By Zohaib Tariq
The question of why the United States consistently supports Israel, even in the face of human rights abuses and illegal occupation of Palestinian territories, is perplexing to many who view this support as inconsistent with America’s professed commitment to human rights, international law, and democracy. A deeper understanding of this issue can be found in John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt’s book The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy. Mearsheimer, a renowned scholar of International Relations and a R. Wendell Harrison distinguished service professor at the University of Chicago. He argues that U.S. support for Israel is not merely a result of strategic or moral interests but is significantly driven by the influence of a powerful pro-Israel lobby in Washington.
Mearsheimer and Walt argue that the Israel lobby, which includes organisations like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and Christian United for Israel (CUFI) and others plays a pivotal role in shaping U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. This lobby, they assert, has an outsized influence on both Democratic and Republican lawmakers, media, and public opinion. The authors contend that the lobby’s power enables it to push policies that prioritise Israel’s interests, even when these policies conflict with broader U.S. national security objectives or global human rights standards. Politicians in Washington, both Republicans and Democrats, often align themselves with pro-Israel policies due to the significant influence of lobbying groups like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). AIPAC, and other pro-Israel organisations, have vast financial and organisational resources that they use to support election candidates who champion policies favourable to Israel, or to marginalise those who question the U.S.-Israel relationship. Public opinion makers, including prominent commentators, think tanks, and advocacy organisations, shape the public’s perception of Israel and U.S. foreign policy.
Many of these institutions receive funding from pro-Israel donors or have strong connections to the Israel lobby. As a result, they often promote narratives that support Israel’s right to defend itself, downplay its human rights abuses on Palestinian and negatively portray Palestinian resistance to occupation, or frame U.S. involvement in the Middle East as a strategic necessity to protect Israel from hostile neighbour’s. Similarly, universities and think tanks serve as intellectual hubs that produce research and policy recommendations, many of which justify U.S. military involvement in the Middle East.
Universities often receive funding from defence contractors, Israeli advocacy organisations, and others. Many think tanks, such as the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP) and the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), are known for advocating U.S. foreign policies that align with Israel’s interests, particularly concerning military action in the Middle East.These institutions often receive funding from pro-Israel donors or defence contractors, creating a vested interest in promoting narratives that justify military action abroad and U.S. support for Israel. By influencing policy debates and shaping media narratives, these think tanks play a pivotal role in maintaining a pro-Israel and pro-war consensus in Washington, which is echoed in political discourse and media coverage. Additionally, academic freedom on issues concerning Israel is often stifled due to pressure from pro-Israel groups, which label criticism of Israeli policies by weaponising the term of antisemitism to silicone the critical voices..
Professors and students who challenge U.S. foreign policy or Israeli actions are sometimes marginalised, affecting the discourse on campuses across the country. This, in turn, limits the intellectual space for critiquing U.S. wars or Israel’s treatment of Palestinians, further reinforcing the status quo. This is not accidental; media outlets are often influenced by their owners, advertisers, or editorial boards, many of which have financial or ideological ties to Israel or the military-industrial complex. The military-industrial complex—comprising defence contractors, the Pentagon, and a network of supporting industries—has a significant interest in sustaining U.S. involvement in foreign conflicts. Israel’s geopolitical position in the Middle East and its conflicts with neighbouring states provide a pretext for U.S. military aid and arms sales, particularly to Israel and its regional allies.Large financial institutions also have a vested interest in maintaining the current structure of U.S. foreign policy. Wars and military aid programs generate enormous flows of capital that benefit banks, particularly those that manage defence contracts or underwrite government debt.
Additionally, the Israeli economy, which is heavily intertwined with the defence sector, benefits from foreign investments managed by U.S. banks. This influence explains why the U.S. continues to provide Israel with more than $3.8 billion annually in military aid, and why it has consistently used its veto power at the United Nations Security Council to block resolutions condemning Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories. Mearsheimer and Walt argue that such unwavering support exists even though Israel’s actions, including illegal settlements in the West Bank, the siege on Gaza, and the excessive use of force against Palestinians, violate international law and norms.
All of US wars in MENA (Middle East and North Africa) region, the conflicts in Eastern Europe, be it Bosnia, Kosovo or current Ukraine-Russia war, or the Cold War itself, were all likely to be driven to create wealth with the nexus of all these institutions, particularly the military industrial complex and the banks, in addition to shaping artificial public opinion through media and think tanks, this wealth is then used to protect Israel’s interests in Middle East and then Israel uses part of same wealth to influence congress, senate and the White House to approve millions of dollars of aid for Israel, in return.
For countries like Russia and China which seek to challenge US hegemony in the world, they need to reconsider their approach of confrontation with US, and understand that that it is not the US that has to fall to put an end to western imperialism, it is Israel instead, and particularly the nexus of all the institutions mentioned above, which capitalism enables. For US to fall, Israel must fall first to trigger a domino effect.
