US security assistance weakens Israel
Gideon Israel 04/08/2016
In the coming days, the American aid agreement will be signed for Israel, but the real questions have not been raised: Why should Israel remain dependent on the dependent child, and whether what was true in the 1970s is still needed today
Israel stood on its own. An Israeli 'Kfir' plane
He squeaked
Send to a friend
Share
Print
"I believe that Israel has reached the end of its childhood, and that it has matured enough to achieve a state of economic independence." Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in a speech to Congress in 1998, in which he declared that Israel intends to stop the economic aid it receives from the US If in 1998 Israel could be released from economic dependence in the United States, even more so after 20 years Of constant economic prosperity.
In the coming days, the US aid deal with Israel will close after lengthy and winding negotiations over its scope, components and conditions. The anticipated signing did not precede a public debate, in the Knesset or in the government, and there was no substantive discussion of the important questions: What is the purpose of the assistance? What is our long-term strategy? Will we ever ask for help?
This is even worse when ministers and public figures encourage Netanyahu to sign the deal as quickly as possible, regardless of its terms. But the truth is quite different: Whatever the final sum, it is a wrong strategic move. Israel would have been able to leverage its economic and military achievements and advance to the status of true strategic partnership with the US, such as England or Australia, instead choosing to remain dependent on the dependent child.
What Israel needs is a wise reform in aid, which on the one hand expands its cooperation with the US and on the other hand gradually reduces the amount of aid it receives - a reform that would send a message of strength to Israel's enemies and a positive message to the United States that Israel perceives itself as a power Regional level. Such a reform would have upgraded Israel's standing in the world, improved its purchasing power with regard to advanced weapon systems, and strengthened Israel's strategic partnership with the US and its support.
Aid as charity
The problem is not the very fact that Israel receives aid from the US The problem is the archaic role that this assistance plays in Israeli-US relations.
Thirty-five years ago, the aid funds served as a lifeline for the State of Israel, which found it difficult to cope alone with the economic and military challenges. The aid was provided in order to serve the strategic interests of the United States, but Israel needed it very much, and since the 1970s, with the cessation of payments from Germany, aid was a vital and significant addition to Israel's security and economy. Of about four billion dollars.
Since then, however, important developments have taken place: Israel's GDP has doubled eightfold, and the Israeli economy is showing signs of stability amidst global economic crises.In recent decades, Israel's strategic contribution to the US has continued to grow and expand, but US military aid is still perceived as "good" Us. Until there is a significant change, it will continue to be perceived in the future.
The concept of aid as an act of "charity" by the government has a destructive effect on the decision-making process in Israel. This penetrates and influences the formulation of policy, even before the presentation of American demands. The aid affects Defense Ministry personnel who meet with their counterparts in the military or the Pentagon. Israel carefully chooses the issues on which it is prepared to argue, in case it irritates the US As Amos Yaron, former director-general of the Defense Ministry, said, there is no free lunch.
Some examples of how aid affects US-Israeli relations, and not for the better: aid is distorting US support for Israel. The US budget commissioner is the congressman who makes the decisions about the aid, even though the president ends up signing it, thanks to traditional support for Israel at the Congress of Aid almost assuredly, and a president who is interested in stopping the aid has not gone to a lost war with Congress. "The aid to Israel at the same time is causing serious diplomatic damage, but he dismisses criticism against him by saying that he is" supportive of Israel "because he signed the aid.
Another point is that as long as the aid is there, it is the main support channel for the US in Israel, even though today, more importantly, Israel needs diplomatic support that is far more important than any financial aid.
In the current format of aid, Congress points to all aid to all countries at once, so many congressmen who support Israel are forced to support even other countries, even though they would prefer to avoid it.
In addition to the peripheral policy implications, aid directly affects Israeli security supplies: In the current situation, Israel must invest 74 percent of the aid funds in industries in the US The industries are aware of this and the lack of competition raises prices, since Israel can not go with the money elsewhere. In some systems, the US does not allow Israel to introduce its own upgrades into the systems it buys, which does not happen with other countries, and sometimes Israel has to beg and lobby in order to obtain approval. If Israel had been free to buy arms from other countries, the US industries might have lowered prices, and perhaps lobbying for Israel with Congress and the Pentagon to get permission to sell to Israel what it wants.
For the US industries, Israel is a major customer thanks to the aid money, and Israel is attracting many other countries to American equipment because they know that Israel buys the highest quality equipment and monitors where and what it buys. The upgrades that need to be made.
