An editorial yesterday in the Jerusalem Post, commented on here at the Burg, posited in an interesting question: can Israel say 'no' to the United States?
At one level the answer is an obvious 'yes', they can say 'no'. Israel is an independent state. But then the hand-wringers start with the idea that while theoretically Israel can do so, in practice Israel is beholden to the U.S. for political support, military aid and free navigation of the eastern Mediterranean Sea and the Red Sea. The U.S. keeps the various BDS butters at bay, and keeps the Europeans from withdrawing their support and recognizing an independent Palestinian state. Without these Israel will surely shrivel and die over time, so Israel must follow the U.S. lead. If John Kerry (he of the chin, the rich wife and the aristocratic upbringing, without any of the advantages these normally convey) demands that Israel accept the American position in the ongoing 'peace' negotiations with the Palestinians, then Israel must do so. Refusal means the loss of American support with all the aforementioned consequences, after which come the boils and locusts. Today Palestinian state, tomorrow moose and squirrel, the theory goes.
As the editorial correctly points out, Israel could say no to Mr. Kerry. Israel has successfully defied past American presidents including Ronald Reagan, we are told. Several Israeli prime ministers have refused to acquiesce to American demands when doing so would have compromised Israel's core principles starting with its right to exist. Israel did not come to an end on any of these occasions.
Further, Mr. Obama will be gone in less than three years. While the Democratic party clearly has allowed its anti-Israel wing to gain precedence (Hillary Clinton would push Israel at least as hard, and Elizabeth Warren would go full-keffiyeh), there is no guarantee that the Democrats will be in charge of anything in 2017.
These facts alone would stiffen the spine of an Israeli prime minister, even a Labour one, but there's more. In a year or so Israel will be completely independent of foreign sources of natural gas, thanks to the new finds in the off-shore fields in the Med. That will translate into independence on energy sources except for heavy oil and gasoline. Energy independence will necessarily make Israel's foreign policy more independent of Washington.
But the real reason Israel is about to say 'no' to Mr. Kerry can be found by simple strategic analysis, the sort that true world statesmen do routinely (perhaps the Harvard Kennedy School could offer a remedial course to the Secretary of State). The question is simple one: what are the threats to Israel's security over the next decade, which is as far into the future as one can realistically see?
Not Egypt -- Egypt is imploding, the Muslim Brotherhood is for now contained, and the military rulers of Egypt will not go after Israel unless they need a Malvinas/Falklands incident to cover their asses. It could happen but it isn't likely. Egyptian leaders will be too busy trying to feed their people and loot what's left of the wealth in the country to go after Israel. Further, one should remember that the Egyptian military now depends almost exclusively on American military equipment and western advisors; changing that requires time and money. As long as they depend on the U.S., Egypt will not wage an offensive war.
Not Syria -- Syria is in the midst of full civil war, one that has dragged in Iran, Lebanon and Iraq. As odious as Bashir Assad is, he's too smart to provoke Israel until the war is over.
Not Saudi-controlled Arabia -- the King and princes there play a long game. They may not like the Zionist entity but they find Israel to be useful, particularly with a belligerent, Shi'a dominated Iran threatening to take over the Persian Gulf. As the Saudis have seen, it's easier to rail at the evil Joooz, and to use them for propaganda purposes, than it is to fight them.
Not Jordan -- Jordan is a poor country with a modest military and multiple threats to its existence. Syria is to the north, the Jordanian population is 60% Palestinian, and al-Qaeda is working quietly to establish a beachhead. The last thing King Abdullah wants is a war with Israel.
Not Lebanon -- see Syria.
That leaves two threats to Israel's existence: the Palestinians and Iran. The latter is providing the former with cash, weapons and support such that Hamas in Gaza is now a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. The laughable and ineffectual Palestinian Authority can't pay its own people without the support of the Europeans, the U.N. and America. Israel has a firm grip on the West Bank, and should the Palestinians try a third intifada, Israel would be ready -- it has had the experience of dealing with Palestinian insurrection in the past. Would an intifada be a serious event? Without question. Can Israel handle it without American support? Yes it can.
Would Iran really use nuclear weapons against Tel Aviv? One cannot reject the possibility completely as the ayatollahs and Revolutionary Guard are not completely sane by western standards. But they are sane by their own standards, and it's very unlikely that they would risk a nuclear retaliation -- one that Israel says would certainly come -- and the loss of major Iranian population centers. Iran also plays a long game.
