AIPAC 1 - US Security and National Interest 0!

A few days back, an appointment of the Obama administration for a top intelligence post 'quitely' stepped down. This was not due to any moral scandals or mistakes in past tax statements nor was it due to any policy difference. It was basically due to the objections of the rightwing supporters of the Israeli Administration in USA and their cohorts in AIPAC and elsewhere in Washington!
The appointee was a higly qualified beauracrat, Charles Freeman Jr., and the position was chairman of the National Intelligence Council.
Charles Freeman Jr., or Chas Freeman as he is popularly known, is a long standing bureaucrat who has considerable experience in the foreign affairs dealings in the middle-east. He was the US ambassador to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia from 1989 to 1992 and is currently the president of the Middle East Policy Council.

Qualifications
After studying at Yale University under a scholarship, he studied at the National Autonomous University of Mexico and entered Harvard Law School. After law school, he left to join the United States Foreign Service in 1965, working first in India and Taiwan before being assigned to the State Department's China desk. There he was assigned as the principal interpreter during United States PresidentRichard Nixon's 1972 first visit to the People's Republic of China. He later became the State Department Deputy Director for Republic of China (Taiwan) affairs.
After various positions within the State Department he was given overseas assignments as deputy chief of mission in Beijing, China and then Bangkok, Thailand, before being selected as principal deputy assistant secretary of state for African affairs in 1986. During these assignments he attained a working knowledge of several languages. He became United States Ambassador to Saudi Arabia in November 1989, serving during Operation Desert Storm, until 1992.

Thus, in a world where the turmoil in the Middle-east and the rising perception of the higly biased policy of US towards the Israel (vis.a vis. Palestine) and the sky-rocketing influence of China over the US, and the fact that a biased intelligence report and an uncritical leadership at the top is sighted as the reason for the disastrous foray of US into Iraq, Chas Freeman's appointment at this position would have proved to be a big asset to the Obama administration's effort to reface the image of US in the world and to finally make a strong effort to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian issue.

Unfortunately, this objectivity is abhorred by the right-wing pro-Israeli government lobby (or pro-Likud lobby as described by Chas Freeman himself) as represented by AIPAC and the Senetors and Congressmen on their payrol.

As per some reports, Senetor Chuck Schumer, from the state of New York, approached Rahm Emanuel, President Obama's Cheif of Staff, with AIPAC's objection, supported by flimsy and unsubstantiated statements that Chas Freeman apparently made and of-course promoting the idea that Freeman's appointment would threaten the very existene of Israel itself! This was of-course initiated by the right wing bloggers who started a movement to overturn Freeman's impending appointment. What happened after that is unclear but within a few days, Freeman announced that he was withdrawing his name from consideration. This is a big loss from improving the image and efficiency of the Intelligence Department that has suffered a big blow after misreporting on the threats that Iraq posed and a big hit on the credibility (and impartiality of the Obama administration) in the eyes of the world. It makes one wonder if this is indeed the 'new begining' that Obama promised us at the start of his administration.

Chas Freeman appeared today on Fareed Zakaria's GPS show on CNN. The interview should be available in the shows

Please spread the word around to write to the white house archieve pretty soon.(http://www.whitehouse.gov/CONTACT/ ) expressing your concern on this development and asking him to shun the pro-Israeli government lobby in the US while making policy decision that will prove critical to US safety in the future. Demand that US foreign policy should be driven by issues and positions critical to the saftey of the Homeland and not by the policy positions of a foreign country!