Copyright by David Jonathan Albert 2007 i The Dissertation Committee for David Jonathan Albert Certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: The Role of American Political Culture in The Development of the U.S.-Israel “Special Relationship” and The Lost Opportunities for Achieving Middle East Peace Committee: Clement Henry, Supervisor Esther Raizen Lawrence Graham Bruce Buchanan Ami Pedahzur ii The Role of American Political Culture in The Development of the U.S.-Israel “Special Relationship” and The Lost Opportunities for Achieving Middle East Peace by David Jonathan Albert, B.A.; M.A. Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of The University of Texas at Austin in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Texas at Austin December 2007 iii Dedication To all of those who are working to bring Peace to the Middle East & To my parents for all of their love and support iv Epigraph In the execution of such a plan, nothing is more essential, than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular Nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded; and that, in place of them, just and amicable feelings towards all should be cultivated. The Nation, which indulges towards another an habitual hatred, or an habitual fondness, is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. Antipathy in one nation against another disposes each more readily to offer insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty and intractable, when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur. Hence frequent collisions, obstinate, envenomed, and bloody contests. The Nation, prompted by ill-will and resentment, sometimes impels to war the Government, contrary to the best calculations of policy. The Government sometimes participates in the national propensity, and adopts through passion what reason would reject; at other times, it makes the animosity of the nation subservient to projects of hostility instigated by pride, ambition, and other sinister and pernicious motives. The peace often, sometimes perhaps the liberty, of Nations has been the victim. So likewise, a passionate attachment of one Nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite Nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest, in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter, without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite Nation of privileges denied to others, which is apt doubly to injure the Nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained; and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens, (who devote themselves to the favorite nation,) facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation. As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent Patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practise the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the Public Councils! Such an attachment of a small or weak, towards a great and powerful nation, dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter. Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens,) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake; since history and experience prove, that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of Republican Government. But that jealousy, to be useful, must be impartial; else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defence against it. Excessive partiality for one foreign nation, and excessive dislike of another, cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots, who may resist the intrigues of the favorite, are liable to become suspected and odious; while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests. -- from George Washington’s Farewell Address, September 17, 1796 v Preface The United States and Israel have developed one of the most unique and unusual, and indeed “special” political alliances in modern history. This alliance that exists on many levels: political, military, economic, religious and cultural. This alliance is at the crux of American involvement in the Middle East and a cause of great concern throughout the Arab and Islamic world. It helps define America’s role in the world and Israel’s unique status in the Middle East. It is an alliance with broad bipartisan support, but one that is also widely criticized, because of the difficulties it creates for the United States. While literally hundreds of books and articles have been written on this unique alliance, it remains in many ways a poorly understood phenomenon. Competing theories and explanations remain deeply tied to allegiances and opinions around the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Many of them are more about efforts to influence American policy in the Middle East rather than to deconstruct and understand and explain its origins and continuity. The following study is an attempt to separate myth from reality and to understand how it is that Americans view Israel and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and how American perceptions and misperceptions of that reality have defined the contours of American foreign policy in the Middle East undermined the possibility of achieving a comprehensive peace settlement in between Israelis and Palestinians. -vi- Acknowledgements This project is the culmination of many years of work and the list of those that to be thanked is almost endless. I would like to thank all the faculty members at the College of William & Mary in Virginia and the University of Texas – Austin who have inspired me over the years. I would especially like to thank Dr. James Bill of the Department of Government who first inspired my interest and excitement about the study of the Middle East. I would like to thank my advisor at UT-Austin, Dr. Clement Henry for his support and patience. I would also like to thank Dr. Esther Raizen at UT-Austin for all of her assistance and particularly for careful editing of this work. I would also like to express my thanks to many friends from my days at the College of William & Mary, the UT Department of Government, the UT Center for Middle East Studies, Texas Hillel, and Brit Tzedek v’ Shalom (the Jewish Alliance for Justice and Peace) who have provided advice, ideas, critiques, friendship and counsel over many years. Finally, I would like to thank my parents for their support and confidence through these many years. As a child, I used to do jigsaw puzzles with my mother. Later on I used to impress my classmates with my skills at solving the Rubik’s Cube. Those skills have served me well since putting together the puzzle that is the U.S.-Israel “special relationship” has often been a process of putting together many pieces of a giant and complicated multi-dimensional puzzle. I hope that my efforts here have succeeded in putting together the many pieces of this puzzle in a way that creates a more complete picture than has previously been assembled. -vii- The Role of American Political Culture in The Development of the U.S.-Israel “Special Relationship” and The Lost Opportunities for Achieving Middle East Peace Publication No._____________ David Jonathan Albert, Ph.D. The University of Texas at Austin, 2007 Supervisor: Clement Henry The “special relationship” between the United States and the State of Israel cannot be fully explained by conventional realist analysis of so-called “hard factors” such as strategic importance and economic; nor can it be fully explained using pluralist theory by the influence of the pro-Israel lobby. The U.S.-Israel relationship, which was initially established as a strategic partnership, has quietly metamorphosed into an alliance that while still nominally rationalized as a strategic has actually becoming deeply rooted in American politics and political culture. -viii- In order to fully explain this unique alliance, which has shaped much of American foreign policy in the Middle East and most particularly American policy towards the Israeli-Palestinian peace process over the past several decades it is necessary to consider “soft factors” most especially cultural, historical, moral, political, and ideological components of the relationship. These often-overlooked factors contribute to a political culture which strengthens the alliance between the United States and Israel and further reinforces American values and identity. American strategic priorities in the Middle East are defined by a context of cultural intimacy that has been established between the two countries rather than Israel’s actual strategic value to the United States. The result is that American policy in the Middle East has often been inconsistent with America’s publicly stated overall strategic goals. Often the alliance has ended up undermining goals like political and economic stability that it was originally intended to enhance. The political imperatives that often seem to govern American commitment to Israel are actually better explained as the results of deeply-rooted cultural and moral interpretations about Israel and its relationships with its neighbors.