Suppose this strategic analysis is correct. Suppose also one accepts that the current Israeli military out-guns any single opponent, and is at parity or better against even a combination of opponents. Suppose further that the Israel political situation is such that while the major parties will squabble over almost anything, the one thing they'll be united on is resisting any existential threat to their country.
In that situation, saying 'no' to John Kerry is not only the smartest option, it's virtually the only option.
The western press and western governments then will mewl, and both Mr. Kerry and President Obama will bluster and threaten. But they can't make good on their threats, and soon they'll be gone.
Israel knows this. Of course they'll say no.
Posted by: Steve White ||
01/20/2014 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
Posted by: Frank G ||
01/20/2014 11:59 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Putin seems to be able to get things done.
Then, there is China.
Israel has options.
Now, bammy and co. need to show off their big arms. Not heeling on command will have consequences, such as trade definitions and the, uhem, unexpected, leaking of intelligence. I sincerely hope Israel chooses and can weather topical storm Kerry and the obama appointee title surges, but knowing that Sderot has a different meaning of a reality program called duck dynasty, get y'all taken care of proper. There is no guarantee that even a pro-Israel president in 2017 will have a functioning US Economy to do anything with. Tea leaves in '14, sure, but as it seems our ship of state is has its rigging for manatee humping rather than turning Cape Horn.
#6
One should not underestimate the Obama administration's leverage.
The US executive branch could threaten to share intelligence on Israel with Iran (and Syria/Hezbollah/Hamas) and it could refuse to veto a Security Council resolution imposing legally binding sanctions on Israel.
None of these actions would require congressional approval nor would they be illegal under US law.
Both would do grievous harm to Israel.
Israel must hope that the political consequences in the US would be unacceptable for the Obama administration.
So far the administration has gotten away with a lot, so Obama&Kerry might be ready to accept this risk as well.
[Telegraph] A neuroscientist has claimed a woman's lifestyle during pregnancy is directly linked to the development of their children, influencing whether they may be gay and having an impact on their IQ
[Michael Graham blog] That's how it works in Massachusetts!
When travel agents or TV/VCR repairmen or buggy-whip makers lose their jobs due to new technology in the private sector, do they get a raise? No.
But when Massachusetts' unionized government workers get phased out by Gov. Patrick's "flyover toll" [electronic bar-coding toll roads]
technology, we have to bribe them with raises.
The state just cut a deal with the toll takers' union to pay them an additional $24 million through 2016. Simply the cost of avoiding union lawfare. What's all the fuss about.
This is why government unions are just a screw job for the taxpayers. The same toll takers who were already getting $60,000 in pay/benefits for the job of handing out slips of paper now get to hold us hostage for $24 million, even though their toll booths won't exist anymore in two years.
And check that math: $24,000,000 for 410 unionized toll takers = $58,536 PER WORKER. We're essentially giving them a year's bonus as a reward for the fact that their job can be done better/faster/cheaper by a machine. And you'll be linked to the EPA, IRS, and NSA people monitoring grid.
Members of the Patrick administration claim this is a terrific deal because it will save us $50 million a year. Here's the problem:
1-- So we should instead be saving $74 million tax dollars the first year;
2-- Holy crap! We were spending $50 million for legislators' cousins to make change?
Oh, and about that $50 million a year in "savings." That doesn't mean savings to you. State politicians are still going to spend that $50 million. And thanks to the flyover tolling you're about to get hit with, they'll have millions more of your money soon.
Because while being monitored
on your on your way to your second underground economy
job to help pay all these taxes, the state of Massachusetts will be sticking flyover tolls on every highway/roadway/walkway in the state.
As Gov. Patrick might say, "Enjoy your 'savings,' suckers!" All of this on top of state and federal fuel and licensing taxes.
#2
There is a strong conservative/libertarian argument to made in favor of toll roads. But I hate them.
To me it represents a complete failure of government to perform its most basic tasks. If they can't even keep up with making enough roads and maintaining then how the hell do they expect to get anything else right?
It also goes against my strong preference of living in a wealthy country. Poor countries have no choice but to nickel and dime you to death. In wealthy countries there simply isn't any need to bother with such things. America is becoming poorer (thank you boomers, liberals, illegals and other useful idiots) and I resent having my nose constantly rubbed in it.
#4
Better pay them the $24M otherwise we would have to spend years training the next generations of toll takers on the best way to take drivers' money and give them a receipt.
