Why the Hell Are We Allied with Israel?

[bemildred]

---

The latest violence in the Middle East has gotten me to question once again, why Israel is a major ally of the United States? The one lesson I learned from my college foreign policy classes was that countries act to assure their survival, period. Nation-states are not people. They do not have altruism. They do not sacrifice the wellbeing of their people for high principles or ideals. As a matter of fact, this stance would ultimately put at least a portion of a country's population at risk. Pacifist leaning countries go to war all the time to ensure their survival. The United States did not sign the Kyoto Agreement on the environment because it would have harmed at least a portion of our economy and therefore our citizenry to do so.

So what is it that Israel gives us that makes it indispensable to our national interest? Does it have a natural resource that we need for economic or military reasons? No, as a matter of fact the direct opposite is true — those countries that are Israel's sworn enemies have oil. Being friends with Israel has placed the lifeblood of our economy at risk many times throughout the years, yet we continue to support Israel with aid, both military and economic, votes in the United Nations, and rhetorically through our leaders.

Does Israel's location provide us with security of a trade route or a convenient military outpost? Again the answer is no. In the Middle East it is other states, some not friendly with Israel, that control or are near strategic trade routes. Egypt owns the Suez Canal. Iran and the United Arab Emirates surround the Straits of Hormuz. As far as military outposts are concerned, the United States has fought two gulf wars in the last twenty years and has never used Israeli soil to encamp or to launch an attack. Bases in Turkey, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia were used with great success.

Lastly, one could ask, does Israel produce some good or service that Americans need to warrant the cozy relationship between them and us? I can't think of any. Certainly our countries trade with each other, but that might continue even if we were not necessarily allies. Didn't the United States and the former Soviet Union trade with each other?

http://blogcritics.org/archives/2009/01/04/1420272.php

[Burma Jones]

1. AIPAC and Fundies

[Meeker Morgan]

6. Tell me something ...

Will you anti-Israel types be staying in the Democratic Party when Barack Obama and the Democrats in Congress continue the policies of every Democrat since Harry Truman?

[GoesTo11]

10. Prediction:

Green Party gets a pretty good showing from DU in 2012.

[BeatleBoot]

17. Jebbers?

Please.

We did that already.

[Burma Jones]

21. I'm not an Anti-Isreal type.....

AIPAC and Fundies do a very good job of organizing and communicating what many, if not most, of the population in the US feels. I probably should have explained myself. The Palestinians lost me in Munich in 1972.

I see much worse shit going on in other parts of the world, but, these people don't have lobbyists and suicide bombers and they aren't fighting over mythologically significant property, so who cares?

Anybody running for President that doesn't heed AIPAC will lose, period, so it isn't that I'm against Israel, I just recognize that Fundies and AIPAC have this issue sewn up tight and that is that.

[bemildred]

2. What? Israelis & Palestinians Are Old News

Day after day, I check BC to see who's written an hysterical rant about the current mayhem in that pitifully small parcel of land known by various names that lies on the Mediterranean Sea in the Middle East. Bupkus. Nada. Niente. Nyet.

No Arab apologist wailing about the wanton destruction of the enfeebled Gaza Strip?

No Israeli apologist citing Barack Obama's comment that if folks were tossing missiles at his kids, he'd do something about it?

Not even an attempt at an unbiased analysis of the conditions that have once again led two peoples who have known nothing but war, discrimination, and hatred into another useless confrontation?

http://blogcritics.org/archives/2009/01/03/021237.php

[Blomst]

11. Thank You!

[bemildred]

13. You're welcome. nt

[mitchum]

3. They are a strategic ally in a region where the US is disliked...

however, the reason that the US is disliked in the region is....well...y'know

It's kind of an Alice In Wonderland situation, isn't it?

[bemildred]

5. Catch-22 was my thought. nt

[Sebastian Doyle]

4. BECUS GAWD SAYS WE HAVE TO BE !!1111!!!!1

AND LIKE ANYONE WHO CRITIZIES ISREAL WILL BURN FOUREVER IN HELL AND LIKE MISS THE RAPTURE AND STUFF!!!1111!

OF CORSE THE JEWS WILL MISS THE RAPTURE TWO BUT ONLY BECAZE THEY ARE GAWDLESS HEATHENS WHO REJECT THE LORD JEEZUS H CHRIST!1!1!1!!!

