It was clear from Rob Reynolds' report for Al Jazeera yesterday that this year's policy conference of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) was likely to attract more attention and controversy than it has in the past. Al Jazeera, itself, responded to the controversy with its Inside Story program, on which it interviewed three guests for their opinions about AIPAC. Programs like this still tend to lack the depth of the sort of report compiled by Stephen Mearsheimer and John Walt or Michael Massing's extended analysis of this report for The New York Review, but it is always nice to compare such informal data points with the more scholarly ones. Summaries of the three comments have now been posted at Al Jazeera English and should not be denied attention.
The first comment comes from a leader of Peace Now, an organization that was just beginning to form back when I worked in Israel in the early seventies:
Gavri Bargil, one of the leaders of Peace Now, an Israeli peace organisation, said: "I think the work Aipac does is crucial and I support them. Our fear is sometimes they are too successful.
"They do not always represent the line of the Israeli public, nor the Jewish community in the US, who believe in two peoples, two states.
"Many times what Aipac reports to the [Capitol} Hill or to the US administration is much out of line."
The second is a view from Washington:
Steve Clemons, of the New American Foundation, a Washington think-tank, said: "I am impressed with the organisation and there's a lot of jealousy of its success.
"It has successfully managed to narrow debate in Washington on the Palestinian issue.
"We have a cartel of institutes and political think-tanks that dominate this area and I think it would be healthier if there were more players.
"... it would be a nice idea to invite Keith Ellison, the first Muslim member of congress into a conversation at the conference.
"That kind of activity would go a long way to demystifying Aipac and what it's about, because there is a bit of mystery about what it is, and isn't, about."
Finally (and it is important that this was part of the debate), there was a voice from AIPAC itself:
Steve Clemons, of the New American Foundation, a Washington think-tank, said: "I am impressed with the organisation and there's a lot of jealousy of its success.
"It has successfully managed to narrow debate in Washington on the Palestinian issue.
"We have a cartel of institutes and political think-tanks that dominate this area and I think it would be healthier if there were more players.
"... it would be a nice idea to invite Keith Ellison, the first Muslim member of congress into a conversation at the conference.
"That kind of activity would go a long way to demystifying Aipac and what it's about, because there is a bit of mystery about what it is, and isn't, about."
The one thing we can conclude from this is that Al Jazeera remains up there with the best of the mass media news sources when it comes to presenting the "story behind the story." Their choice of medium does not lend itself to extended analysis and reflection, but they should be praised for the way they have handled the limitations they have set for themselves. Since I tend to see things in terms of "The Memorable Sentence," I, for one, was most interested in Steve Clemons' suggestion about bringing Keith Ellison into the conversation. Indeed, had I read a report that Nancy Pelosi would be attending the AIPAC conference along with Ellison, I would probably not have reacted as negatively as I did to reading that she would be attending along with Cheney!
No comments:
Post a Comment