel's corner in its ‎dispute with the Palestinians. America's national interest ‎would be better served by largely abandoning Israel -- ‎pressuring it to make all the concessions necessary to get a ‎deal done with the Palestinians, which would presumably ‎result in an immediate warm wet blanket of approval all ‎around the world to reward America for its newly found ‎wisdom. ‎ For Mearsheimer and Walt, America's terrible mistake in ‎supporting Israel had led to all kinds of other strategic follies. ‎The Iraq war was supposedly a war fought by America but ‎really stage-managed by Israel and its backers in the United ‎States. This bit of nonsense had found other backers, such as ‎nativist Patrick Buchanan, who has never had a kind word to ‎say for the Jewish state. But the truth of the matter is that ‎Israel was clearly not a supporter of the Iraq war in 2003, ‎having experienced the blowback from Saddam Hussein's Scud missiles 12 years earlier in the American war to liberate ‎Kuwait, and not looking forward to a repeat performance. ‎Israel was also far more skeptical than American officials as ‎to whether Saddam had an active nuclear weapons program ‎underway in 2003. ‎ During the Iraq War, if one accepted the Mearsheimer-Walt ‎argument, President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary ‎of State Colin Powell, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, and ‎National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice were all servants ‎of Israel, and it was Israel that wanted war with Iraq and ‎pushed America into it. Presumably America's leaders were ‎all weaklings, and were easily pushed around by those who ‎were really powerful -- the Israel lobby, in this case led by a ‎few Jewish "neocon" writers, working at the direction of ‎Israel, such as Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz and Bill ‎Kristol. ‎ For Mearsheimer and Walt, America's leaders are never ‎independent actors when it comes to policy toward israel, ‎with decisions to be made based on their reading of America's ‎national interest. Rather, they are pawns of the Jews and ‎Israel. For them, the all-powerful "Israel lobby" distorts the ‎thinking of the government, and Congress, producing a ‎collection of American officials and lawmakers serving ‎Israel's interests, but not America's. ‎ The Mearsheimer-Walt argument has gained wide acceptance ‎in the years since the original publication of an article ‎previewing the book in the London Review of Books. Given the distinction of its ‎authors, professors from the University of Chicago and Harvard, the former also a West Point graduate, the book ‎gave a broad protection to many other Israel haters who ‎wanted to extend the argument. New York Times columnist ‎Tom Friedman, one of the president's favorite reads, referred to Congress as "bought and paid for by Israel" after it gave a warm welcome to Prime Minister Benjamin ‎Netanyahu when he spoke before a joint session of Congress. ‎The line warmed the hearts of Israel-haters such as writers for Al Jazeera and the Mondoweiss website. Presumably, the applause ‎would have been better reserved for the real peacemakers of ‎the Palestinian Authority or countries and movements that ‎deserved more thoughtful consideration from America, such ‎as Hamas, Iran, or even Hezbollah, since the Congress could ‎then declare itself "Islamophobe-free," probably the most ‎important designation around these days for the "paper of ‎record." ‎ Obama's reproach of Menendez reflects a view that America ‎would be better off if there was not such strong support for ‎Israel. Then Obama and other presidents to follow could sell ‎out Israel for some other political objective. The president is ‎unhappy that Israel has not yet turned into a pure Republican vs. Democrat battle, like all others. The president feeds on ‎partisanship, since he believes the numbers on his side of ‎every argument are larger and growing more rapidly. Obama ‎has worked hard to break the bipartisan support for the ‎Jewish state that now exists. So far, his gains have been ‎modest, though there is evidence that support for Israel on the Left and among some Democrats has faded.‎ Of course, if almost all members of Congress back Israel, it ‎might reflect that their constituents strongly support Israel ‎and always have. Americans see a natural ally, aligned with ‎American interests and values, and a nation on the front line ‎of the same battles American is fighting. Obama is ‎not part of that majority. His view reflects what one would ‎expect to find in someone who is emotionally on the side of the ‎Arabs and the Third World, and resents Western nations and ‎their success. This was a theme Dinesh D'Souza explored in ‎his documentary: "2016: Obama's America." ‎D'Souza's legal problems probably owe as much to making ‎this film as to any minor campaign finance violations of ‎which he was guilty. ‎ In any case, the president's comment to Menendez is a signal that ‎like so much else on the political battlefield, now that there ‎are no more elections to worry about, Obama can be Obama ‎these next two years. And there is not a trace of warmth ‎for Israel in this cold man.