[Meeker Morgan]

8. Fundies. Right. Is that why Bill Clinton is pro-Israel? n/t

[GoesTo11]

7. I guess the national consensus is just We Like Israel

Are there any other allies we should betray for expediency? Certainly Taiwan comes to mind. Also the countries bordering Russia.

[exboyfil]

52. How long should a commitment last and under what conditions?

A close friend of mine has visited Israel numerous times as part of an exchange with Palestinian Christians in the area. Their treatment by the Israeli state has been abysmal. The isolation of both the West Bank and Gaza means that they cannot have a viable economy. Remember both Gaza and the West Bank share borders with Arab countries. Aren't the surrounding Arab countries also culpable in the situation in these territories?

Our support of Israel advances no national interest, and its justification is based entirely on moral arguments. The more that Israel loses the moral high ground in its conflict with the Arabs, the less likely future support will be.

On a long term basis, Israel's position is intractable. They have had sixty years to figure out how to get along with their neighbors, and they have failed. On the flip side it is obvious that the surrounding Arab states care nothing for the Palestinians - they are just a political football that can be used to advance their own interests.

If the Palestinians had exercised passive resistance techniques, I think their long term prospects and how they would be viewed in the U.S. would have been improved. Lobbing rockets into civilian centers does not endear folks to their cause. Parking munitions in mosques does not either. It is obvious that the Palestinian leadership's goal is the destruction of the Jewish state. How else can you explain their refusal at Oslo?

While Israel's goal is primarily survival, their is an undercurrent of taking back additional "Promised Land" that fuels some of their behaviors. A basic question is whether Israel in its current form has a right to exist. While the country itself was built in part on the uncompensated seizure of Arab lands, Jews in Arab countries were also displaced at the same time (in about the same numbers as Arabs displaced).

[GoesTo11]

67. Hmm.

I think you are right that Israel gives up moral high ground when they succumb to the "promised land" expansionism of their right wing. If your friend was in areas where the Israelis are settlers, your friend probably encountered more of that sentiment than there is in Israel at large. Israelis I know resent settlers who insist on being in dangerous places and then making other Israelis defend them. I don't think the sentiment in the US supports this extremist wing of Israelis (although fundamentalists probably do).

As for the basic question of whether Israel in its current form has a right to exist, Jewish people overall (with a few exceptions) aren't going to care about that question. About half the Jews in the world live in Israel, and it is the center of Jewish culture more than, say, Minneapolis. When the state of Israel didn't exist, the concept of Israel was still central to the Jewish people. Much of the world believes Israel doesn't have a right to exist - Iran, for example (and Hamas, since the Jews committed the crime of rejecting Mohamed, and the UN when it equated Zionism with racism). Jews remember what life was like without a homeland and so they are not going away. The alternative, I suppose, would be creating 5.5 million Jewish refugees who would be pretty much unwelcome everywhere.

So, Israel is in it for the long term. I disagree with your comment that Isreal has had 60 years to figure out how to get along and has failed. Israel has done fine with their reasonable neighbors. Israel has made peace with Egypt and Jordan and progress with the PA (although rhetoric is heated now), and has detente with Saudi Arabia. Syria was a Soviet client and is a harsh dictatorship, but even they were talking with Israel, Lebanon has been a powerless pawn of Syria and Iran (although Israel screwed it up worse). But that's not a horrible record. If something like the Oslo type solution or 2000 Camp David type solution that keeps getting brought up ever comes to fruition, there could be much better long-term prospects for Israel and its neighbors.

[Karenina]

9. Male bonding.

[bemildred]

12. Well, I think in fairness we have to allow that some women want to bond too. nt

[The Magistrate]

14. Some Thoughts Of Mine On the Topic, My Friend, Can Be Found Here....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x236763#236822

[Duckhunter935]

18. Thank you sir

Read that last night, some people think history began last week

[bemildred]

22. Thank you Sir.

I think I am reasonably well acquainted with things up to around Eisenhower, and your comments filled in the time since then, somewhat. The cold war context certainly fits.

I posted this because it presented the question in a general way without getting into any areas that it ought not, and the question is raised here with some frequency, so I thought an example of how it should be done could be useful.

And of course, I like to stimulate debate.

I posted another one below it from the same source in the spirit of equal time.

[The Magistrate]

25. Oh, It Is A Legitimate Question, Sir

And as we have noted before, emotional factors are greatly under-rated in analyzng such things.

