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
Enough
Sabre Rattling Already!
By
David Stockman
October 11, 2016 "Information
Clearing House"
-
"Contra
Corner"
- This
is starting to sound pretty ominous. The
Washington War Party is coming unhinged and
appears to be leaving no stone unturned when
it comes to provoking Putin’s Russia and
numerous others.
The
recent collapse of cooperation in Syria –
based on the false claim that Assad and his
Russian allies are waging genocide in Aleppo
– is only the latest example.
So
now comes the U.S. Army’s chief of staff,
General Mark Milley, doing his best
imitation of Curtis LeMay in a recent speech
dripping with bellicosity. While America has
no industrial state enemy left on the planet
that can even remotely challenge its
economic might, technological superiority
and overwhelming military power, General
Milley unloaded a fusillade of bluster at
the Association of the United States Army’s
annual meeting in Washington DC:
“The strategic resolve of our nation, the
United States, is being challenged and our
alliances tested in ways that we haven’t
faced in many, many decades,” Army Chief of
Staff Gen. Mark Milley told the audience.
“I
want to be clear to those who wish to do us
harm … the United States military – despite
all of our challenges, despite our
[operational] tempo, despite everything we
have been doing – we will stop you and we
will beat you harder than you have ever been
beaten before. Make no mistake about that.”
That is rank nonsense. We are not being
“tested” by anyone. To the contrary,
Imperial Washington is provoking tensions
and confrontations everywhere – from the
South China Sea to Syria, Iraq, Yemen,
Libya, the Black Sea, the Baltics and
Ukraine – that have no bearing whatsoever on
the safety and security of the citizens of
Spokane WA, Topeka KS and Springfield MA.
Indeed, the clear and present danger to
peace and freedom in the homeland lies not
in the machinations of foreign capitals, but
in the arrogant and bombastic groupthink
that has overtaken the denizens of the
Imperial City.
The
latter is again on display in the
full-throated fulminations about the siege
of Aleppo being emitted by the Washington
War Party and its trained poodles in the
establishment media – most especially the
New York Times.
We
are told that the Russian Air Force and
Assad’s military are targeting schools,
hospitals and the 200,000 or so civilians of
Eastern Aleppo for indiscriminate bombing
and slaughter. It’s shades of Benghazi 2011
all over again – an incipient genocide that
Washington must stop in the name of R2P
(Responsibility to Protect).
No
it’s not!
What is happening in Aleppo is a raging
sectarian civil war and a proxy battleground
for the regional political maneuvers of
Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Iran. They are none
of America’s business and haven’t been since
the so-called Arab spring uprising spread to
Syria in 2011.
Indeed, Syria is a lawless, bombed-out,
economically decimated failed state today
owing to Washington’s heavy-handed
intervention at the behest of the War
Party’s bloody twin sisters. That is, the
neocons and the R2P liberal interventionist
claque around Hillary Clinton, including UN
Ambassador Samantha Powers and National
Security Council head Susan Rice.
We
name names in this context for a reason. A
nation of 22 million back in 2011, which had
been reasonably stable in modern times under
the authoritarian but secular rule of the
Assad family, does not suddenly give rise to
a human tsunami of 5 million refugees
spilling all over the Mediterranean and
Europe and to the reduction of virtually
every one of its ancient cities and towns to
rubble and rivers of blood on its own
volition.
To
the contrary, all of this mayhem was
instigated by the War Party’s armchair
warriors and the “indispensable” nation
hegemonists in Washington. Literally
billions in aid, weapons, munitions,
training and logistics have flowed into
Syria from all directions on the outside.
And all of it was either financed by
American taxpayers or by regional powers
which have been armed and greenlighted by
Washington.
The
fact is, the Assad regime in Syria was from
the same mold as the regime of Saddam
Hussein in Iraq. Both arose out of military
coups in the postwar period and espoused a
secularist Arab nationalism. The aim was to
stimulate economic progress and a
renaissance of Arab culture under the
leadership of a strong state and prodigious
public sector, which in practice meant rule
by economic bribery and heavy-handed
police-state repression of dissent.
Still, it was the antithesis of jihadism and
the religious fanaticism represented by the
Wahhabism exported from Saudi Arabia, the
various offshoots of al-Qaeda and now the
murderous caliphate established by ISIS in
the Sunni lands of western Iraq and the
Euphrates Valley of Syria.
The
Assad regime in Syria, in fact, was the
guardian of religious pluralism. The Assad
family was from the minority Alawite branch
of Shiite Islam, which was heavily
concentrated in the northwest coastal
provinces. Its coming to power broke a
centuries old dominance of the majority
Sunni population and was therefore welcomed
by other minorities including Christians,
Druze, Jews, Kurds, and countless more.
