At Last, a Debate About U.S. Mideast Policy-and Who Influences It

By Allan C. Brownfeld

That the influence of individuals and groups who are committed to the policies of the Israeli government of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is altering the course of U.S. foreign policy-often in ways which have proven detrimental to both long-term American and Israeli interests-finally has become a subject of widespread public discussion.

One of our most respected military leaders, retired Gen. Anthony Zinni, a past chief of the U.S. Central Command and President George W. Bush's former Middle East special envoy, told "60 Minutes" in May that the role of neoconservatives in pushing the war in Iraq for Israel's benefit was "the worst kept secret in Washington."

In Zinni's view, the Bush administration was reckless in permitting itself to be influenced by neoconservatives who advanced the notion of pursuing a policy of democratizing the entire Middle East, starting with Iraq.

Earlier in the month, retiring Sen. Ernest F. Hollings (D-SC) wrote in The State and other leading South Carolina newspapers that, since we know Iraq did not possess weapons of mass destruction, nor is there any evidence of a tie between Iraq and al-Qaeda, we must seek another explanation for the rush to war. His assessment is that the war was entered into as part of "President Bush's policy to secure Israel."

Wrote Hollings: "Led by Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz and Charles Krauthammer, for years there has been a domino school of thought that the way to guarantee Israel's security is to spread democracy in the area.