[bemildred]

27. Indeed, when you get upset, your brain doesn't work as well.

A pervasive principle of politics everywhere.

[The Magistrate]

29. And In The Longer Run, Too, Sir

Countries fall into love as people do, and sometimes with as little sense, at least in the eyes of others. The fact is the coldest analysis of U.S. policy would dictate dropping Israel like the proverbial hot potato, and yet we both know nothing remotely resembling that will happen.

[bemildred]

31. Well, principle does require that you sometimes abjure untrammeled self-interest.

And of course politicians are ever reluctant to admit error, so their self-interest may not be the same as the nation which they purport to serve. Hobbes was right, but his solution was more of a punt than an answer to the question he posed.

[GoesTo11]

35. Nations can bond

US and Britain have a long-running alliance that goes beyond pragmatism (as we saw from Blair). The people of Britain and the people of the US see each other as allies in a way that, for example, the people of Poland and the people of America don't.

In Israel, people there just love America. They see America as a model, a friend, and Jews in Israel see American Jews as cousins. Americans who go there (Jewish and Christian at least) feel that. They aren't just interested in using the US for convenience while really wanting to see us fail. People get that. This is not very connected to government policies.

[Alamuti Lotus]

15. Because that's the way it has been

There is very little coherence of ideology in modern politics (virtually anywhere, Central/South America may be the one exception where any movement is being made in any direction whatsoever); most arrangements and activities go on because 'we were yesterday' or similar excuse. Interia and momentum (combined with very basic economic consideration and also basic political party mechanical fundraising considerations) are the prime driving force behind things like this.

[Taitertots]

16. Terrorism

Israel- Victims of regional aggression, victims of terrorism, and ideologically similar to us
Israel's Enemies- Perpetrators of regional aggression, terrorists, and diametrically opposed ideology.

Why don't we just abandon them so the radical Islamists can genocide them? It is their stated goal.

[AnOhioan]

40. Are you serious??

Israel has the most advanced armed forces in the region...they have fought multiple wars and won (The most recent Lebanon invasion being the exception.)

They are in no danger of being taken over or to use your term "genocided".

They have nuclear deterrence, something no other country in the region possesses.

Hamas is no threat to Israel, which makes the current operation in Gaza appear to be something other than self-defense. It is in fact, a political ploy, designed to garner support for those who initiated it.

Scare the bejabbers out of the voting public, they will vote for you every time. The politics of fear.

[Vegasaurus]

59. Oh, those little "firecrackers"

are just an annoyance and a nuisance.

Hamas is no threat to Israel, not with their 7000 rockets, aimed at nursery schools and hospitals, determined to do as much human damage as possible,

Filled with schrapnel and ball bearings, that fly hundreds of feet on impact, those little nuisance firecrackers can't harm Israelis!

:sarcasm:

[AnOhioan]

69. Sorry, they are not 'aimed' anywhere

They cannot be aimed except in a general direction. The way you describe them, hundreds of Israeli's should be maimed or dead. Oh wait, the maiming and killing is being done BY the Israeli's.

None of that was the point of my post anyway. The person I was responding to used the term "genocide", as if Hamas could wipe out the State of Israel. The reality is Hamas is no more capable of wiping out Israel than humans are capable of flying by themselves.

Even if the entire Arab world joined Hamas and went to war against Israel, history has shown us that Israel is more than capable of defending herself.

Now fighting an invading army is very different from going into Gaza with vastly superior firepower and shrugging off civilians deaths as "unfortunate".

[WeDidIt]

19. Cold War Relic

It should be removed along with other Cold War relics as it no longer serves any strategic purpose and is, in fact, a hindrance to US national security.

[ecstatic]

20. One thing I wonder about is why they didn't consult us and other

allies first before going to war. It seems like we deserve at least that much courtesy. Forgive me if I'm wrong.

[Bobbieo]

24. Don't you think Bush and Cheney know exactly what is going on!!!

[LeftishBrit]

57. I believe the source for that is Dick Cheney..

Would you believe anything from his filthy lying mouth?

I am sure that the American government was well aware; and that indeed the Bushies have been egging Israel on for their own purposes.