There is no denying that the rule of the
Assad regime was harsh, but it was also
absolutely par for the course among middle
eastern governments before or since.
Of
course, Saudi Arabia is the worst of all.
You can be beheaded there for apostasy,
infidelity, drug possession or insulting the
king. Last year they chopped nearly 200
heads – even as the War Party claims Riyadh
as an indispensable ally in the battle
against the far less prodigious
head-choppers of the Islamic State.
So
when the uprising began in Syria during 2011
there was no reason for Washington to take
sides – any more than there was in Libya.
But in both cases false propaganda about
allegedly imminent massacres of civilians by
the incumbent regimes was deftly conveyed to
the establishment media – especially CNN –
by the various War Party think tanks and
official agencies.
The
subsequent slide down the slippery slope of
regime destruction did not take long. Thanks
to Hillary’s harpies of war, the White
House’s bombing campaign resulted in the
butchering of Khadafy within the year, and
Libya’s descent into the anarchy of rule by
warlords and jihadist killers that has
metastasized since then.
And
that brings us back to Syria and Aleppo.
Whatever the merits of the original peaceful
protests against the Assad government in the
spring of 2011, the movement turned violent
and quickly descended into civil war only
because of the flow of fighters, arms and
agitators from outside of Syria.
The
first of these was the so-called Free Syrian
Army (FSA), but that was a creation of
Turkey and the Washington regime change
advocates who wanted Assad gone. Erdogan
wished to eliminate Assad because he was
unwilling to suppress the large Kurdish
population on Turkey’s border, while
Washington’s motivation was no less
untoward.
It’s beef against Assad had nothing to do
with humanitarian considerations, but,
instead, was all about Washington’s fatwa
against Iran. The latter was allied with the
Assad government based on the confessional
politics of the Shia/Sunni divide, but when
it comes to Washington’s imperial writ, the
sovereign state of Syria was not entitled to
a foreign policy and alliances of its own
choosing.
Accordingly, Turkey provided sanctuaries for
the FSA inside its borders, allowed fighters
and arms to move freely to the FSA training
camps and staging areas and provided safe
transit of soldiers and supplies across its
borders into Syria. In fact, after the
Libyan regime fell, the CIA opened up
Khadafy’s arsenals and transshipped weapons
to Turkey through what was called the
“ratline”. That’s what we going on in the
CIA annex in Benghazi when Ambassador
Stevens was killed.
Needless to say, the Assad regime reacted
brutally to this militarized attack on its
very existence, and thereby begat the
“humanitarian crisis” which is the
inexorable result of civil war prosecuted
with modern weaponry in dense urban areas.
So without missing a beat, the liberal
interventionist faction of the Obama White
House was also soon beating the war drums on
R2P grounds.
Meanwhile, the so-called “moderate” FSA
fighters armed and enabled by Turkey were
allied with the Moslem Brotherhood.
Moreover, still other so-called rebel
factions have been recruited, trained and
armed by the CIA in camps based in Jordan.
For the most part these fighters, when they
eventually get to the battlefronts in Syria,
have tended to sell or abandon their
weapons, disappear across the Turkish border
or defect to the Nusra Front and even ISIS.
Last summer, in fact, the 55 fighters
recruited and vetted under a $500 million
Congressional authorization were gone within
weeks. Their commander and his deputy was
captured during their first day on the
battlefield, a dozen or so were killed and
the rest defected. Worse still, within days
jihadist fighters showed up on propaganda
videos brandishing their brand new American
weapons.
Is
it any wonder that Syria has become hell on
earth? Or that what remains of Eastern
Aleppo is crawling with Jihadist radicals
aligned with Nusra Front? Or that they have
attempted to use the 200,000 or so remaining
civilians as human shields?
The
whole thing is madness. Yet at this very
moment Washington is risking a military
clash with Russia owing to the breakdown of
the truce in Aleppo, and a renewed campaign
to establish a no fly zone in the immediate
area.
Really? The US Air Force is going to
shootdown Russian bombers to protect
civilians in a small part of what is left of
Aleppo who are being used as human shields
by affiliates of the Muslim Brotherhood and
al-Qaeda?
Madness indeed.
David Alan Stockman is a former businessman
and U.S. politician who served as a
Republican U.S. Representative from the
state of Michigan and as the Director of the
Office of Management and Budget under
President Ronald Reagan.
http://davidstockmanscontracorner.com
|