WHY THE U.S. SUPPORTS ISRAEL ***
By Stephen Zunes
(Editor's Note: Excerpted from a new FPIF Global Affairs Commentary
available in its entirety at: http://www.fpif.org/papers/usisrael.html
.)
The close relationship between the U.S. and Israel has been one of the
most
salient features in U.S. foreign policy for nearly three and a half
decades. The well over $3 billion in military and economic aid sent
annually to Israel by Washington is rarely questioned in Congress, even
by
liberals who normally challenge U.S. aid to governments that engage in
widespread violations of human rights--or by conservatives who usually
oppose foreign aid in general. Virtually all Western countries share the
United States' strong support for Israel's legitimate right to exist in
peace and security, yet these same nations have refused to provide arms
and
aid while the occupation of lands seized in the 1967 war continues. None
come close to offering the level of diplomatic support provided by
Washington--with the United States often standing alone with Israel at
the
United Nations and other international forums when objections are raised
over ongoing Israeli violations of international law and related
concerns.
Although U.S. backing of successive Israeli governments, like most
foreign
policy decisions, is often rationalized on moral grounds, there is
little
evidence that moral imperatives play more of a determining role in
guiding
U.S. policy in the Middle East than in any other part of the world. Most
Americans do share a moral commitment to Israel's survival as a Jewish
state, but this would not account for the level of financial, military,
and
diplomatic support provided. American aid to Israel goes well beyond
protecting Israel's security needs within its internationally recognized
borders. U.S. assistance includes support for policies in militarily
occupied territories that often violate well-established legal and
ethical
standards of international behavior.
Were Israel's security interests paramount in the eyes of American
policymakers, U.S. aid to Israel would have been highest in the early
years
of the existence of the Jewish state, when its democratic institutions
were
strongest and its strategic situation most vulnerable, and would have
declined as its military power grew dramatically and its repression
against
Palestinians in the occupied territories increased. Instead, the trend
has
been in just the opposite direction: major U.S. military and economic
aid
did not begin until after the 1967 war. Indeed, 99% of U.S. military
assistance to Israel since its establishment came only after Israel
proved
itself to be far stronger than any combination of Arab armies and after
Israeli occupation forces became the rulers of a large Palestinian
population.
Similarly, U.S. aid to Israel is higher now than twenty-five years ago.
This was at a time when Egypt's massive and well-equipped armed forces
threatened war; today, Israel has a longstanding peace treaty with Egypt
and a large demilitarized and internationally monitored buffer zone
keeping
its army at a distance. At that time, Syria's military was expanding
rapidly with advanced Soviet weaponry; today, Syria has made clear its
willingness to live in peace with Israel in return for the occupied
Golan
Heights--and Syria's military capabilities have been declining, weakened
by
the collapse of its Soviet patron.
Also in the mid-1970s, Jordan still claimed the West Bank and stationed
large numbers of troops along its lengthy border and the demarcation
line
with Israel; today, Jordan has signed a peace treaty and has established
fully normalized relations. At that time, Iraq was embarking upon its
vast
program of militarization. Iraq's armed forces have since been
devastated
as a result of the Gulf War and subsequent international sanctions and
monitoring. This raises serious questions as to why U.S. aid has either
remained steady or actually increased each year since.
In the hypothetical event that all U.S. aid to Israel were immediately
cut
off, it would be many years before Israel would be under significantly
greater military threat than it is today. Israel has both a major
domestic
arms industry and an existing military force far more capable and
powerful
than any conceivable combination of opposing forces. There would be no
question of Israel's survival being at risk militarily in the
foreseeable
future. When Israel was less dominant militarily, there was no such
consensus for U.S. backing of Israel. Though the recent escalation of
terrorist attacks inside Israel has raised widespread concerns about the
safety of the Israeli public, the vast majority of U.S. military aid has
no
correlation to counterterrorism efforts.
In short, the growing U.S. support for the Israeli government, like U.S.
support for allies elsewhere in the world, is not motivated primarily by
objective security needs or a strong moral commitment to the country.
Rather, as elsewhere, U.S. foreign policy is motivated primarily to
advance
its own perceived strategic interests.
There is a broad bipartisan consensus among policymakers that Israel has
advanced U.S. interest in the Middle East and beyond.
* Israel has successfully prevented victories by radical nationalist
movements in Lebanon and Jordan, as well as in Palestine.
* Israel has kept Syria, for many years an ally of the Soviet Union, in
check.
* Israel's air force is predominant throughout the region.
* Israel's frequent wars have provided battlefield testing for American
arms, often against Soviet weapons.
* It has served as a conduit for U.S. arms to regimes and movements too
unpopular in the United States for openly granting direct military
assistance, such as apartheid South Africa, the Islamic Republic in
Iran,
the military junta in Guatemala, and the Nicaraguan Contras. Israeli
military advisers have assisted the Contras, the Salvadoran junta, and
foreign occupation forces in Namibia and Western Sahara.
* Israel's intelligence service has assisted the U.S. in intelligence
gathering and covert operations.
* Israel has missiles capable of reaching as far as the former Soviet
Union, it possesses a nuclear arsenal of hundreds of weapons, and it has
cooperated with the U.S. military-industrial complex with research and
development for new jet fighters and anti-missile defense systems.
(Stephen Zunes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> is Middle East editor of Foreign
Policy
In Focus (online at www.fpif.org).)
Serbian News Network - SNN
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.antic.org/
