The V-Shaped US-Israel Saga « The Ettinger Report

The US-Israel bond is a unique bottom-up phenomenon in the sphere of international relations, with most elected officials in the House, Senate and the White House following and reflecting the positive state of mind of most constituents on the issue of Israel, the Jewish State.

Ordinarily, international relations constitute a top-down phenomenon, with elected officials shaping policy toward another country, which is then endorsed – or opposed – by the constituency.

The roots of the positive attitude toward Israel, by most Americans, are 400 years old, dating back to the 1620 “Mayflower,” as described in my March, 2020 1^st video in a series of nine, and my March, 2020 eBook on Amazon and Smashwords.

Thus, according to a most recent Gallup poll, Israel’s February 2020 favorable rating among Americans is 74% – the highest since 1989. It is second only to a January 1991 poll (79%), when Israel was targeted by Iraq’s Scud missiles during the First Gulf War. While Canada, Britain, Germany, France, Japan and India are ahead of Israel, none of them has experienced Israel’s systematically coarse treatment by the US State Department establishment, the US “elite” media (e.g., the NY Times, Washington Post, CNN and the three “major” TV networks), as well as much of the US academia. While Israel benefits from a substantial level of public support, the Palestinian Authority’s favorable rating in February 2020 was 23%, slightly ahead of Iran (11%), North Korea (12%), Afghanistan (18%) and Iraq (19%).

Most Americans recognize the US-Israel compatibility of long term core values, culture and civic foundations, in addition to shared national security challenges and threats, which transcend short term disagreements.

Most Americans appreciate Israel’s consistently unconditional alliance with the US – unlike the rest of the Middle East and many of the European countries – in addition to Israel’s innovative nature and unique levels of patriotism, optimism, attachment to roots and communal responsibility.

The wide base of support among Americans – along with the surging mutually beneficial strategic cooperation – has produced a unique pattern of friction between the US and Israeli Administrations: V-shaped (a swift deterioration and a swift recovery) and not U-shaped (a swift deterioration and a delayed recovery).

For example, Israel’s June 7, 1981 destruction of Iraq’s nuclear reactor triggered a harsh US reaction, including the suspension of the delivery of F-16 combat planes. However, on December 1, 1981, an unprecedented strategic cooperation accord was concluded, recognizing Israel’s cardinal role in the battle against Islamic terrorism, the rising threat of Iran’s Ayatollahs, the expansion of Soviet influence in the Middle East, and the contribution of Israel’s unique battle experience and military intelligence to the performance of the US armed forces and defense industries. On December 15, 1981, Israel annexed the Golan Heights, which led to the US suspending the strategic accord. However, on October 29, 1983 – notwithstanding the US’ aggressive opposition to Israel’s war on Palestinian terrorists in Lebanon – a more comprehensive US-Israel strategic accord was signed, responding to the intensification of Middle East turbulence. Moreover, on March 3, 2015, major friction erupted between the two Administrations, due to Prime Minister Netanyahu’s speech at a joint congressional session, articulating a well-documented opposition to the Iran Nuclear Agreement. However, a landmark 10 year US-Israel military foreign aid agreement was concluded on September 4, 2016.

The landmark agreement reflected the growing realization – by the US national security establishment – of the dramatic benefits to the US armed forces and defense industries, yielded by the bolstered US-Israel mutually-beneficial two-way-street.

Over time, US-Israel strategic cooperation has eclipsed the litany of disagreements over the Arab-Israel conflict and the Palestinian issue.

The US and Israel are intrinsically linked through our 400-year-old roots of core values, as well as contemporary geo-strategic regional and global mutual threats and challenges. These threats and challenges include Iran’s sponsorship of anti-US global terrorism and drug trafficking; Iran’s expanding conventional, ballistic and nuclear capabilities; global Islamic Sunni terrorism such as ISIS and the multitude of Muslim Brotherhood branches and cells; the potential threat of Erdogan’s imperialistic vision; the increasing vulnerability of every pro-US Arab regime; the vacillation of Europe; the ineffectiveness of NATO and the UN; and the mutual need to develop advanced defense and commercial technologies.

In the words of Admiral James Stavridis, former Supreme Commander of NATO: “Our best military partner in the region, by far, is Israel…. It truly is a case of two nations that are unarguably stronger together.”

