Setting the Record Straight: A Response to Critics of "The Israel Lobby"

On March 23, 2006, we published an article titled “The Israel Lobby” in theLondon Review of Books. A slightly longer, fully documented version titled “TheIsrael Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy” was posted simultaneously on the FacultyWorking Paper website of Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government.In these two pieces, we argued that unconditional U.S. support for Israel couldnot be justified on either strategic or moral grounds, and that it was primarilydue to the political effectiveness of the loose coalition of groups and individualsthat make up the “Israel lobby.” We also argued that the lobby had encouragedthe United States to adopt policies that were neither in the America’s nationalinterest nor in Israel’s long-term interest.

We knew that our article would be controversial, because it addressed a setof important issues that few mainstream scholars or journalists had examined.We also knew it would be criticized, because it challenged a number of powerfulindividuals and organizations and cast doubt on a set of historical claims andpolicy positions to which these individuals and organizations are stronglycommitted. We also thought it likely that we would be personally attacked,because we were critical of Israeli policy and of Washington’s unconditionalsupport for Israel, and we had observed what had happened to others who hadtaken similar positions in the past.

We have followed the criticisms closely and have provided brief responsesto some of them in two letters to the London Review of Books (May 11 and May 25,2006), a symposium on the Israel lobby in Foreign Policy (July/August 2006) anda letter on that symposium in Foreign Policy (September/October 2006). We alsopublished a slightly revised version of the original Harvard Working Paper inthe Fall 2006 issue of the journal Middle East Policy. This clarified our position onseveral points, but our main position was unaltered.