The Israel Lobby,” by John J. Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago and Stephen M. Walt of Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government, was one of the most controversial articles in recent memory. Originally published in the London Review of Books in March 2006, it provoked both howls of outrage and cheers of gratitude for challenging what had been a taboo issue in Americ...
The Israel Lobby,” by John J. Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago and Stephen M. Walt of Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government, was one of the most controversial articles in recent memory. Originally published in the London Review of Books in March 2006, it provoked both howls of outrage and cheers of gratitude for challenging what had been a taboo issue in America: the impact of the Israel lobby on U.S. foreign policy. Now in a work of major importance, Mearsheimer and Walt deepen and expand their argument and confront recent developments in Lebanon and Iran. They describe the remarkable level of material and diplomatic support that the United States provides to Israel and argues that this support cannot be fully explained on either strategic or moral grounds. This exceptional relationship is due largely to the political influence of a loose coalition of individuals and organizations that actively work to shape U.S. foreign policy in a pro-Israel direction. Mearsheimer and Walt provocatively contend that the lobby has a far-reaching impact on America’s posture throughout the Middle East—in Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, and toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict—and the policies it has encouraged are in neither America’s national interest nor Israel’s long-term interest. The lobby’s influence also affects America’s relationship with important allies and increases dangers that all states face from global jihadist terror. Writing in The New York Review of Books, Michael Massing declared, “Not since Foreign Affairs magazine published Samuel Huntington’s ‘The Clash of Civilizations?’ in 1993 has an academic essay detonated with such force.” The publication of The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy is certain to widen the debate and to be one of the most talked-about books of the year.
无机客
苏霍壹
上海人民出版社2009版
[已注销]
上海人民出版社2009版
黛
Penguin Books1986版
1 有用 Jiong 2015-03-15
主要在写中东问题，对游说写得太少。不过两个作者比较悲观，对AIPAC之类犹太复国团体将长期绑架美国外交政策的现象能否改变不抱太大希望:-)
1 有用 东林君 2014-04-23
没读死过去
1 有用 633 2021-01-04
Strong explanatory power. 米尔斯海默的这个research在内容和scientific的研究方法上都给人了很强的启发。内容上米尔斯海默和Waltz触碰了美国政治的禁忌，Israel lobby。尝试去论证了他给美国外交政策的误导性和消极影响。从书的研究方法来看，这本书是一本很好的scientific methods的运用。文章基于structure做为一个explanat... Strong explanatory power. 米尔斯海默的这个research在内容和scientific的研究方法上都给人了很强的启发。内容上米尔斯海默和Waltz触碰了美国政治的禁忌，Israel lobby。尝试去论证了他给美国外交政策的误导性和消极影响。从书的研究方法来看，这本书是一本很好的scientific methods的运用。文章基于structure做为一个explanatory variable在解释美国中东政策失败作为基点。尝试去寻找其他的intervening variable。而以色列lobby就是作为最强的干扰变量被拿出来研究。里面各种primary source的运用也十分的详实。五个例子的选用也十分有说服力，整体的结果十分scientific，值得模仿。 (展开)
0 有用 augustine 2007-10-27
Yes, there is a lobby. A powerful one. However, Prof. Mearsheimer is wrong. Iraq War was not fought for Israel.
0 有用 德意奥人 2016-06-15
其实看的是02年London Review of Books上的那篇文章。虽然很神棍，但是老米这种左翼犀利知识分子的面目真是我的心头好。
1 有用 633 2021-01-04
Strong explanatory power. 米尔斯海默的这个research在内容和scientific的研究方法上都给人了很强的启发。内容上米尔斯海默和Waltz触碰了美国政治的禁忌，Israel lobby。尝试去论证了他给美国外交政策的误导性和消极影响。从书的研究方法来看，这本书是一本很好的scientific methods的运用。文章基于structure做为一个explanat... Strong explanatory power. 米尔斯海默的这个research在内容和scientific的研究方法上都给人了很强的启发。内容上米尔斯海默和Waltz触碰了美国政治的禁忌，Israel lobby。尝试去论证了他给美国外交政策的误导性和消极影响。从书的研究方法来看，这本书是一本很好的scientific methods的运用。文章基于structure做为一个explanatory variable在解释美国中东政策失败作为基点。尝试去寻找其他的intervening variable。而以色列lobby就是作为最强的干扰变量被拿出来研究。里面各种primary source的运用也十分的详实。五个例子的选用也十分有说服力，整体的结果十分scientific，值得模仿。 (展开)
0 有用 德意奥人 2016-06-15
其实看的是02年London Review of Books上的那篇文章。虽然很神棍，但是老米这种左翼犀利知识分子的面目真是我的心头好。
1 有用 Jiong 2015-03-15
主要在写中东问题，对游说写得太少。不过两个作者比较悲观，对AIPAC之类犹太复国团体将长期绑架美国外交政策的现象能否改变不抱太大希望:-)
1 有用 东林君 2014-04-23
没读死过去
0 有用 我要养生不喝酒 2014-04-14
老喷子真是什么都懂。