Catching Up, 8/3/26

A few months ago John Mearsheimer mentioned that a new book, not his, would be coming out that would be a sort of update to the Walt - Mearsheimer The Israel Lobby. That book is now out:

Israel’s Lobby: America in the Grip of a Foreign Power

And the authors have helpfully reviewed the book:

The pro-Israel lobby has swayed US presidents since Truman. It must end with Trump

Our new book tracks the growth over nearly eight decades, of the most powerful foreign policy lobby in US history

The review is fairly long and I highly recommend it. One problem I have with the book is the same problem I have listening to Mearsheimer on this topic. A “lobby” in American politics is composed of American citizens—well, theoretically. And yet the authors imply in their title that America is in the grips of a “foreign power.” particular lobby puts America in the power of a “foreign state”, Israel. Wouldn’t it be more correct to state that America is in the grips of a lobby? Wouldn’t it be more correct to state that Jews who are American citizens (and perhaps also Israeli citizens, but not always) and Jews who are Israelis constitute one nation, but that the decisive influence over American politicians is not Israel the state but rather Jews who are active in American politics—”the lobby”? After all, the roots of what we know as “The Israel Lobby” date back to certainly more than a decade before Israel the state ever came into existence. So the decisive influence would be Jews as a self identified nation—to the extent that those Jews live in America but support the notion of a Jewish state in Palestine.

In fact, the authors make this reality clear enough in their review. When Jimmy Carter was forced to plead his case to Moshe Dayan, Dayan’s ultimatum to Carter was not ‘I’ll get Israelis to say mean things about you.’ It was:

In October 1977, the US secretary of state, Cyrus Vance, issued a joint communique with Soviet foreign minister, Andrei Gromyko, committing the superpowers to achieving “as soon as possible a just and lasting settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict”. Though fully expecting opposition to the president’s Middle East policy, the administration was stunned by the nearly apoplectic reaction to the US-Soviet statement by both the Israeli government and the lobby. Profoundly concerned with the political damage, Carter requested a meeting with the Israeli foreign minister, Moshe Dayan, in New York. According to Zbigniew Brzezinski, Carter’s national security adviser, who was present at the meeting, “Dayan in effect blackmailed the President by saying that unless he had assurances that we would oppose an independent West Bank and that we would give them economic and military aid, he would have to indicate our unwillingness in his public statements here in the United States … ‘I can go,’ said Dayan, ‘to the American Jews.’” Faced with this threat, Carter surrendered.

The next day, Vance and Dayan issued a joint statement summarizing a US-Israeli “working paper” prepared in the early hours of the morning. The statement affirmed negotiations would be dramatically scaled back and would not frame a Palestinian homeland as a central issue. The end result was a celebrated “separate peace” between Israel and Egypt that earned Carter, Begin and Sadat Nobel peace prizes, but also led to the isolation of Egypt in the Arab world and the assassination of Sadat. It also set the stage for Israel’s invasion of Lebanon in 1982 and settlement projects that resulted in Israel’s de facto annexation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

In other words, no matter what John Mearsheimer says about non-Zionist Jews or Jeffrey Sachs says about the malign influence of Evangelical Zionists, the reality is that America arrived at the point that we find ourselves in because of the influence of American citizens who are Jewish Nationalists before they are Americans. I don’t think I’m misunderstanding this. It’s easy enough to run a poll of Jewish Americans and learn that the majority think genocide is icky, even against Arabs, but a similar majority will also support the fiction of a “democratic” Israel. They will not say that the entire Zionist project is a malign exercise in national exceptionalism that was a huge mistake and injustice. The assault on Free Speech that targets criticism of Israel is not some weird aberration forced upon Americans by Evangelicals. If it were, it wouldn’t have any traction.

You can read some of Scott Ritter’s views on this, which fall pretty much in line with what I had to say in Jewish Nationalist Influence And Spy Threats.

The United States of Israel

If Section 219/1217of the NDAA becomes law, we will have surrendered our Constitutional Republic to the Zionists. It will literally be the end of our country as we know it.

