|
Supporting Israel Is in America’s Best Interest
By Marvin Peyser, Torrington
Edward LeHoskey, in his vicious anti-Israeli article "More Reasons to Vote" [June 14], writes that he has been following events there since the end of World War II. I wonder if he's aware that during this war the natural Palestinian leader at that time, Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, the man who stirred up Arab rioters to massacre Jews in the late ‘20s and ‘30s, spent most of the war years as Hitler's guest in Berlin. During this time he recruited Balkan Muslims for the infamous SS, and also broadcast radio messages back to the Mideast calling on Muslims to kill Jews. His hatred of Jews seems to have been passed down to his nephew, Yasser Arafat, who years ago changed his name in an attempt to hide the connection to his notorious uncle.
LeHoskey must also be aware that in 1948 the newborn state of Israel was invaded by armies from the six surrounding Arab countries who stated openly their intent to exterminate all Jews, to drive them into the sea, etc. He complains about American support of Israel but ignores the reason such support is needed. If the implacable hatred of Israel shown by most of the Arab nations did not exist, if they were willing to make peace (which they have been offered innumerable times and always rejected), then American military aid to Israel would be largely unnecessary. LeHoskey claims that the "Palestinians have two choices—continue to get pushed around or fight back." He chooses to ignore the third choice, and it's the best one. Make peace.
At Camp David and later at Taba the Palestinians walked away from the most generous offer it was possible to make, according to Dennis Ross, the U.S. negotiator. They could have had everything they asked for: their own independent state with contiguous borders, most of the settlements removed, a share in control of East Jerusalem, and were not satisfied. Instead of coming up with a counter offer, they started the Intifada. The fact is that Palestinians have never proposed a solution that Israel could live with. The pre-Intifada Palestinian economy was flourishing, 95% of all Palestinians were living under Palestinian jurisdiction (not Israeli), there were no checkpoints, and life was relatively good. Now the economy is in shambles, unemployment is rampant, and Palestinians are staggering from the desolation they themselves caused by rejecting the third choice—peace.
The main thrust of LeHoskey's article is to inveigh against the military aid given to Israel by our government. Let’s take a look at the reasons for this aid, but first of all it’s important to put things into perspective. The entire foreign aid given to all countries in the world amounts to about one half of 1% of our total budget. Military aid to Israel is reputed to be about $3 billion per year. (Israel also formerly received additional economic aid of about $1 billion per year, but about seven years ago volunteered to phase this out over a ten-year period. This is the only time any nation in the world ever requested that the United States cut its aid to them. No other country has ever done this.)
Why do we give Israel this aid? Does it benefit the United States? The answer to the latter question is a definite "Yes." The bulk of the $3 billion in military aid is spent right here in the U.S. If Congress were to cut back on this aid it would cause some consternation in the American defense industry, a vital part of our economy. Aid to Israel means jobs for Americans. Is this the reason Congress votes the aid? Not really.
Congress votes this aid because Israel is a democracy, with regularly scheduled elections, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, etc. These are freedoms enjoyed by Israel's 6 million inhabitants, not by the 300 million Arabs who control 99.9% of all Mideast lands. (Israel is actually less than one-half the size of Lake Michigan and represents only one-tenth of 1% of the Middle East landmass.) Israel is also in need of U.S. aid, as it is only its military superiority that stops the Arab nations from again invading the country. Writers like LeHoskey must surely be aware that if Israel were weak militarily and were conquered by their Arab enemies, then the likelihood of massacres would be high and Jewish blood would flow in the streets. Is this what anti-Israeli writers are really hoping for when they ask for aid to stop? Perhaps it is … Who knows?
What other benefits do we get from having a militarily strong Israel? How about strategic value: having a dependable and efficient ally in this part of the world should a military need arise. No other country in the area can really be counted on with confidence. U.S. aid to Israel was actually minimal until after the Six-Day War in 1967, and it only increased significantly in 1970 when Israel saved the U.S. ally Jordan from a Syrian invasion. This was a significant reason for us to realize our vital need in keeping Israel strong.
During the height of the cold war Israeli intelligence succeeded in obtaining both a MiG-21 and a MiG-23, and the U.S. government was given access to their vital secrets. How about the destruction of the Iraqi nuclear facility? Does anyone doubt the sorry state the world and we would be in right now if Israel had not been strong enough to accomplish this? And don't forget that Israeli experience in trying out weapons under actual combat conditions has been very helpful to our own military.
So now the question is asked: Why does the American Congress overwhelmingly support Israel, even the members from states with very few Jewish voters? The answer is that they do this because they believe it is in America's own interests to do so. Write to any of our elected politicians, and this is the answer you will get.
|
|
