I’ve always been amazed anyone
thought the United States would ever act against the Iranian nuclear threat.
There was never any chance that such a thing would happen. Moreover, there was
never any chance the US would let Israel attack Iran.
In a Huffington
Post article by Steven Strauss, the author quotes Netanyahu: “‘I believe that we
can now say that Israel has reached childhood’s end, that it has matured enough
to begin approaching a state of self-reliance.... We are going to achieve
economic independence [from the United States].’ Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu to a Joint Session of the United States Congress – Washington DC, July
10, 1996 (Source: Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs).”
today, almost 20 years later, this is not a fair statement to
Strauss continues: “In 1997, Israel received $3.1 billion in aid
from the US. In 2012, Israel was still receiving $3.1 billion annually in US
This, however, is not an appropriate comparison today. Let us look
at the current situation: Egypt will receive $2b. in US aid; Saudi Arabia will
receive military aid, as will the anti-Assad Syrian rebels; Turkey will receive
billions of dollars and probably military equipment.
Moreover, the US and
Europe will also reach out to Iran, and Hezbollah and Syria will receive aid
from Iran. In addition, the Palestinians have not made the least bit of
commitment on a two-state solution . In other words, only Israel would lose. And
this is “childhood’s end”? Strauss further notes, “Israel has become an affluent
and developed country that can afford to pay for its own defense.” But the point
is that other hostile countries will receive more, while Israel will get the
He continues, “...Israel has a well developed economy in
other ways.” But again, Israel will be placed at much more of a
The article’s claim that, “Other countries/ programs could
better use this aid money,” does not state the reality.
domestically, the aid that goes to Israel could be useful. Detroit is bankrupt,
and our Congress is cutting back on food stamps, and making other painful budget
Again, the US does not face immediate threat from its neighbors,
while Israel does.
Moreover, this argument is shockingly implying that
Israel is stealing money from poor people in the US. “Israel and the United
States have increasingly different visions about the future of the Middle East,”
the article continues. But again, so what? This is absolutely
“A major (bipartisan) goal of the United States has been the
two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.”
Once again, this
is a policy that is impossible to implement, but the United States is going to
try to force it on Israel anyway.
Note that the less security the US and
the West provide to Israel, the more difficult it becomes to secure or promote a
Strauss adds, “However, the current Israeli
government is clearly not committed to the US vision, and has done everything
possible to sabotage American efforts.”
The problem with this last point
is that the Palestinians have always tried to sabotage this. If this concept
hasn’t gotten across in the past quarter century, I can’t imagine when it will
The current Israeli government has tried for many years to
achieve a two-state solution and has made many concessions. And if Secretary of
State Kerry can’t take Israel’s side on this issue, then I can’t imagine how
decades of US policy has been carried out.
To say that the Israeli
government is not committed is a fully hostile statement. This claims Israeli
settlement and not Palestinian intransigence has blocked the peace
Note that the author of this article has “distinguished”
credentials: “Steven Strauss is an adjunct lecturer in public policy at
Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government.”
Yet if this is what the US
government understands, things will end badly.
Moreover, the issue of
Iran and nuclear weapons is not the important point; rather, it is the
transformation of the US Middle East position that is significant.
not believe there is any chance Iran will use nuclear weapons. The problem is
that this is reversal of US policy. In other words, it is like going back to
1948 and opposing partition.
Finally, what this is all about is money and
greed. Many European countries are drooling at the money to be made. For
example, Vittorio Da Rold writes (Il Sole 24 ore), “Italian SMEs are hoping for
a rapid agreement on the Iranian nuclear issue in order to return as soon as
possible to trade without limits with Tehran and the rich Iranian market in
hopes of finding new markets in a time when the European market flirts with
deflation.”The author is director of the Global Research in
International Affairs (GLORIA) Center, editor of the Middle East Review of
International Affairs (MERIA) and a featured columnist for PJMedia. His latest
books are The Arab-Israel Reader (seventh edition), The Long War for Freedom:
The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley), and The Truth About