Home   Bookmark and Share

 Print Friendly and PDF

The announcement last week by the United States of the largest military aid package in its history – to Israel – was a win for both sides.

Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu could boast that his lobbying had boosted aid from $3.1 billion a year to $3.8bn – a 22 per cent increase – for a decade starting in 2019.

Mr Netanyahu has presented this as a rebuff to those who accuse him of jeopardising Israeli security interests with his government’s repeated affronts to the White House.

In the past weeks alone, defence minister Avigdor Lieberman has compared last year’s nuclear deal between Washington and Iran with the 1938 Munich pact, which bolstered Hitler; and Mr Netanyahu has implied that US opposition to settlement expansion is the same as support for the “ethnic cleansing” of Jews.

American president Barack Obama, meanwhile, hopes to stifle his own critics who insinuate that he is anti-Israel. The deal should serve as a fillip too for Hillary Clinton, the Democratic party’s candidate to succeed Mr Obama in November’s election.

In reality, however, the Obama administration has quietly punished Mr Netanyahu for his misbehaviour. Israeli expectations of a $4.5bn-a-year deal were whittled down after Mr Netanyahu stalled negotiations last year as he sought to recruit Congress to his battle against the Iran deal.

In fact, Israel already receives roughly $3.8bn – if Congress’s assistance on developing missile defence programmes is factored in. Notably, Israel has been forced to promise not to approach Congress for extra funds.

The deal takes into account neither inflation nor the dollar’s depreciation against the shekel.

A bigger blow still is the White House’s demand to phase out a special exemption that allowed Israel to spend nearly 40 per cent of aid locally on weapon and fuel purchases. Israel will soon have to buy all its armaments from the US, ending what amounted to a subsidy to its own arms industry.

Nonetheless, Washington’s renewed military largesse – in the face of almost continual insults – inevitably fuels claims that the Israeli tail is wagging the US dog. Even The New York Times has described the aid package as “too big”.

Since the 1973 war, Israel has received at least $100bn in military aid, with more assistance hidden from view. Back in the 1970s, Washington paid half of Israel’s military budget. Today it still foots a fifth of the bill, despite Israel’s economic success.

But the US expects a return on its massive investment. As the late Israeli politician-general Ariel Sharon once observed, ­Israel has been a US “aircraft carrier” in the Middle East, acting as the regional bully and carrying out operations that benefit Washington.

Almost no one blames the US for Israeli attacks that wiped out Iraq’s and Syria’s nuclear programmes. A nuclear-armed Iraq or Syria would have deterred later US-backed moves at regime overthrow, as well as countering the strategic advantage Israel derives from its own nuclear arsenal.

In addition, Israel’s US-sponsored military prowess is a triple boon to the US weapons industry, the country’s most powerful lobby. Public funds are siphoned off to let Israel buy goodies from American arms makers. That, in turn, serves as a shop window for other customers and spurs an endless and lucrative game of catch-up in the rest of the Middle East.

The first F-35 fighter jets to arrive in Israel in December – their various components produced in 46 US states – will increase the clamour for the cutting-edge warplane.

Israel is also a “front-line laboratory”, as former Israeli army negotiator Eival Gilady admitted at the weekend, that develops and field-tests new technology Washington can later use itself.

The US is planning to buy back the missile interception system Iron Dome – which neutralises battlefield threats of retaliation – it largely paid for. Israel works closely too with the US in developing cyber­warfare, such as the Stuxnet worm that damaged Iran’s civilian nuclear programme.

But the clearest message from Israel’s new aid package is one delivered to the Palestinians: Washington sees no pressing strategic interest in ending the occupation. It stood up to Mr Netanyahu over the Iran deal but will not risk a damaging clash over Palestinian statehood.

Some believe that Mr Obama signed the aid package to win the credibility necessary to overcome his domestic Israel lobby and pull a rabbit from the hat: an initiative, unveiled shortly before he leaves office, that corners Mr Netanyahu into making peace.

Hopes have been raised by an expected meeting at the United Nations in New York on Wednesday. But their first talks in 10 months are planned only to demonstrate unity to confound critics of the aid deal.

