Elizabeth Warren: Progressive except on Palestine

It’s a familiar story in American politics. Elizabeth Warren has earned high praise from progressives for standing up to Wall Street, but as Max Blumenthal notes, when it comes to Israel she is marching in lockstep with those on the right who are willing to start another war and cripple the global economy.

While progressives celebrate Warren for her fight against the big banks and the financial industry’s lobbying arm, they have kept silent over the fact that she has enlisted with another powerful lobby that is willing to sabotage America’s economic recovery in order to advance its narrow interests. It is AIPAC, the key arm of the Israel lobby; a group that is openly pushing for a US war on Iran that would likely trigger a global recession, as the renowned economist Nouriel Roubini recently warned. The national security/foreign policy position page on Warren’s campaign website reads as though it was cobbled together from AIPAC memos and the website of the Israeli Foreign Ministry by the Democratic Party hacks who are advising her. It is pure boilerplate that suggests she knows about as much about the Middle East as Herman “Uzbeki-beki-stan-stan” Cain, and that she doesn’t care.

Warren’s statement on Israel consumes far more space than any other foreign policy issue on the page (she makes no mention of China, Latin America, or Africa). To justify what she calls the “unbreakable bond” between the US and Israel, Warren repeats the thoughtless cant about “a natural partnership resting on our mutual commitment to democracy and freedom and on our shared values.” She then declares that the United States must reject any Palestinian plans to pursue statehood outside of negotiations with Israel. While the US can preach to the Palestinians about how and when to demand the end of their 45-year-long military occupation, Warren says the US “cannot dictate the terms” to Israel.

Warren goes on to describe Iran as “a significant threat to the United States,” echoing a key talking point of fear-mongering pro-war forces. She calls for “strong sanctions” and declares that the “United States must take the necessary steps to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon” — a veiled endorsement of a military strike if Iran crosses the constantly shifting American “red lines.” Perhaps the only option Warren does not endorse or implicitly support is diplomacy. Her foreign policy views are hardly distinguishable from those of her Republican rival, who also marches in lockstep with AIPAC.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

3 thoughts on “Elizabeth Warren: Progressive except on Palestine

  1. Norman

    It seems as though she did sell her soul to the Devil. It’s looking as if they-the “O” team-made good on their pledge to the Banksters, on marginalizing Ms Warren. What a choice the voters of the state she’s running for office in, either her or a Repuglicon. If she’s elected, perhaps she’ll run for the office of P.O.T.U.S. like “O” did, again, marginalizing the other woman, Hillery I think is her name?

  2. delia ruhe

    As I’ve explained to someone else today, Warren is picking her fights instead of having them picked for her. Her fight is against Government by Wall Street of, for, and by the one percent. Can you imagine if she’s turned down AIPAC? She’d have a whole army of hysterical Zionists squawking at her loud enough for the NYT and WaPo to hear. That would be the finish of her, as she’d never be able to get back on topic.

    As an old feminist pressing 70 — a feminist who turned feminism into a career — I’ve seen this kind of thing a million times, i.e., feminists who refuse to get sidetracked by questions like: Are you a lesbian? Why do feminists hate men? Why are you opposed to marriage and motherhood? in order to be able to focus, laser-like, on their particular chosen cause. I don’t know what Warren’s private position on Israel is, but I’m damned sure she knows a political trap when she sees one — and she’ll be damned if she gives her Republican opponent the opportunity to turn the competition into “Who loves Israel more?”

  3. Leonard Fein

    Brava, Delia. Well-reasoned, well-said — with one MAJOR reservation. “Pressing 70” does not qualify as “old.” It is closer to late middle age. (Not to be confused with the late Middle Ages.) Honest. I passed the threshold seven years ago, and I am not even comfortable with “elderly,” let alone “old.”

    Happy birthday, whenever it is.

Comments are closed.