#2
This article is totally bogus. Everybody knows that in order to be a full affiliate of al-Kaeda you need to submit for 397 to the IRS and a section 9(c) disclosure to the SEC. And Sarbanes Oxley requires that al-Kaeda incorporate your financial statements in their consolidated financial statements in form 68-Q. This hasn't happened, so obviously they aren't an affiliate.
#3
A few weeks ago, someone here on the Burg recommended Kenneth Conboy & Dale Andre's book Spies & Commandos, How America Lost the Secret War in North Vietnam.
I was able to find a copy. The parallels between our early involvement in Vietnam and events in Benghazi are inescapable and startling.
#4
"In his New Yorker interview published over the weekend, President Obama stated that current Al Qaeda was jayvee and said that his analogy was often used around the White House. The analogy we use around here sometimes, and I think is accurate, is if a jayvee team puts on Lakers uniforms that doesnt make them Kobe Bryant, Obama said. He then added, I think there is a distinction between the capacity and reach of a bin Laden and a network that is actively planning major terrorist plots against the homeland versus jihadists who are engaged in various local power struggles and disputes, often sectarian.
#5
His sports references or diversions are tiring and trite. They betray his lack of seriousness and profound deficit of knowledge and caring. Too many Americans have died to invoke such analogies.
#6
OK, the current al Qaeda boys are JV. But they not only kicked our ass in Benghazi, but we didn't even see them coming. Worse yet, we were unable to respond. What does that say about us? And by 'us', I mean YOU, Mr. Commander in Chief.
[Ynet] Israel has already learned that rushing into irresponsible agreements turns into an ongoing nightmare.
The world is angry at us. Tzipi Livni and Yair Lapid say so too. We are living in a paradise of self-euphoria and refusing to notice that even our best friends are turning their backs on us. We will soon be lonely, isolated and boycotted. No one will bother visiting us either. Not even the gays at the Tel Aviv Pride Parade.
What have we done to deserve this, you ask. Many of us are actually very warm and friendly, there is high-quality human capital here, a small island of Western sanity in the heart of growing backwardness in the surroundings. Israel is a power of knowledge and technology, the fruits of which are enjoyed by the entire world's population.
Well, that's not working anymore. We are being terrified, we are being told that the world has changed, that once people just wanted Israel to be annihilated and now it's something completely different. A Third Generation hatred of Israel, with Instagram and Twitter. It's not a game anymore. If we're not careful, we'll eventually sit alone in the dark while the last African infiltrators leave voluntarily after having enough too.
It's possible that we will no longer get past the Eurovision semi-final, and that the television will constantly broadcast reruns of (1980s sitcom) "Krovim Krovim" because the writers of "Eretz Nehederet" will flee to Berlin. Clearly, we must not come to terms with such a horrible situation.
So what are we waiting for? Perhaps we should simply agree to a return to the 1967 borders without any delay, give up on the security arrangements in the Jordan Valley and grant citizenship to tens of thousands of Paleostinians? True, missiles will fly on Ben-Gurion Airport and on the cities of the Tel Aviv Metropolitan Area, but why be petty? The world will no longer grumble. After all, the Jewish state was founded to give the Europeans some peace and quiet from the Jews after hundreds of years of ongoing suffering. There's a name for it -- it's called "being a light unto the nations."
We will already be hiding under the kitchen table when the Color Red sirens break through, and on Saturdays we'll lodge in cafés made from reinforced concrete to spare ourselves the need to run to the shelter. We'll cling to newspapers in German and French praising Israel, because the local newspaper wasn't distributed again. The print workers are on strike in protest of the days they lost while watching the children who didn't study because another missile landed next to a school in Herzliya. Luckily, it ended in a miracle once again.
In the nearby industrial zone, high-tech workers have already been fired a long time ago. With all their appreciation of the Jewish mind, foreign companies have packed up. It's too dangerous to do business here. But don't worry. As part of the new and restrained policy, the IDF no longer responds towards the sources of fire in the West Bank. Why ignite a "round of violence" which will lead to another anti-Israel wave of protests?
Only in southern Tel Aviv, all remains the same. The Africans who left at their own initiative due to lack of livelihood (the tourists preferred Cyprus' safe hotels) have been replaced by new guests: A unstoppable flow of Paleostinians fleeing for lives from the horror of the Hamas, always the voice of sweet reason, government, which has recently gained control of Jenin, Ramallah and Nablus. Thousands more arrive every day. Persecuted women, homosexuals and just seculars. Clearly, they cannot be returned. After all, Israel respects the Refugee Convention.
