Facebook Feed

2 weeks ago

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

2 weeks ago

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

2 weeks ago

Yoram Ettinger
US-sponsored anti-Israel UN Security Council statement - acumen: bit.ly/3lVqpCM ... See MoreSee Less
View on Facebook

2 weeks ago

Yoram Ettinger
bit.ly/3xHPCDc הסכמי אברהם – אינטרס ערבי, אמריקאי וישראלי: ... See MoreSee Less
View on Facebook

The USA – Better Unique Ally than Honest Broker

All US Administrations have displayed a split personality when it comes to Israel. 

On the one hand, US Administrations have been Israel’s unique ally, implementing the will of the American People and Congress since the 17th century, thus forging a mutually-beneficial two-way street security and commercial alliance, based on shared values, joint interests and mutual threats. 

On the other hand, US Administrations have played the role of an honest broker between Israel and its Arab enemies.  They usually follow the lead of the UN and Europe-oriented State Department bureaucracy, which has generally been at odds with the American People and Congress, opposing the establishment of the Jewish State in 1948, still not recognizing even western Jerusalem as Israeli territory, embracing Arafat, Saddam Hussein (until Kuwait’s invasion) and Khomeini (until the US Embassy takeover), and serving as Israel’s harshest critic in Washington.

The split personality of US Administrations radicalizes Arab positions, undermines US and Israeli national security, and impairs US-Israel relations.  It attempts to establish a false moral equivalence between Israel – a role model of counterterrorism, democracy and unconditional alliance – and the Palestinian Authority – the role model of terrorism, hate education and alliance with America’s adversaries.

In 2009, former US Ambassador to Israel, Dan Kurtzer, cautioned Special Envoy George Mitchell against pressuring Israel for an unprecedented long-term freeze of construction in Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem. However, pressure was applied, Israel succumbed and Abu Mazen intensified his demands, thus causing the current impasse.

In August 1970, Israel and Egypt concluded a US-negotiated ceasefire agreement, which was summarily violated by Egypt by their construction of the most-advanced Soviet-made anti-aircraft system. The US Administration pressured Israel to tolerate such a dramatic violation, which played a key role in the devastating Israeli losses during the October 1973 War.

In 1977, Israel and Egypt launched a peace process, frustrating President Carter’s pursuit of an international conference and courting radical Arabs. In 1979, Israel and Egypt concluded a peace treaty, overruling Carter’s insistence to require Israeli concessions on the Palestinian and Jerusalem fronts.

In 1994, Israel and Jordan signed a peace treaty, totally independent of President Clinton’s involvement.

The deal-maker of the only two Israel-Arab peace accords was the direct initiative and dialogue between Israel, Egypt and Jordan.  The deal-breaker of well-intentioned Presidential initiatives was the undermining of the direct dialogue, thus failing to produce a single peace accord.

Arab parties to US-led negotiation with Israel cannot be more moderate than the US Department of State.  They consider Israel increasingly susceptible to pressure, thus upping the ante, which constitutes a tailwind to extremism and a headwind to peace.

The current US-led initiative aims to produce a resolution of the 100 year old Arab-Israeli conflict during the term of an incumbent President, subordinating long-term strategic interests to short-term gains. The time factor renders the President more vulnerable to pressure by Arab dictators who are not constrained by election cycles. The President is at ease pressuring Israel– a democracy which is susceptible to domestic and external lobbying – to assume more risks for peace, while the boiling Arab Street mandates less risks and more security!

The Arab-Israeli conflict has never been a top priority in domestic, regional, or global politics, lagging behind – and unrelated to – the challenges of Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, the turmoil in all Arab lands, as well as the challenges of Russia, China, North Korea, Mexico, Columbia, Venezuela, nuclear proliferation, ballistic missiles defense, etc. Presidential preoccupation with Israel-Arab negotiations, while the globe is increasingly unpredictably threatening, undermines vital US economic and national security interests.

The more significant the US role as an “honest broker,” the less significant is its role as a “unique ally,” which has produced unique economic and security benefits to the American People by Israel, “the largest American aircraft carrier, which does not require a single American boot on board, deployed in the critical eastern flank of the Mediterranean, saving the American taxpayer $20BN annually.”

The smothering sandstorms emerging on the Arab Street behoove the US and Israel to enhance strategic cooperation, which should be top heavy on “unique alliance” and low on “honest brokerage.”

 




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