Towards Change
The conclusion from all this is that Israel needs to create a gradual pattern in which it waives aid over a period of ten years, with each year reducing several hundred million dollars.
http://mida.org.il/2016/08/04/הסיוע-הביטחוני-האמריקני-מחליש-את-ישרא/
translted by google
Gideon Israel 04/08/2016
In the coming days, the American aid agreement will be signed for Israel, but the real questions have not been raised: Why should Israel remain dependent on the dependent child, and whether what was true in the 1970s is still needed today
Israel stood on its own. An Israeli 'Kfir' plane
He squeaked
Send to a friend
Share
"I believe that Israel has reached the end of its childhood, and that it has matured enough to achieve a state of economic independence." Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in a speech to Congress in 1998, in which he declared that Israel intends to stop the economic aid it receives from the US If in 1998 Israel could be released from economic dependence in the United States, even more so after 20 years Of constant economic prosperity.
In the coming days, the US aid deal with Israel will close after lengthy and winding negotiations over its scope, components and conditions. The anticipated signing did not precede a public debate, in the Knesset or in the government, and there was no substantive discussion of the important questions: What is the purpose of the assistance? What is our long-term strategy? Will we ever ask for help?
This is even worse when ministers and public figures encourage Netanyahu to sign the deal as quickly as possible, regardless of its terms. But the truth is quite different: Whatever the final sum, it is a wrong strategic move. Israel would have been able to leverage its economic and military achievements and advance to the status of true strategic partnership with the US, such as England or Australia, instead choosing to remain dependent on the dependent child.
What Israel needs is a wise reform in aid, which on the one hand expands its cooperation with the US and on the other hand gradually reduces the amount of aid it receives - a reform that would send a message of strength to Israel's enemies and a positive message to the United States that Israel perceives itself as a power Regional level. Such a reform would have upgraded Israel's standing in the world, improved its purchasing power with regard to advanced weapon systems, and strengthened Israel's strategic partnership with the US and its support.
Aid as charity
The problem is not the very fact that Israel receives aid from the US The problem is the archaic role that this assistance plays in Israeli-US relations.
Thirty-five years ago, the aid funds served as a lifeline for the State of Israel, which found it difficult to cope alone with the economic and military challenges. The aid was provided in order to serve the strategic interests of the United States, but Israel needed it very much, and since the 1970s, with the cessation of payments from Germany, aid was a vital and significant addition to Israel's security and economy. Of about four billion dollars.
Since then, however, important developments have taken place: Israel's GDP has doubled eightfold, and the Israeli economy is showing signs of stability amidst global economic crises.In recent decades, Israel's strategic contribution to the US has continued to grow and expand, but US military aid is still perceived as "good" Us. Until there is a significant change, it will continue to be perceived in the future.
The concept of aid as an act of "charity" by the government has a destructive effect on the decision-making process in Israel. This penetrates and influences the formulation of policy, even before the presentation of American demands. The aid affects Defense Ministry personnel who meet with their counterparts in the military or the Pentagon. Israel carefully chooses the issues on which it is prepared to argue, in case it irritates the US As Amos Yaron, former director-general of the Defense Ministry, said, there is no free lunch.
Some examples of how aid affects US-Israeli relations, and not for the better: aid is distorting US support for Israel. The US budget commissioner is the congressman who makes the decisions about the aid, even though the president ends up signing it, thanks to traditional support for Israel at the Congress of Aid almost assuredly, and a president who is interested in stopping the aid has not gone to a lost war with Congress. "The aid to Israel at the same time is causing serious diplomatic damage, but he dismisses criticism against him by saying that he is" supportive of Israel "because he signed the aid.
Another point is that as long as the aid is there, it is the main support channel for the US in Israel, even though today, more importantly, Israel needs diplomatic support that is far more important than any financial aid.
In the current format of aid, Congress points to all aid to all countries at once, so many congressmen who support Israel are forced to support even other countries, even though they would prefer to avoid it.
In addition to the peripheral policy implications, aid directly affects Israeli security supplies: In the current situation, Israel must invest 74 percent of the aid funds in industries in the US The industries are aware of this and the lack of competition raises prices, since Israel can not go with the money elsewhere. In some systems, the US does not allow Israel to introduce its own upgrades into the systems it buys, which does not happen with other countries, and sometimes Israel has to beg and lobby in order to obtain approval. If Israel had been free to buy arms from other countries, the US industries might have lowered prices, and perhaps lobbying for Israel with Congress and the Pentagon to get permission to sell to Israel what it wants.
For the US industries, Israel is a major customer thanks to the aid money, and Israel is attracting many other countries to American equipment because they know that Israel buys the highest quality equipment and monitors where and what it buys. The upgrades that need to be made.
Towards Change
The conclusion from all this is that Israel needs to create a gradual pattern in which it waives aid over a period of ten years, with each year reducing several hundred million dollars.
http://mida.org.il/2016/08/04/הסיוע-הביטחוני-האמריקני-מחליש-את-ישרא/
translted by google