Seasonal outbursts of anti-Semitic rage
So what is the conclusion? That we must continue pursuing political agreements with our neighbors in any way, as long as they guarantee real security and peace. Losing our senses and getting hysterical because of seasonal outbursts of good old anti-Semitic rage cannot dictate another round of political experiments on human beings.
On the other hand, the Israeli government must definitely prepare for a possible temporary setback to the standard of living, and the price that the Jordan Valley's farmers are paying in the meantime will have to be paid by everyone. The other option is simply much worse.
We have already learned that hastily signing irresponsible agreements turns into a chronicle of an ongoing nightmare with no way out, which has serious economic consequences. The first to be harmed as usual will be the poor. So when the world's boycott threats increase, it's advisable to engage in breathing exercises. If the anxiety becomes annoying, one can always visit the family physician.
[PJ Media] Bottom line up front:
We forget that the obligations of the working to care for the 70-80 million who genuinely cannot work become more difficult, when the 90 million who can work for all sorts of reasons won't. Note the theme of this essay: the more in humane fashion we provide unemployment insurance, food stamps, subsidized housing, legal advice, health care and disability insurance, the more the recipients find it all inadequate, inherent proof of unfairness and inequality, and always not enough.
#1
"Every three working Americans provide sustenance for two who are not ill, enfeebled, or too young." This is a distortion. A substantial percentage of federal expenditures is now made up of borrowed money. This money is NOT being provided by working Americans.
#2
In the final analysis, the trouble we face is the vast growth of the size of the public sector vs the private. The percentage of nonmilitary public workers/grant recipients/subsidy recipients/"private" rent-seekers in the workforce was 5% in 1960 and is 20% now - and the average government worker now makes about 20% more than the average private worker. Add to that longer stays on unemployment, a larger entrenched welfare sector as a result of Gramscian/Alinskyite tactics by the left, and a hyperregulatory environment which harms business, and the route to our current troubles is crystal clear. . . .
as is the route out. The only way America is saved in for millions of people whose income stream is derived from the coerced government sector to be summarily dismissed from their position and be forced to survive in the dreaded private, in all likelihood at a greatly diminished material standard of living. In short, when the wealthy counties around Washington D.C. are reduced to impoverished ghost towns and the money channeled there currently is back out among the people, America will be OK and justice will have been served.
Those who must make the transition to a private sector life with its lesser pay and the constant anxiety that most of them lack life skills to handle will resist this with all means available to them. That is the sad and difficult part. There is no way back to this country being great, at this point, without civil unrest. The truth is that the personality types that make up the bulk of the public work force will do great evil to maintain their anxiety-free income status. Be prepared.
Posted by: no mo uro ||
01/20/2014 8:46 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Anguper Hupomosing9418:
You raise a key point. These days when I talk about government expenditures I never say "we spent." I say "we borrowed." Much more accurate, and has a greater impact. Most people still think of the US as a wealthy country, so who cares if we are a little profligate now and then. Need to hammer home the fact that we are broke and all this lunacy is just making us broker faster.
#4
Iblis - exactly.
"the wealthy counties around Washington D.C. are reduced to impoverished ghost towns " only AFTER the descent of the rest of the country into abject poverty and/or barbarism, except for outliers that produce something easily exported, perhaps ND & TX would be among those relatively better off.
Also, remember about 70% of the economy is supported by consumer expenditures. Should these expenditures decline, the economy will follow. Laying off half of government employees would have a drastically bad effect on expenditures, the economy, and the unemployment rate.
Besides bad governance, outsourcing of America's industrial base, and looney-toons political theories, I also blame the extreme spike in energy costs. For about 200 years economic growth has depended on cheap=abundant fuel sources, which aren't available at the moment. The level of current domestic petroleum exploitation now is only possible due to these high prices, which in turn are strangling other possibilities.
#5
Laying off half of government employees would have a drastically bad effect on expenditures, the economy, and the unemployment rate.
I get that, AH. Bad, but better than not doing so, long term. It has to happen eventually - nothing else will fix this country. Literally nothing else. Better sooner than later. The longer we wait the worse the eventual fix will become. There will be social unrest, as the publics will do anything including watch their private sector neighbors have their property and wealth confiscated by the government and their persons be shipped off to concentration camps with great approval, so long as their precious magic checks and anxiety-free state of income stream is upheld. You can take that to the bank. The longer we wait to trim off 50-75% of the public work force, the less likely we will be to do it at all. I don't think we have more than 5 or so years, maybe less.
Posted by: no mo uro ||
01/20/2014 15:03 Comments ||
Top||
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
