|
It's Time for a Declaration of
Independence From Israel
By Chris Hedges, Truthdig
MARIN COUNTY'S NEWS MONTHLY -
FREE PRESS
(415)868-1600 - (415)868-0502(fax) - P.O. Box 31, Bolinas, CA, 94924
August, 2007
http://www.coastalpost.com/07/08/16.html
Israel, without
the United States, would probably not exist. The country came perilously
close to extinction during the October 1973 war when Egypt, trained and
backed by the Soviet Union, crossed the Suez and the Syrians poured in
over the Golan Heights. Huge American military transport planes came to
the rescue. They began landing every half-hour to refit the battered
Israeli army, which had lost most of its heavy armor. By the time the war
was over, the United States had given Israel $2.2 billion in emergency
military aid.
The
intervention, which enraged the Arab world, triggered the OPEC oil embargo
that for a time wreaked havoc on Western economies. This was perhaps the
most dramatic example of the sustained life-support system the United
States has provided to the Jewish state.
Israel was born at midnight May 14, 1948. The U.S. recognized the new
state 11 minutes later. The two countries have been locked in a deadly
embrace ever since.
Washington, at the beginning of the relationship, was able to be a
moderating influence. An incensed President Eisenhower demanded and got
Israel's withdrawal after the Israelis occupied Gaza in 1956. During the
Six-Day War in 1967, Israeli warplanes bombed the USS Liberty. The ship,
flying the U.S. flag and stationed 15 miles off the Israeli coast, was
intercepting tactical and strategic communications from both sides. The
Israeli strikes killed 34 U.S. sailors and wounded 171. The deliberate
attack froze, for a while, Washington's enthusiasm for Israel. But
ruptures like this one proved to be only bumps, soon smoothed out by an
increasingly sophisticated and well-financed Israel lobby that set out to
merge Israeli and American foreign policy in the Middle East.
Israel has reaped tremendous rewards from this alliance. It has been given
more than $140 billion in U.S. direct economic and military assistance. It
receives about $3 billion in direct assistance annually, roughly one-fifth
of the U.S. foreign aid budget. Although most American foreign aid
packages stipulate that related military purchases have to be made in the
United States, Israel is allowed to use about 25 percent of the money to
subsidize its own growing and profitable defense industry. It is exempt,
unlike other nations, from accounting for how it spends the aid money. And
funds are routinely siphoned off to build new Jewish settlements, bolster
the Israeli occupation in the Palestinian territories and construct the
security barrier, which costs an estimated $1 million a mile.
The barrier weaves its way through the West Bank, creating isolated
pockets of impoverished Palestinians in ringed ghettos. By the time the
barrier is finished it will probably in effect seize up to 40 percent of
Palestinian land. This is the largest land grab by Israel since the 1967
war. And although the United States officially opposes settlement
expansion and the barrier, it also funds them.
The U.S. has provided Israel with nearly $3 billion to develop weapons
systems and given Israel access to some of the most sophisticated items in
its own military arsenal, including Blackhawk attack helicopters and F-16
fighter jets. The United States also gives Israel access to intelligence
it denies to its NATO allies. And when Israel refused to sign the nuclear
nonproliferation treaty, the United States stood by without a word of
protest as the Israelis built the region's first nuclear weapons program.
U.S. foreign policy, especially under the current Bush administration, has
become little more than an extension of Israeli foreign policy. The United
States since 1982 has vetoed 32 Security Council resolutions critical of
Israel, more than the total number of vetoes cast by all the other
Security Council members. It refuses to enforce the Security Council
resolutions it claims to support. These resolutions call on Israel to
withdraw from the occupied territories.
There is now volcanic anger and revulsion by Arabs at this blatant
favoritism. Few in the Middle East see any distinction between Israeli and
American policies, nor should they. And when the Islamic radicals speak of
U.S. support of Israel as a prime reason for their hatred of the United
States, we should listen. The consequences of this one-sided relationship
are being played out in the disastrous war in Iraq, growing tension with
Iran, and the humanitarian and political crisis in Gaza. It is being
played out in Lebanon, where Hezbollah is gearing up for another war with
Israel, one most Middle East analysts say is inevitable. The U.S. foreign
policy in the Middle East is unraveling. And it is doing so because of
this special relationship. The eruption of a regional conflict would usher
in a nightmare of catastrophic proportions.