In the words of my friends in Texas: “The US and Israel will do to ride a river with.”

*The US’ co-sponsorship of an anti-Israel UN Security Council Statement reflects the return of the State Department’s worldview to the center stage of US foreign policy-making. This was the first time, in six years, that the US enabled the UN Security Council to act against Israel.

*This is not merely a worldview, which is highly critical of Israel, as has been the case since 1948, when Foggy Bottom led the charge against the re-establishment of the Jewish State.

This worldview has systematically undermined US interests, by subordinating the unilateral, independent US national security policy (on Iran’s Ayatollahs, the Muslim Brotherhood, the Palestinian issue, etc.) to a multilateral common denominator with the anti-US and anti-Israel UN and international organizations, as well as the vacillating and terrorists-appeasing Europe.

*It has sacrificed Middle East reality on the altar of wishful-thinking, assuming that the establishment of a Palestinian state would fulfill Palestinian aspirations, advance the cause of peace, reduce terrorism and regional instability; thus, enhancing US interests.

*However, the reality of the Middle East and Jordan and the rogue Palestinian track record lend credence to the assumption that a Palestinian state west of the Jordan River would doom the pro-US Hashemite regime east of the River, yielding traumatic ripple effects, regionally and globally:

^Replace the relatively-moderate Hashemite regime with either a rogue Palestinian regime, a Muslim Brotherhood regime, or other rogue regimes;
^Transform Jordan into a chaotic state, similar to Libya, Syria, Iraq and Yemen, which would be leveraged by Iran’s Ayatollahs to intensify their encirclement of the pro-US Saudi regime;
^Convert Jordan into a major arena of regional and global Islamic terrorism;
^Trigger a domino scenario into the Arabian Peninsula, which could topple all pro-US, oil-producing Arab regimes;
^Imperil the supply of Persian Gulf oil, which would be held hostage by anti-US entities, catapulting the price at the pump;
^Jeopardize major naval routes of global trade between Asia and Europe through the Indian Ocean, the Red Sea and the Suez Canal;
^Intensify epicenters of regional and global terrorism and drug trafficking;
^Generate a robust tailwind to US’ adversaries (Russia and China) and enemies (Iran’s Ayatollahs, the Muslim Brotherhood and ISIS) and a powerful headwind to US economic and national security interests.

*The State Department assumes that Palestinian terrorism – just like Islamic terrorism – is driven by despair, ignoring the fact that Palestinian terrorism has been driven (for the last 100 years) by the vision to erase the “infidel” Jewish entity from “the abode of Islam,” as stated by the charters of Fatah (1959) and the PLO (1964), 8 and 3 years before the Jewish State reunited Jerusalem and reasserted itself in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank).

*Aspiring for a Palestinian state, and viewing Israel’s control of Judea and Samaria as an obstacle to peace, ignores the Arab view of the Palestinians as a role model of intra-Arab subversion, terrorism, corruption and treachery. Moreover, the State Department has held the view that the Palestinian issue is the crux of the Arab-Israeli conflict and a central to Arab interests, which has been refuted by the Abraham Accords. The latter ignored the State Department, sidestepped the Palestinian issue and therefore came to fruition.

*The State Department overlooks the centrality of the Palestinian Authority’s hate education, which has become the most effective production-line of terrorists, and the most authentic reflection of the Palestinian Authority’s worldview and vision.

*The State Department has also taken lightly the Palestinian Authority’s mosque incitement, public glorification of terrorists and monthly allowances to families of terrorists, which have documented its rogue and terroristic nature (walk), notwithstanding its peaceful diplomatic rhetoric (talk).

*The State Department’s eagerness to welcome the Palestinian issue in a “red carpet” manner – contrary to the “shabby doormat” extended to Palestinians by Arabs – and its determination to promote the establishment of a Palestinian state, along with its embrace of Iran’s Ayatollahs and the Muslim Brotherhood, have been interpreted by rogue regimes and organizations as weakness.

Experience suggests that weakness invites the wolves, including wolves which aim to bring “The Great Satan” to submission throughout the world as well as the US mainland.

Support Appreciated

Recent Articles

Search

The V-Shaped US-Israel Saga

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

US-sponsored anti-Israel UN Security Council statement – acumen

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