Facebook Feed

5 days ago

Yoram Ettinger
2023 Jewish demographic momentum in Israel: bit.ly/40qV0aV ... See MoreSee Less
View on Facebook

4 weeks ago

Yoram Ettinger
Purim Guide for the Perplexed 2023: bit.ly/3ZdlxHY ... See MoreSee Less
View on Facebook

4 weeks ago

Yoram Ettinger
אתגר מרכזי לביטחון לאומי: bit.ly/3xkSwh1 ... See MoreSee Less
View on Facebook

Defiance, Not Inhibition

Israel’s battle against Palestinian terrorism and conventional military threats must not be inhibited by its ties with the USA and Egypt.

In 1982, Prime Minister Begin launched a comprehensive war on PLO terrorist headquarters in Lebanon.  In 1981, he ordered the bombing of Iraq’s nuclear reactor.  Both operations were executed irrespective of bullying US pressure and notwithstanding the fragile 1979 Israel-Egypt peace treaty.  Begin realized that a failure to eradicate these threats would imperil Israel’s survival, erode its posture of deterrence, thus undermining the deterrence-driven peace with Egypt and the strategic cooperation with the USA.

Contrary to conventional wisdom, the Israel-Egypt peace treaty did not collapse.  Once again, Arab leaders did not rush to rescue the PLO, demonstrating that the Palestinian issue was not a crown jewel of Arab policy-making.  Moreover, Egypt – just like all other Arab countries – would not sacrifice its own national interests on the altar of the Palestinian issue. 

While the US Administration condemned Israel for the large scale preemptive military operations, and imposed a brief military embargo, these operations yielded the 1981 and the 1983 strategic Memoranda of Understanding between the two countries, which enhanced joint national security projects, upgrading Israel’s long-term strategic posture.

From 1983 to1992, Prime Minister Shamir was severely criticized by Presidents Reagan and Bush for crushing Palestinian terrorism during the 1st Intifadah and expanding Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria and eastern Jerusalem.  However, US-Israel strategic cooperation was unprecedently augmented during his terms in office. Washington recognized that US-Israel cooperation never evolved around the Arab-Israeli conflict. The mutually-beneficial US-Israel ties are based upon shared values, mutual threats, such as Islamic terrorism, ballistic missiles and rogue regimes and joint interests, such as research & development and job-creation in the high-tech market and in the defense industries.

In August,1948, the US Ambassador to Israel, James McDonald, recorded Prime Minister Ben Gurion’s response to the American demand (accompanied by a regional military embargo) to end the “occupation” of  Arab land or agree to a land swap, to accept the internationalization of Jerusalem and to allow the return of the Arab refugees: “Speaking with solemn emphasis, [Ben Gurion] added that much as Israel desired friendship with the US and full cooperation with it and the UN, there were limits beyond which it could not go.  Israel could not yield at any point which, in its judgment, would threaten its independence or its security. The very fact that Israel was a small State made more necessary the scrupulous defense of its own interests; otherwise it would be lost…Ben Gurion warned President Truman and the Department of State that they would be gravely mistaken if they assumed that the threat or even the use of UN sanctions would force Israel to yield on issues considered vital to its independence and security.  [He] left no doubt that he was determined to resist at whatever cost ‘unjust and impossible demands.’ On these he could not compromise (My Mission. 1951, pp 49-50).”

Ben Gurion’s defiance transformed the image of the Jewish State in Washington – from a strategic liability to a potential strategic asset.

In1973, Prime Minister Golda Meir subordinated Israel’s national security concerns to its ties with the USA, rejecting the advice to preempt the pending Egyptian-Syrian offensive, lest Israel be perceived as the aggressor.  Irrespective of Israel’s military victory, the trauma of the 3,000 Israeli fatalities and the near elimination of Israel still haunt Israelis and embolden Israel’s enemies.

In 2011, Israel benefits from a robust economy, demography and military and from the growing Western awareness to the threat of Islamic terrorism and to the violence and volatility of the Arab Street.  Therefore, Israel should not refrain from flexing its decisive military muscle in face of military threats, lest it reaffirm the image of a restrained and indecisive Israel, thus inflaming anti-Israel and anti-Western terrorism. 

 




Videos

The post-1967 turning point of US-Israel cooperation

Israeli benefits to the US taxpayer exceed US foreign aid to Israel

Iran - A Clear And Present Danger To The USA

Exposing the myth of the Arab demographic time bomb

Open letter to Prime Minister Bennett ahead of visit to USA

(Hebrew edition in “Israel Hayom,” Israel’s largest circulation daily)

During your first official visit to Washington, DC, you’ll have to choose between two options:

*Blurring your deeply-rooted, assertive Israeli positions on the future of Judea and Samaria (the West Bank), which would be welcome by the Biden Administration, yielding to short-term political convenience and popularity inside the beltway;

or

*Tenaciously advocating your deeply-rooted, principle-driven positions, which would underscore a profound disagreement with the Biden Administration and the “elite” US media, while granting you and Israel long-term strategic respect, as demonstrated by some of your predecessors.

