Interview with Alison Weir
Wed Mar 5, 2014 8:25AM GMT
Wed Mar 5, 2014 8:25AM GMT
Press TV has conducted an interview with Alison Weir, Executive Director of If Americans Knew from Washington, to discuss contradictory messages coming out of the White House regarding American intentions towards Iran.
The following is an approximate transcript of the interview.
Press TV: There’s a lot being said about how valid the remarks by President Obama can be considering the various opinions we’re hearing in Congress and from the Israeli lobby.
Do you think that these policies are strongly affected by Israel and it is the Israeli lobby and Israel that is going to determine what these policies are?
Weir: The Israeli lobby is always a major factor in all US policies and in the statements made by our president and our congressional representatives.
Fortunately the Israeli lobby is slightly dividing now. So, there is AIPAC that is the hardline right wing support Israel no matter how brutal its actions against others that’s been in power for very long.
But there are softer sides of the Israeli lobby such as J-Street that are probably more in line with the majority of Jewish Americans, which are not quite as vitriolic, not quite as aggressive and a bit more reasonable. They’re still very pro-Israel, they’re still not really based on American interests, but they are slightly different than the AIPAC view.
So that gives the president a bit of wiggle room to try to speak toward policies and move toward policies that are a bit more reasonable and that are more in line with actions that would bring peace that would be in the interests of Americans rather than the right wing Israel.
Press TV: President Obama in that interview with Bloomberg while he did make some positive remarks on Iran, he also said that his ‘all options are on the table’ is quite valid and the Iranians should take that threat seriously and that does say a lot about the American approach on Iran.
It looks like despite the fact that it’s talking with Iran it still wants to keep that threat on the table as well – Do you think this means that at the end of the day Israeli and US policies on Iran are the same?
Weir: No I don’t think they’re the same. I think Obama is trying to depart from the Israeli policies. He still has to play to the Israel lobby – both sides of the Israel lobby to a degree – and they want a hardline on Iran, they want the US to talk about the alleged threat of an Iranian nuclear weapon. So he is doing that to an extent.
It is also typical of presidents to say all options are on the table. In general that’s probably a negotiating position. I certainly hope all options are not on the table – Americans are very tired of war; we don’t want more US aggression; it damages our country as well as bringing tragedy to everyone involved. But that’s the way presidents tend to speak.
So that’s less troublesome than the fact that Israel’s lobby is still powerful and Obama still thinks he has to make statements such as we have undying ties to Israel, that these will never change.
I don’t think he’s right. I think these will change. I think America is an independent country. And our first president George Washington warned us against passionate attachment to any other nation. I think more and more Americans are saying we do want an independent United States not one driven by any foreign country.
Press TV: Let’s look at the remarks that John Kerry has made in his address to AIPAC, he said that the nuclear deal with Iran the talks that are taking place are not about building trust – he said in his own words – it’s about testing Iran.
These kinds of comments and the comments I mentioned earlier by President Obama, even if we say they are meant for domestic consumption or for consumption by the Israeli lobby they are giving very contradictory messages to the Iranian nation.
So, what are the effects of these kinds of remarks on the process of any possible reconciliation?
Weir: Well, I don’t think hardline remarks are helpful. I don’t think that that’s in the best interests of moving forward with a very important diplomatic relationship that needs to be rebuilt.
So I think Obama’s remarks – the part of it that are more reasonable, conciliatory and less arrogant, less condescending are far more useful and potentially productive.
There are things happening in the US that are starting to be a factor: on Friday there is going to be a national summit in which high level experts, national security experts, former CIA analysts, a number of academic scholars and former Congress people and other authors will be for the first time assessing the US Israel relationship and how it impacts Americans.
This is an unprecedented gathering. More and more Americans will be paying attention to it and will be discussing what these policies mean for the United States rather than for Israel and that will no doubt affect the relations with Iran and those policies concerning Iran as well as other places.
Press TV: Let’s look at what President Obama has said on the Israeli Palestinian issue, he said if the peace talks fail the US will have a limited ability to protect Israel from what he called ‘international fallout’. Is Obama here practically putting pressure on Israel?
Weir: It is suggesting that. I think that’s probably the way the Israeli government should take it.
There are these references that are starting to be made to this international movement to rein in Israel, its oppressive actions against Palestinians and also its very vitriolic statements against places like Iran.
So I think these are sort of veiled references to international boycott that’s going on. It’s targeting Israeli companies and Israeli academics and Israelis in general that’s growing. I think also there’s a movement in the United States to stop our tax money from going to Israel and Israel is very aware of these.
None of these movements have the kind of financing that Israeli partisans can give to pro-Israel movements, but they are growing and they are grassroots based.
So, this gives another arrow in the quiver for Obama of having an independent policy on Iran, one that uses diplomacy effectively rather than going in the direction that Netanyahu seems to want the United States to go.
Press TV: How dependent do you find these two sides, Israel and the United States?
Weir: I agree with the previous comments I don’t think Israel really is in a position or wants to take direct military action itself. It’s too close to Iran, Iran has some power.
And I agree that Saudi Arabia is taking actions that are also anti-Iranian and I don’t think they want to be seen as aligned with Israel on a military pact against a Muslim nation.
I just don’t see that very obvious blatant public kind of alliance going on, which means that Israel would be going alone and at this time I don’t think it would be wise for them and I don’t think they will do it.
Now… they will try to blackmail people into thinking they might do it and frighten people into thinking, well, we have to give in to Israel otherwise they will do something that will be truly lunacy; but I don’t think people will fall for that and it’s my opinion that it won’t happen.
Press TV: Do you think that the US policies on Iran have been realistic and have been fact-based?
Weir: Well, there has been a mixture – different statements from different parts of the government.
The intelligence agencies continue to say that there’s no evidence that Iran is developing a nuclear weapon. But other portions of the government and the media portray this situation as if Iran is on the verge of a nuclear weapon. So, we’re sort of getting mixed messages there.
But in terms of actions, Congress has enacted a few sanctions against Iran almost to a level of what would theoretically be an act of war – potentially in terms of sanctions.
But from the Executive we have, despite some bellicose types of statements, there has been some reluctance to go there, there has been discussion, there have been some statements that show some willingness to negotiate. So I think there has been some diplomacy employed.
A lot of non-fact-based statements have been made, but fortunately some statements that are closer to the facts have also been made. So I think there is a mixed scene, but there are reasons for some positive hope in this particular case.
SC/PR
Source PRESS TV