In a book entitled “Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid” published in 2006, former U.S. president Jimmy Carter defended Israel’s right of security but said Israeli policies in the occupied territories are like the policies of the racist regime of South Africa during the apartheid era.

He argued that pro-Israeli groups, especially those playing the role of lobbies, are preventing the U.S. government from creating a favorable situation for Israel because they always try to prevent efforts to put pressure on Israel, and this allows Israeli officials to do whatever they want.
Carter’s view, which is the outcome of over thirty years of political experience, especially in issues such as Israel and the Middle East, irritated many supporters of Israel. However, Carter made such remarks at a time when he was not in office; otherwise he would not dare to express such comments in the face of the powerful Zionist lobby.
Barack Obama’s address on May 19, 2011, insisting on the necessity of returning to the borders of 1967, should be regarded as an effective and fundamental step for establishing peace in the region. Prior to this, especially in recent years, many had warned that the U.S. is too strongly biased toward Israel, and instead of supporting Tel Aviv in every situation, it should return to the system of the pre-1967 period, in which the U.S. apparently had a more or less lukewarm position toward Israel, Palestine, and their Arab neighbors in the region.
Obama’s remarks have provoked harsh responses from supporters of Israel. Even his mild tone at the next AIPAC summit could not reduce the extreme discomfort and anger of the Zionists. Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu and right-wing groups in the U.S. are continuing to chastise Obama for his compassionate support of the Palestinians.
However, protecting its national interests is the first priority of the United States, and the security of Israel has always been regarded as an indispensable part of U.S. national security.
Now, with the ongoing wave of awakening in the Middle East and North Africa, the U.S. needs to reconsider its Israel policy. In fact, Washington is trying to create a better environment based on its interests in the region. Meanwhile, the seemingly unsolvable Israeli-Palestinian issue is a big obstacle in the way of the realization of these new policies in the Middle East. Israel remains the main problem, and in such a situation, Obama does not want to sacrifice U.S. interests for the sake of an extremist Israeli government. This is exactly the same point which has been expressed as a warning by various thinkers and writers. For example, in a controversial book published in 2007 entitled “The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy”, John Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt quoted Jimmy Carter as saying that excessive U.S. support for Israel would result in great damage to the interests of both countries.
“The main reason for Washington’s support of Israel is that Israel can create the U.S. version of peace in the Middle East and this is a low cost way to maintain order in the region,” said Martin Kramer of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
But it seems that supporting Israel is so costly because it has caused a rise in anti-U.S. sentiments in the region.
Therefore, Obama’s new position on Israel can gradually create a conflict of interests and the notion of a full consensus between the two governments is not going to last forever. On the other hand, it would be naive to image a U.S. administration that is not loyal to Israel. However, there may be some U.S. officials, like Obama, who are seeking to control Israel on some issues and to impose their global domination upon Israel, too.
Now, we can expect an intensification of lobbying activities by powerful pro-Israeli organizations and personalities in an attempt to convince U.S. officials to support Israel. The U.S. is trying to reduce the dimensions of the complex issue of Palestine by returning to the pre-1967 borders, but Israel has rejected the proposal out of hand. The Zionist lobby is dependent on the policies of the Israeli government, and now we must wait and see whether the U.S. will be able to convince Israel to return to the 1967 borders or will bow to Israel and its sponsors. In fact, the Zionist lobby is an integral part of U.S. national policy, and if they want to exert their influence like before, the U.S. will be the great loser in the peace process.
It is not clear whether Obama’s remarks represent the beginning of a series of changes in the relationship between the U.S. and Israel or are merely a show to entertain the public. But will Israel’s refusal to return to the 1967 borders damage the political prestige of the U.S.? These are some questions that will require time before they can be answered.
Afshin Davarpanah teaches anthropology at the School of Media Studies of the Islamic Republic News Agency.