Foreign Policy and Ethnic Interest Groups: American and Canadian Jews Lobby for Israel (review)

116 SHOFAR Shapiro delineates what he refers to as Begin's myths. These centrally involved the purpose of Israel to revive the magnificent history of the Jewish PGople through military struggle and with Begin as the chosen instrument, a myth said to be identical to those that had prevailed among Polish nationalist circles during the period of Pilsudski. Berut as a "leader party" is convincingly examined, although at times it tends to be somewhat too much a blow-by-blow account. An interesting theme which in some form has received attention by other commentators (including this reviewer) is seeing Berut as a party giving expression to the desires of various groups like the Oriental]ews for greater status in the Israeli social structure. Shapiro sees the party myths as helping fulfill an important bonding action for new groups. The author presents a revealing insight into the phenomenon observed by various political commentators that Herut-Likud offers a more impressive sense of belonging and partnership for new members; in a leader party lacking a mediating intermediate level of membership (leadership?) new members co-opted to party institutions gained a sense of belonging and partnership not available in other Israeli parties which were seen as machine ruled. Shapiro'S book then is a significant study which makes a good contribution to the literature of Israeli party polities in general, and for those seeking a fuller understanding of a major political movement and the controversial m:ln who was its dominating leader for so many years. SCott D. Johnston Department of Political Science Hamline University Foreign Policy and Ethnic Interest Groups: American and Canadian Jews Lobby for Israel, by David Howard Goldberg. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1990.197 pp. $45.00. For students of contemporary Canadian foreign policy, this reviewer included, David Goldberg's Foreign Policy and Ethnic Interest Groups: American and CanadianJews Lobbylor Israel is a welcome and informative addition to a limited if growing literature on Canada's approaches to the Middle East. Goldberg's concern, however, is not to document the spectrum of those approaches. It is, rather, to focus on what he defines as the "pro-Israel political activities" of organized Jewish communities in Canada, and specifically the Canada-Israel Committee (CIC). Vol. 10, No. 4 Summer 1992 117 Until recently, very little was known about the influence on the Canadian foreign policy process of interest groups in general or ethnic groups in particular. While it was widely believed that the influence of these groups was somewhat greater than the reported levels of their activity, Goldberg's documented analysis of the behavior of the CIC both supports and qualifies this belief. This volume, then, makes a useful contribution to the little explored field of Canadian interest group behavior. As a study in the political activity of an ethnic lobby, it is also timely in view of the growing ethnic dimension to Canadian politics. Through interviews in major Canadian cities, and by culling the existing literature, Goldberg explores the history, mandate, and organizational structure of the CIC. He then turns to the lobbying activities of the Committee from the time of the 1973 Yom Kippur War through the highly controversial decision of the Liberal government of Pierre Elliott Trudeau to "postpone" Canada's hosting of the 1975 United Nations Conference on the Prevention of Crime, and the equally controversial decisions of the short-lived Conservative government ofjoe Clark in 1979 to recognize and then nm lO recognize jerusalem's status as the capital of Israel. He concludes with the late 1980s and the Palestinian intifada. Parallel analyses of the history and activity of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee are provided, perhaps not so much with a view toward providing new insights inlO the activities of AI PAC but for purposes of comparing the lobbying efforts of similar ethnic groups in republican and parliamentary political systellls. That Goldberg would find differences is instructive but not surprising. He rightly notes that the essential difference I;etween AI PAC and the CIC lies in their power to influence the Middle East policies of their respective states. But he wrongly concludes that the limited power of the CIC can be attributed principally to...