For example, the late Prime Minister Shamir honed the second option, bluntly introduced his assertive Israeli positions on Judea and Samaria, rebuffed heavy US pressure – including a mudslinging campaign by President Bush and Secretary of State Baker – suffered a popularity setback, but produced unprecedented expansion of US-Israel strategic cooperation. When it comes to facing the intensified threats of rogue regimes and Islamic terrorism, the US prefers principle-driven, reliable, patriotic, pressure-defying partners, irrespective of disagreements on the Palestinian issue.

Assuming that you shall not budge on the historical and national security centrality of Judea and Samaria, it behooves you to highlight the following matters during your meetings with President Biden, Secretary of State Blinken, National Security Advisor Sullivan, Secretary of Defense Austin and Congressional leaders (especially the members of the Appropriations Committees):

  1. The 1,400-year-old track record of the stormy, unpredictable, violent and anti-“infidel” Middle East, which has yet to experience intra-Arab peaceful-coexistence, along with the 100-year-old Palestinian track record (including the systematic collaboration with anti-US entities, hate-education and anti-Arab and anti-Jewish terrorism) demonstrates that the proposed Palestinian state would be a Mini-Afghanistan or a Mega-Gaza on the mountain ridges of Judea and Samaria.

It would dominate 80% of Israel’s population and infrastructures in the 9-15-mile sliver between Judea and Samaria and the Mediterranean, which is shorter than the distance between RFK Stadium and the Kennedy Center.

Thus, a Palestinian state would pose a clear and present existential threat to Israel; and therefore, Israel’s control of the mountain ridges of Judea and Samaria is a prerequisite for its survival.

  1. The proposed Palestinian state would undermine US interests, as concluded from the Palestinian intra-Arab track record, which has transformed the Palestinians into a role-model of intra-Arab subversion, terrorism and ingratitude. Arabs are aware that a Palestinian state would add fuel to the Middle East fire, teaming up with their enemies (e.g., Iran’s Ayatollahs, the Muslim Brotherhood and Turkey’s Erdogan) and providing a strategic foothold to Russia and China. Consequently, Arabs shower Palestinians with favorable talk, but with cold and negative walk.

Hence, during the October, 1994 Israel-Jordan peace treaty ceremony, Jordan’s military leaders asserted to their Israeli colleagues that a Palestinian state west of the Jordan River would doom the pro-US Hashemite regime east of the River, and lead, subsequently, to the toppling of all pro-US Arab Peninsula regimes.

  1. There is no foundation for the contention that Israel’s retreat from the mountain ridges of Judea and Samaria – which are the cradle of Jewish history, religion and culture – is required in order to sustain Israel’s Jewish majority. In reality, there is unprecedented Jewish demographic momentum, while Arab demography – throughout the Middle East – has Westernized dramatically. The Jewish majority in the combined area of Judea, Samaria and pre-1967 Israel benefits from a robust tailwind of fertility and migration.
  2. Israel’s control of the mountain ridges of Judea and Samaria and the Golan Heights, bolsters its posture of deterrence, which has daunted rogue regimes, reduced regional instability, enhanced the national security of all pro-US Arab regimes, and has advanced Israel’s role as a unique force-multiplier for the US. An Israeli retreat from Judea and Samaria would transform Israel from a strategic asset – to a strategic liability – for the US.
  3. As the US reduces its military presence in the Middle East – which is a global epicenter of oil production, global trade (Asia-Africa), international Islamic terrorism and proliferation of non-conventional military technologies – Israel’s posture of deterrence becomes increasingly critical for the pro-US Arab countries (e.g., Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Oman, Jordan), who consider Israel to be the most reliable “life insurance agent” in the region.

Contrary to NATO, South Korea and Japan, Israel’s defense does not require the presence of US troops on its soil.

  1. Sustaining Israel’s Qualitative Military Edge is a mutual interest for the US and Israel, which serves as the most cost-effective battle-tested laboratory for the US defense industries and armed forces. Thus, Israel’s use of hundreds of US military systems has yielded thousands of lessons (operation, maintenance and repairs), which have been integrated, by the US manufacturers, into the next generation of the military systems, saving the US many years of research and development, increasing US exports and expanding the US employment base – a mega billion dollar bonanza for the US. At the same time, the US armed forces have benefitted from Israel’s military intelligence and battle experience, as well as joint training maneuvers with Israel’s defense forces, which has improved the US formulation of battle tactics.

Prime Minister Bennett, your visit to Washington, is an opportunity to demonstrate your adherence to your deeply-rooted strong Israeli positions, rejecting the ill-advised appeals and temptations to sacrifice Israel’s national security on the altar of convenience and popularity.

Yours truly,

Yoram Ettinger, expert on US-Israel relations and Middle East affairs

Support Appreciated

 

 

 

 

 




Videos

The post-1967 turning point of US-Israel cooperation

Israeli benefits to the US taxpayer exceed US foreign aid to Israel

Iran - A Clear And Present Danger To The USA

Exposing the myth of the Arab demographic time bomb