Aug 03, 2026

When I was travelling to Israel on a regular basis back in the mid- to late-1990’s as part of my duties with the United Nations, I was always struck by how closely many Israelis identified with the United States. On national holidays, many Israeli motorists would fly two little plastic flags from the windows of their cars—one the blue and white Star of David, and the other the Stars and Stripes. “We see ourselves as little America”, my Israeli host would explain when I pointed this out.

Here’s a clue in that regard. If you look at this pie chart of Jewish population by country, all you need to know is that the dark green is the USA and the light green is Israel:

The reality was far different.

The Israelis conspired against their American counterparts behind their backs, and the US intelligence and security services viewed Israel as a threat to US national security.

I know—I was caught up in the middle of this power dynamic, and ended up being accused by the US government of spying on behalf of Israel. The charges were eventually dropped as unfounded and politically motivated, but the sentiment behind the accusations was real—a significant part of the US defense, intelligence and security establishment of the United States viewed Israel as a threat.

Because Israel was a threat.

As Scott told the Judge this morning, it isn’t that Israel was a threat. Israel is a threat—the most serious threat there is to the national security of the United States of America. Why do intel professionals think that? Maybe because Israel steals key US tech and sells it to Russia and China. And Congress’ response is to gift the nation to Jewish Nationalism—for thirty shekels.

Moving on.

Russia. There’s more evidence that Russia is planning to escalate in Ukraine—beyond the fact that Russia has attacked 80 ships in the Black Sea as part of their blockade of Ukraine. Russia is probing with the idea of upping their air offensive:

ayden @squatsons

Russian Su-34 and Su-57 aircraft have been preforming unusually aggressive simulated bombing and missile launches at distances of 5-10km from the active frontline.

It appears as though the Russians are testing the waters and looking to see if there will be any Ukrainian air defenses activated in response.

If no response is elicited it would stand to reason that the depth of Russian FAB strikes would be extended. It would also stand to reason that when Russian aircraft fly more aggressively there is greater risk of losing them to Ukrainian fire.

Expect a more complex battlefield situation for Ukrainian staging and logistics and more frequent downing of Russian tactical bomber aircraft.

AMK Mapping @AMK_Mapping_

A few hours ago, an extremely unusual event occurred in Zaporizhzhia Oblast, where a Russian Su-34 aircraft flew within 7 km of the frontline to carry out simulated launch maneuvers of KAB glide-bombs.

The aircraft then looped back around and carried out a second simulated launch maneuver around 2 minutes after the first. No munitions were actually launched.

For reference, Su-34s typically launch glide-bombs from around 40-45 km behind the frontline to avoid being shot down by Patriot PAC-3 interceptors. It’s possible that this aircraft was probing to see if there would be any air defence response by the Ukrainians.

Losing in Panama? Remember when Trump basically threatened to invade Panama (again) if Panama didn’t void their contracts with China re the Panama Canal? China took that badly, but they went ahead and took action. And they seem to have got results—which are being kept secret:

Brandon Weichert @WeTheBrandon

11h

ICYMI: Trump’s Panama Canal gambit just failed. China made a secret deal with Panama to keep its properties in the Panama Canal Zone. So much for Trump’s Venezuela gambit and Cuban pressure campaign! This fool just lost the hemisphere.

Gichengi M’Mwenda

19h·

CHINA AND PANAMA have made friends again. But the deal was made behind closed doors, so no one knows the details.

Story so far: After pressure from Donald Trump, Panama ousted a Hong Kong conglomerate from its job as the main terminal operators at the Panama Canal, shocking the global shipping industry. Hong Kong-owned Panama Ports Company is seeking US$2 billion in compensation.

China became more stringent in safety checks and raised the number of Panama-flagged vessels detained at its ports. Almost 500 were detained this year.

Worried shippers changed alliance, with 264 cargo ships removing their Panama flags in June alone, Lloyd’s List reported. This was a huge blow to the small country.

But the Panama leadership visited Beijing on July 16-17 and struck a deal.

Things appear to have returned to normal. In the first three weeks of July, China detained just 17 Panama ships, Lloyd’s List reported. This figure is close to the rate in the past, when an average of 21 ships were halted after failing inspections.

Panama is breathing a sigh of relief.

China is keeping quiet about what it gets out of the deal.

And Washington, which created the problem? It’s left in the dark.