There were many in the American foreign policy establishment and State
Department who saw this situation coming. The decision to throw our lot in
with Israel in the Middle East was not initially a popular one with an
array of foreign policy experts, including President Harry Truman's
secretary of state, Gen. George Marshall. They warned there would be a
backlash. They knew the cost the United States would pay in the oil-rich
region for this decision, which they feared would be one of the greatest
strategic blunders of the postwar era. And they were right. The decision
has jeopardized American and Israeli security and created the kindling for
a regional conflagration.
The alliance, which makes no sense in geopolitical terms, does makes sense
when seen through the lens of domestic politics. The Israel lobby has
become a potent force in the American political system. No major
candidate, Democrat or Republican, dares to challenge it. The lobby
successfully purged the State Department of Arab experts who challenged
the notion that Israeli and American interests were identical. Backers of
Israel have doled out hundreds of millions of dollars to support U.S.
political candidates deemed favorable to Israel. They have brutally
punished those who strayed, including the first President Bush, who they
said was not vigorous enough in his defense of Israeli interests. This was
a lesson the next Bush White House did not forget. George W. Bush did not
want to be a one-term president like his father.
Israel advocated removing Saddam Hussein from power and currently
advocates striking Iran to prevent it from acquiring nuclear weapons.
Direct Israeli involvement in American military operations in the Middle
East is impossible. It would reignite a war between Arab states and
Israel. The United States, which during the Cold War avoided direct
military involvement in the region, now does the direct bidding of Israel
while Israel watches from the sidelines. During the 1991 Gulf War, Israel
was a spectator, just as it is in the war with Iraq.
President Bush, facing dwindling support for the war in Iraq, publicly
holds Israel up as a model for what he would like Iraq to become. Imagine
how this idea plays out on the Arab street, which views Israel as the
Algerians viewed the French colonizers during the war of liberation.
"In Israel," Bush said recently, "terrorists have taken innocent human
life for years in suicide attacks. The difference is that Israel is a
functioning democracy and it's not prevented from carrying out its
responsibilities. And that's a good indicator of success that we're
looking for in Iraq."
Americans are increasingly isolated and reviled in the world. They remain
blissfully ignorant of their own culpability for this isolation. U.S.
"spin" paints the rest of the world as unreasonable, but Israel, Americans
are assured, will always be on our side.
Israel is reaping economic as well as political rewards from its lock-down
apartheid state. In the "gated community" market it has begun to sell
systems and techniques that allow the nation to cope with terrorism.
Israel, in 2006, exported $3.4 billion in defense products -- well over a
billion dollars more than it received in American military aid. Israel has
grown into the fourth largest arms dealer in the world. Most of this
growth has come in the so-called homeland security sector.
"The key products and services," as Naomi Klein wrote in The Nation, "are
hi-tech fences, unmanned drones, biometric IDs, video and audio
surveillance gear, air passenger profiling and prisoner interrogation
systems -- precisely the tools and technologies Israel has used to lock in
the occupied territories. And that is why the chaos in Gaza and the rest
of the region doesn't threaten the bottom line in Tel Aviv, and may
actually boost it. Israel has learned to turn endless war into a brand
asset, pitching its uprooting, occupation and containment of the
Palestinian people as a half-century head start in the 'global war on
terror.' "
The United States, at least officially, does not support the occupation
and calls for a viable Palestinian state. It is a global player, with
interests that stretch well beyond the boundaries of the Middle East, and
the equation that Israel's enemies are our enemies is not that simple.
"Terrorism is not a single adversary," John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt
wrote in The London Review of Books, "but a tactic employed by a wide
array of political groups. The terrorist organizations that threaten
Israel do not threaten the United States, except when it intervenes
against them (as in Lebanon in 1982). Moreover, Palestinian terrorism is
not random violence directed against Israel or 'the West'; it is largely a
response to Israel's prolonged campaign to colonize the West Bank and Gaza
Strip. More important, saying that Israel and the US are united by a
shared terrorist threat has the causal relationship backwards: the US has
a terrorism problem in good part because it is so closely allied with
Israel, not the other way around."
Middle Eastern policy is shaped in the United States by those with very
close ties to the Israel lobby. Those who attempt to counter the virulent
Israeli position, such as former Secretary of State Colin Powell, are
ruthlessly slapped down. This alliance was true also during the Clinton
administration, with its array of Israel-first Middle East experts,
including special Middle East coordinator Dennis Ross and Martin Indyk,
the former deputy director of the American Israel Public Affairs
Committee, AIPAC, one of the most powerful Israel lobbying groups in
Washington. But at least people like Indyk and Ross are sane, willing to
consider a Palestinian state, however unviable, as long as it is palatable
to Israel. The Bush administration turned to the far-right wing of the
Israel lobby, those who have not a shred of compassion for the
Palestinians or a word of criticism for Israel. These new Middle East
experts include Elliott Abrams, John Bolton, Douglas Feith, the disgraced
I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz and David Wurmser.