If Mr Obama really wanted to pressure Mr Netanyahu, he would have used the aid agreement as leverage. Now Mr Netanyahu need not fear US financial retaliation, even as he intensifies effective annexation of the West Bank.

Mr Netanyahu has drawn the right lesson from the aid deal – he can act against the Palestinians with continuing US impunity.

- See more at: http://www.jonathan-cook.net/2016-09-19/palestinians-lose-in-us-military-aid-deal-with-israel/#sthash.fL4Eq28N.dpuf

21st Century Amerika, A Reality Show

By Phillip Farruggio

September 30, 2016 "Information Clearing House" - Forty years have passed since Sidney Lumet's finest film, Network, written by Paddy Chayefsky. Anyone who wishes to see an almost clairvoyant vision of how our culture would regress, please watch this film. Our high schools and colleges should make this a must see for their curriculums. Chayefsky captured the whoring essence of our mainstream media, and, sadly, how easily our public can be mesmerized by it. Remember, empires can only grow and maintain themselves when the masses ' go along to get along' . One needs to study the 1961 Milgram Obedience Experiments and 1971 Zimbardo Stanford University Prison Experiments to see just how far down the rabbit hole average Americans can fall.

If anyone took the time out and viewed the recent Presidential ( so called ) debate, one would realize how reality television has merged with politics. Mel Brooks or Woody Allen could not come close to capturing the absurdity of it all. Making sure that the two ' third party ' presidential candidates were not allowed to participate, this charade of intelligent concern for issues became a farce. Guess what? The prostituted and disgraceful mainstream news  ( so called ) journalists played their roles like Howard Cosell in Woody Allen's film Bananas  ( go see that finale of that film )and acted like this was all normal. Normal? How sad... for those Amerikans out there who actually think it was!!

We have a man very close to being elected president who has spent his adult life making billions ( so he says ) by what he calls ' the art of the deal '... or is it ' the art of the steal ' ? A man who has, by his own admissions, played the game by supporting both of these two corrupt political parties, caring not about the welfare of millions of working stiffs, rather the welfare of his company's bottom line. He actually acknowledged that he did in fact make mega profits from the foreclosures of millions of Americans. He said it was ' Good business'.  Yet, the ' angry white males ' who make up the majority of his supporters will follow this pied piper right over the cliff of personal financial solvency. On the other side of the dais we had a woman who considered Henry Kissinger , deemed a war criminal by millions of people throughout our nation and the globe, as one of her mentors. Yet, her base of support is made up of the overwhelming majority of black folks who actually vote in these con job elections. One wonders how many of them had relatives or friends that perished or were crippled for life in the ( so called ) Vietnam War that Kissinger orchestrated along with Nixon. A woman who stood by her man and proudly claims she advised him on most matters of importance, like when he pushed through and signed the Welfare Reform Act of 1996.

Both of these ' lowly evolved souls' have embraced our Military Industrial Empire. Each one wishes to outdo the other and fork over even more funding for our War Economy. How many of their base of support realizes that already 50% + of our taxes goes for this? As our cities and towns crumble, literally and financially, we are ready to anoint one of these two predators as the new stooge of empire. One surmises that perhaps, like the ostrich, we should all turn off our boob tubes for four years and go sit in the corner... waiting for Mr. Jordan.

Philip A Farruggio is son and grandson of Brooklyn, NYC longshoremen. A graduate of Brooklyn College ( class of '74 with a BA in Speech & Theater), he is a free lance columnist. Philip works as an environmental products sales rep and has been a street corner protest activist leader and Green Party member since 2000. In 2010 he became a local spokesperson for the 25% Solution Movement to Save Our Cities by cutting military spending 25%. Philip can be reached at PAF1222@bellsouth.net

Click for Spanish, German, Dutch, Danish, French, translation- Note- Translation may take a moment to load.

What's your response? -  Scroll down to add / read comments 

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for our FREE Daily Email Newsletter

For Email Marketing you can trust

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 Please read our  Comment Policy before posting -
It is unacceptable to slander, smear or engage in personal attacks on authors of articles posted on ICH.
Those engaging in that behavior will be banned from the comment section.
 
 

 

  

 

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. Information Clearing House has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is Information ClearingHouse endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

Privacy Statement