"U.S. Aid to Israel: Interpreting the 'Strategic Relationship"'

by Stephen Zunes

"The U.S. aid relationship with Israel is unlike any other
in the world," said Stephen Zunes during a January 26
CPAP presentation. "In sheer volume, the amount is the
most generous foreign aid program ever between any two
countries," added Zunes, associate professor of Politics and
chair of the Peace and Justice Studies Program at the
University of San Francisco.

He explored the strategic reasoning behind the aid, asserting
that it parallels the "needs of American arms exporters" and
the role "Israel could play in advancing U.S. strategic interests
in the region."

Although Israel is an "advanced, industrialized, technologically
sophisticated country," it "receives more U.S. aid per capita
annually than the total annual [Gross Domestic Product]
per capita of several Arab states." Approximately a third
of the entire U.S. foreign aid budget goes to Israel, "even
though Israel comprises just…one-thousandth of the world's
total population, and already has one of the world's higher
per capita incomes."

U.S. government officials argue that this money is necessary for
"moral" reasons-some even say that Israel is a "democracy
battling for its very survival." If that were the real reason,
however, aid should have been highest during Israel's early
years, and would have declined as Israel grew stronger. Yet
"the pattern…has been just the opposite." According to Zunes,
"99 percent of all U.S. aid to Israel took place after the June
1967 war, when Israel found itself more powerful than any
combination of Arab armies…."

The U.S. supports Israel's dominance so it can serve as
"a surrogate for American interests in this vital strategic
region." "Israel has helped defeat radical nationalist
movements" and has been a "testing ground for U.S.
made weaponry." Moreover, the intelligence agencies of
both countries have "collaborated," and "Israel has funneled
U.S. arms to third countries that the U.S. [could] not send
arms to directly,…Iike South Africa, like the Contras,
Guatemala under the military junta, [and] Iran.
" Zunes cited an Israeli analyst who said: "'It's like Israel
has just become another federal agency when it's convenient
to use and you want something done quietly."' Although the
strategic relationship between the United States and the
Gulf Arab states in the region has been strengthening in
recent years, these states "do not have the political stability,
the technological sophistication, [or] the number of
higher-trained armed forces personnel" as does Israel.

Matti Peled, former Israeli major general and Knesset member,
told Zunes that he and most Israeli generals believe this aid is
"little more than an American subsidy to U.S. arms manufacturers,"
considering that the majority of military aid to Israel is used to
buy weapons from the U.S. Moreover, arms to Israel create
more demand for weaponry in Arab states. According to
Zunes, "the Israelis announced back in 1991 that they
supported the idea of a freeze in Middle East arms transfers,
yet it was the United States that rejected it."

In the fall of 1993-when many had high hopes for peace-78
senators wrote to former President Bill Clinton insisting that
aid to Israel remain "at current levels." Their "only reason"
was the "massive procurement of sophisticated arms by
Arab states." The letter neglected to mention that 80 percent
of those arms to Arab countries came from the U.S. "I'm not
denying for a moment the power of AIPAC [the American
Israel Public Affairs Committee], the pro-Israel lobby,"
and other similar groups, Zunes said. Yet the "Aerospace
Industry Association which promotes these massive arms
shipments…is even more influential." This association has
given two times more money to campaigns than all of the
pro-Israel groups combined. Its "force on Capitol Hill, in
terms of lobbying, surpasses that of even AIPAC." Zunes
asserted that the "general thrust of U.S. policy would be
pretty much the same even if AIPAC didn't exist. We
didn't need a pro-Indonesia lobby to support Indonesia in
its savage repression of East Timor all these years." This
is a complex issue, and Zunes said that he did not want to
be "conspiratorial," but he asked the audience to imagine
what "Palestinian industriousness, Israeli technology, and
Arabian oil money…would do to transform the Middle East….
[W]hat would that mean to American arms manufacturers?
Oil companies? Pentagon planners?"

"An increasing number of Israelis are pointing out" that
these funds are not in Israel's best interest. Quoting Peled,
Zunes said, "this aid pushes Israel 'toward a posture of callous
intransigence' in terms of the peace process." Moreover, for
every dollar the U.S. sends in arms aid, Israel must spend
two to three dollars to train people to use the weaponry, to
buy parts, and in other ways make use of the aid. Even
"main-stream Israeli economists are saying [it] is very
harmful to the country's future."

The Israeli paper Yediot Aharonot described Israel as
"'the godfather's messenger' since [Israel] undertake[s]
the 'dirty work' of a godfather who 'always tries to appear
to be the owner of some large, respectable business."
' Israeli satirist B. Michael refers to U.S. aid this way:
"'My master gives me food to eat and I bite those whom
he tells me to bite. It's called strategic cooperation." 'To
challenge this strategic relationship, one cannot focus solely
on the Israeli lobby but must also examine these "broader
forces as well." "Until we tackle this issue head-on," it will
be "very difficult to win" in other areas relating to Palestine.

"The results" of the short-term thinking behind U.S. policy
"are tragic," not just for the "immediate victims" but "
eventually [for] Israel itself" and "American interests in the
region." The U.S. is sending enormous amounts of aid to the
Middle East, and yet "we are less secure than ever"-both in
terms of U.S. interests abroad and for individual Americans.
Zunes referred to a "growing and increasing hostility [of] the
average Arab toward the United States." In the long term,
said Zunes, "peace and stability and cooperation with the vast
Arab world is far more important for U.S. interests than this
alliance with Israel."

This is not only an issue for those who are working for
Palestinian rights, but it also "jeopardizes the entire agenda
of those of us concerned about human rights, concerned about
arms control, concerned about international law." Zunes sees
significant potential in "building a broad-based movement
around it."

The above text is based on remarks, delivered on. 26 January,
2001 by Stephen Zunes - Associate Professor of Politics and
Chair of the Peace and Justice Studies Program at San
Francisco University.

For Related Articles Click Here