Washington was once willing to stay Israel's hand. It intervened to thwart
some of its most extreme violations of human rights. This administration,
however, has signed on for every disastrous Israeli blunder, from building
the security barrier in the West Bank, to sealing off Gaza and triggering
a humanitarian crisis, to the ruinous invasion and saturation bombing of
Lebanon.
The few tepid attempts by the Bush White House to criticize Israeli
actions have all ended in hasty and humiliating retreats in the face of
Israeli pressure. When the Israel Defense Forces in April 2002 reoccupied
the West Bank, President Bush called on then-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon
to "halt the incursions and begin withdrawal." It never happened. After a
week of heavy pressure from the Israel lobby and Israel's allies in
Congress, meaning just about everyone in Congress, the president gave up,
calling Sharon "a man of peace." It was a humiliating moment for the
United States, a clear sign of who pulled the strings.
There were several reasons for the war in Iraq. The desire for American
control of oil, the belief that Washington could build puppet states in
the region, and a real, if misplaced, fear of Saddam Hussein played a part
in the current disaster. But it was also strongly shaped by the notion
that what is good for Israel is good for the United States. Israel wanted
Iraq neutralized. Israeli intelligence, in the lead-up to the war, gave
faulty information to the U.S. about Iraq's alleged arsenal of weapons of
mass destruction. And when Baghdad was taken in April 2003, the Israeli
government immediately began to push for an attack on Syria. The lust for
this attack has waned, in no small part because the Americans don't have
enough troops to hang on in Iraq, much less launch a new occupation.
Israel is currently lobbying the United States to launch aerial strikes on
Iran, despite the debacle in Lebanon. Israel's iron determination to
forcibly prevent a nuclear Iran makes it probable that before the end of
the Bush administration an attack on Iran will take place. The efforts to
halt nuclear development through diplomatic means have failed. It does not
matter that Iran poses no threat to the United States. It does not matter
that it does not even pose a threat to Israel, which has several hundred
nuclear weapons in its arsenal. It matters only that Israel demands total
military domination of the Middle East.
The alliance between Israel and the United States has culminated after 50
years in direct U.S. military involvement in the Middle East. This
involvement, which is not furthering American interests, is unleashing a
geopolitical nightmare. American soldiers and Marines are dying in droves
in a useless war. The impotence of the United States in the face of
Israeli pressure is complete. The White House and the Congress have
become, for perhaps the first time, a direct extension of Israeli
interests. There is no longer any debate within the United States. This is
evidenced by the obsequious nods to Israel by all the current presidential
candidates with the exception of Dennis Kucinich. The political cost for
those who challenge Israel is too high.
This means there will be no peaceful resolution of the Palestinian-Israeli
conflict. It means the incidents of Islamic terrorism against the U.S. and
Israel will grow. It means that American power and prestige are on a
steep, irreversible decline. And I fear it also means the ultimate end of
the Jewish experiment in the Middle East.
The weakening of the United States, economically and militarily, is giving
rise to new centers of power. The U.S. economy, mismanaged and drained by
the Iraq war, is increasingly dependent on Chinese trade imports and on
Chinese holdings of U.S. Treasury securities. China holds dollar reserves
worth $825 billion. If Beijing decides to abandon the U.S. bond market,
even in part, it would cause a free fall by the dollar. It would lead to
the collapse of the $7-trillion U.S. real estate market. There would be a
wave of U.S. bank failures and huge unemployment. The growing dependence
on China has been accompanied by aggressive work by the Chinese to build
alliances with many of the world's major exporters of oil, such as Iran,
Nigeria, Sudan and Venezuela. The Chinese are preparing for the looming
worldwide clash over dwindling resources.
The future is ominous. Not only do Israel's foreign policy objectives not
coincide with American interests, they actively hurt them. The growing
belligerence in the Middle East, the calls for an attack against Iran, the
collapse of the imperial project in Iraq have all given an opening, where
there was none before, to America's rivals. It is not in Israel's
interests to ignite a regional conflict. It is not in ours. But those who
have their hands on the wheel seem determined, in the name of freedom and
democracy, to keep the American ship of state headed at breakneck speed
into the cliffs before us.
Chris Hedges is the former Middle East bureau chief for The New York Times
and the author of "War Is a Force That Gives Us Meaning."
(c) 2007 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/55827/
|