[MisterP]

23. a nice work is Melani McAlister's "Epic Encounters," which also covers

U.S. perceptions of Muslims since the 50s
they also were a client-state against the "ultimate evil" of Moscow and its obedient "puppet states"--and now "fundamentalist Islam" (refusal to surrender entirely to Hardt and Negri's Empire, really) is that ultimate evil
added to the mix is the 18th- and 19th-century settler colony's total disregard for "nomads" beyond its fringes, to be extirpated at whim

[bemildred]

26. Well, Hardt & Negri's view is certainly interesting in view of recent economic events.

I find their views about the capital flows useful in understanding "globalism" etc. I'm not sure I see how it relates to US-Israel relations particularly though.

[MisterP]

33. I meant it more in the terms of the imperial "us" Israel's often described be:

like "us," Israel's called a democracy, secular, white bulwark against the savage hordes: this idea isn't some "holdout" from the Boer Republics but is as modern as, say, transistors and the CIS
what I had in mind was their overall "Empire," the post-imperialist, nationless hegemony that works to crush any obstacle to its fluxes and dominance

[bemildred]

37. Well, I think Israel is fundamentally a nationalist enterprise.

You can mix that in with some colonial elements, from it's origins, but essentially that's what it looks like politically.

So there is a conflict in fitting it into a Globalization narrative, which is fundamentally anti-nationalist. In other words, I think it's a tool in terms of Hardt & Negri's narrative.

[bemildred]

50. That does look like an interesting book, I'll keep it in mind. nt

[Double T]

28. I'm NOT anti-Israel; I'm anti-Israeli RW war-hawk neocon government.

Similarly, many are NOT anti-American, many are anti-bushco.

[Arrowhead2k1]

30. Exactly. This is nothing but right-wing bullshit.

All you people supporting current Israeli policies while claiming to be on the left need to give your head a shake.

[Double T]

32. Here's one for the head shakers

[Vegasaurus]

60. All you supporters of human rights abuses

like stonings and hanging gays, or shooting anyone of different political beliefs, or oppressing women,

Those are not policies we would ever expect people on the left to support.

But we see it here every day.

Support for terrorists, support for dictatorships and theocracies that treat their citizens horribly.

[Arrowhead2k1]

68. Spoken like a true right-winger.

I'm sorry, but only in your narrow-mind do I support those awful things just because I'm against right-wing Israeli policies.

[Alamuti Lotus]

34. This is *not* a rightwing Israeli gov't..

The major players in the ruling coalition are represented by Livni/Olmert from the centrist Kadima Party (founded by Ariel Sharon a few years ago, when the spectre of death terrified The Bulldozer enough to use his last years to defy the tendencies of his previous five decades), and Ehud Barak from the Labor Party. This is what passes for the dominant mainstream Center/Left in Israel. Yes, the right (Likud and the other pro-colonist and religious parties) are claiming they're not hitting hard enough, and there is a fairly small grouping of Communist and Palestinian parties in Israeli parliament opposing this latest activity, but neither are running the show at this time. War has always been a great election plank for the Labor Party and Ehud Barak in particular, and this current war is very popular with the Israeli populace at this time.

[Double T]

36. Center/left sure looks a lot like neocon right. It isn't about what 'THEY' say 'THEY' are..........

it is always about what 'THEY' do!!

[wellst0nev0ter]

65. NeoLibs?

[shaayecanaan]

38. Some thoughts...

1) Probably not for any military or strategic advantage. Far easier for the US to operate out of its Muslim allies, like Turkey, than Israel.

2) All politicians strive for something they like to call "moral clarity". The only two things that are universally hated are Hitler and child molestors, which is why politicians relish any opportunity to set themselves up in opposition against either of them. I suspect many Christian leaders support Israel because they view it as some sort of immunity talisman against accusations of facism. At one time, the US was the most anti-Semitic country outside continental Europe. It needs all the immunity it can get.

3) For the same reason that Cubans are entitled to permanent residency status as soon as they can reach the beaches of Miami - US Jews are a significant constituency in a swing electorate and can make themselves heard on the narrow cross section of issues that collectively matter to them, but which don't really matter to anyone else.

4) Most foreign lobbies are balanced by countervailing forces on the other side. There is a significant Chinese lobby in the US, but also reasonably strong Japanese and Taiwanese lobbies. There are strong Greek and Armenian lobbies in America but also a Turkish lobby, and to some extent the Jewish lobby has also gone in to bat for the Turks in recent years. But there is not really any significant Arab lobby to balance the Jewish lobby in the US. There is the ADC, but they wield little clout. Only 0.5% of the US population is Arab Muslim. The Saudis have some influence but only a finite amount and they choose to spend most of it trying to persuade lawmakers to allow them to purchase weapons.

