[Peace-discuss] Military aid to Israel

[C. G. Estabrook]

Carter says it isn't necessary because he knows perfectly well that all the USG 
has to do is to let the Israeli government know it's serious, and the matter is 
settled. (I gave some recent examples in an earlier post.)

The US has been able with ease to hold out against a world consensus in favor of 
the obvious solution to the "Palestinian problem" -- two independent states -- 
because a truly independent Palestine serves neither its interests nor those of 
its chief client.  The US has no desire for an independent Arab state 
contributing to the resistance to US control of the Middle East; Israel wants 
the resources of the West Bank without the people (although it likes to trumpet 
the threat).

It's obviously difficult to predict our government's actions (in part because we 
have so little control over them), but its guiding principles are consistent and 
rational (in the Weberian sense of fitting means to ends -- those principles may 
of course be quite vicious). Like the Bush administration, the Obama 
administration wants to work out a form of government for the Palestinians -- 
call it a state if you wish -- that continues the Palestinians as second class 
citizens in their land (something like American Indian reservations -- but not 
to the level of dignity of the S. African bantustans).

The problem is to find a native jailer for the Palestinians.  The present US 
candidate is Mahmoud Abbas, of Fatah, but the problem is to make his writ run in 
the West Bank and Gaza -- the last US administration tried a coup -- where the 
popular nationalist sentiment is led by the (democratically elected) Hamas.  The 
US has to accomplish its traditional deterrence of democracy to effectuate its 
policy.

But remember that the principle enunciated by a British PM in the 19th century 
remains the guide for the USG today: "We have no eternal allies, and we have no 
perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests 
it is our duty to follow." Those interests are of course those of the dominant 
social groups in the US, and in fact they conflict sharply with those of the US 
majority, so resistance to the USG is not futile. --CGE


Jenifer Cartwright wrote:
> Amy Goodman asked Jimmy Carter what he tho't of cutting off $support to 
> Israel and he said it wasn't a good idea or even necessary (just a few weeks 
> ago -- it's surely archived for a better explanation). Below is the line I 
> like best and another indication (to me) that Obama expects Israel to change 
> it's behavior, tho' it won't be done tomorrow: Obama mentioned Muslims before
>  Israelis in his inaugural address, and he phoned Palestinians before
> Israelis the first day of his presidency. And he appointed Freeman, knowing
> his position on Israel. The Israelis have reason to think that a change
> (which they definitely won't like) is coming.
> 
> "The Obama Administration however expects the next government of Prime 
> Minister-designate Benjamin Netanyahu to continue peace negotiations with the
>  Palestinians, he said. --Jenifer
> 
> 
> --- On *Sun, 3/15/09, Morton K. Brussel /<brussel at illinois.edu>/* wrote:
> 
> 
> From: Morton K. Brussel <brussel at illinois.edu> Subject: [Peace-discuss] 
> Military aid to Israel To: "Peace Discuss" <peace-discuss at anti-war.net> Date:
>  Sunday, March 15, 2009, 10:25 PM
> 
> Maddening.  --mkb
> 
> U.S. official: Obama won't cut military aid to Israel By DPA Tags: Israel 
> News <http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/tags/index.jhtml?tag=Israel+News>,
 > ...