|
Chicago Tribune – August 21, 2007
Group cancels forum on book against Israel lobby
Critics say Chicago group yielded to pressure, silenced discussion of controversial topic
By Karoun Demirjian and E.A. Torriero
The Chicago Council on Global Affairs' decision to cancel a forum about a controversial upcoming book on the influence of the pro-Israel lobby on U.S. foreign policy has sparked a heated debate about free speech.
"The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy," a book due out in September by University of Chicago professor John Mearsheimer and Harvard University professor Stephen Walt, argues that the pro-Israel lobby has had a negative effect on U.S. foreign policy.
Expanding on a previous academic article that caused uproar and protest, Mearsheimer and Walt argue that the Israel lobby -- including Jewish organizations, Christian fundamentalists and neo-conservatives -- helped, among other actions, to stop diplomatic talks between the U.S. and Syria and hampered efforts to solve the Israel-Palestinian conflict.
The Chicago Council on Global Affairs is a non-partisan organization founded in 1922 that holds public forums on international issues such as immigration and world trade. The organization also conducts public opinion polls about foreign affairs.
The council had planned to hold a public discussion of the book in September with the two authors. But in late July, the council decided to scrap the program.
Council President Marshall Bouton, who made the decision to cancel, said he was not trying to stifle free speech nor shy away from public discussion of a controversial issue. Rather, Bouton said, he preferred that the authors appear in "an appropriate forum" balanced by an opposing viewpoint. Neither council board members who are Jewish nor pro-Israeli groups influenced his decision or pressured him, Bouton said.
But in a letter sent to the council's 94 board members shortly after the decision, Mearsheimer and Walt said they felt political pressure was behind the move.
"On July 24, Council President Marshall Bouton phoned one of us [Mearsheimer] and informed him that he was canceling the event," they wrote. "He said he felt 'extremely uncomfortable making this call' and that his decision did not reflect his personal view on the subject of our book. Instead, he explained that his decision was based on the need 'to protect the institution.'"
In a telephone interview with the Tribune, Mearsheimer said a council scheduler told him that the council was "feeling heat" over the authors' anticipated appearance before Bouton called to cancel. Bouton confirmed to him that the council was facing criticism, Mearsheimer said.
"If he wasn't protecting the council from the lobby, who was he protecting it from?" Mearsheimer asked, in wondering whom the authors' appearance would harm.
In the end, the authors have been censored, Mearsheimer said.
"The bottom line is that preventing us from speaking before the council is not the way we are supposed to be conducting public debate on important issues in the United States," he said.
The book is an extension of an essay published by the authors in March 2006 in the London Review of Books and is expected to draw stinging challenges from pro-Israeli groups. The essay sparked intense debate, drawing criticism in academic and political circles that the authors showed poor scholarship, had an undue anti-Israel bias and even displayed anti-Semitic tendencies. Mearsheimer and Walt deny any hostility to Jews or Israel.
Still, the council's decision has led several scholars in the Chicago area to say it buckled to pressures to muzzle debate. Rumors are flying through academic circles in Chicago of the council wilting under strong-arm tactics -- even though council leaders deny it.
"It's a huge mistake," George Bisharat, a professor of law at the University of Chicago Law School, said of the council's decision to cancel the event.
"It will ultimately cause more harm to the institution than would have been caused by holding the debate," he said. "These institutions thrive when they are seen as arenas for public discussion of difficult issues. If they begin to appear to bend with the political winds and be susceptible to influence, and ultimately engage in what is essentially a form of censorship, their reputation will be damaged."……
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-israelbook_aug21,1,6109069.story
|
|