5) There is also a recognition that a strong US relationship with Israel may well be for the best globally, if not for the US itself. Without a strong US ally, Israel may well become unmanageable, a Serbia with nuclear weapons. For the same reason that China's relationship with North Korea is a stablising influence, the same may be said for the US-Israel relationship.

Historically, Britain was Israel's major ally, followed by the French for a little while, then the US. Germany has also been a major ally. Israel's second strike nuclear capacity is dependent largely on German-supplied submarines. Basically, the Europeans have understood that someone needs to be Israel's ally, even if none of them particularly want the job.

6) Further, both Europe and the US would be horrified in the event that Israel began to fail, either as the result of a military conflict (which is exceedingly unlikely) or as a result of internal problems within the state (much more so) which would cause it to start haemorrhaging its citizens into Europe and North America. Morally, Europe would be almost forced to accept such a wave of refugees.

There are probably a few more reasons in addition to these and the others which have been canvassed by other posters.

[bemildred]

39. Not bad.

:thumbsup:

[shaayecanaan]

53. There are reports on al-Jazeera today that Jordan is considering derecognising Israel...

I can't find it in print and site rules don't allow me to simply post it as an OP.

If anyone else wants more they can go to www.aljazeera.net/english and click on 'watch now'.

[bemildred]

62. I saw a couple of those Sunday.

I'll believe it when I see it. Nevertheless I do get the feeling some people are getting testy.

[TheDebbieDee]

41. B-I-B-L-E.....................

[bridgit]

44. Yup, the old random Judeo-Christian guilt generator we've come to love & ignore

[ellisonz]

42. This guy is obviously not very well schooled.

"I learned from my college foreign policy classes was that countries act to assure their survival, period. Nation-states are not people. They do not have altruism. They do not sacrifice the wellbeing of their people for high principles or ideals."

What ignorant ass tripe...He's take a crude version of realism and imagining that this is the reality of world history/international relations.

"Liberalism holds that state preferences, rather than state capabilities, are the primary determinant of state behavior."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_relations_theory#Liberalism

Damn dirty Jews.

:sarcasm:

[bemildred]

45. "ignorant ass tripe"?

Did you mean "ignorant ass wipe", or was it something else? Realism does seem pretty crude to me, too zero-sum, but it seems plausible enough that he was taught it, and his description seems accurate enough.

[ellisonz]

46. His description makes sense if you agree with his pre-determined conclusion...

...that Israel has no right to exist as a Jewish state.

[bemildred]

47. But is it accurate?

Where does his description differ from the one on Wikipedia that you linked? I don't really favor realism, as I said, so I don't think it makes sense, but I thought he described it well enough.

[ellisonz]

54. No.

He doesn't once mention the Holocaust and there's no discussion of the actual history of Israel or why the United States might have felt compelled to support a Jewish state and then to support a fellow democracy.

This is an article from a primary school teacher in Africa. Not an expert on international relations. It is sentimentalist.

[bridgit]

48. Well no, tripe *could* be used by some, yes: 2. Slang. something, esp. speech or writing, that is...

...is false or worthless; rubbish - http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=tripe :shrug:

[bemildred]

49. Yeah, it seemed ambiguous whether it was a typo or intentional. nt

[ellisonz]

55. tripe, rubbish

[bemildred]

63. Poop. nt

[bemildred]

64. I mean, if it was "smart-ass tripe", it would be clear.

"smart-ass" is more or less idiomatic slang, in the US anyway.

[TomClash]

43. Money and votes

You need both to get elected. Israel's supporters give a politician lots of both.

[cali]

56. yeah, but it's definitely more than that

there's the old institutional part of it, and then there's the emotional piece of it.

[anonymous171]

51. They were a useful ally during the Cold War. nt

[LeftishBrit]

58. Partly long tradition (like the even longer tradition between the USA and UK)

Partly, I'd say, because Israel and America have often shared the same enemies: the Soviet Union during the Cold War; Iran now.

[Sezu]

61. Because some 6 million or so Jews died in WW2

FWIW, good for us.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

66. It wasn't always so. Ike took the side of the Egyptians in the Suez Crisis.

When the Brits, France, and Israel conspired to take the Suez Canal.