Israeli Minister Denounces U.S. Influence Over Israeli Policy
The interesting developments continue in Israel:
“Israel does not take orders from [US President Barack] Obama,” Environmental Protection Minister Gilad Erdan (Likud) said on Monday, responding to an earlier statement by the US president in which he reaffirmed his administration’s commitment to all previous understandings between Israel and the Palestinians, including the process launched at Annapolis in 2007.
Erdan, who is also in charge of coordinating between the Knesset and the cabinet, also praised Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, who only last week said that Israel was not bound by the Annapolis talks.
I seem to recall my rabbi back in the early 1990s—the High Peace Process Era—opining that it might be better if the United States and Israel basically went their separate ways. The United States wouldn’t hand out all this aid, and Israel would be responsible for making its own decisions regarding the Palestinians. He has some fairly complicated view about how that would actually make the Israelis more inclined to compromise on things like settlements, because the issue would be seen through the eyes of Israeli interests rather than through the lens of Israel’s pseudo-interest in pushing back on whatever issues they’re getting pushed on.
I have my doubts about all that. But the fact remains that Israel doesn’t “take orders” from Washington, Israel has fought for a very close special relationship between the United States and Israel. We give them a lot of money, and a lot of close defense cooperation, and they don’t have much to offer in return. Consequently, we’re in a position to boss them around to a substantial extent. On the other hand, a lot of people in the United States seem to feel that it’s wrong, as a matter of principle, for the United States to actually use its leverage over Israeli policy. So it’s quite possible that, in practice, the Israeli government could tell Obama that they don’t care what he thinks and manage to continue to get whatever they want out of congress.
57 Responses to “Israeli Minister Denounces U.S. Influence Over Israeli Policy”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
April 6th, 2009 at 2:08 pm
Like midwestern farmers.
Stay out of my business…oh, and my check didn’t come.
April 6th, 2009 at 2:09 pm
“Israel has fought for a very close special relationship between the United States and Israel. We give them a lot of money, and a lot of close defense cooperation, and they don’t have much to offer in return.”
Not much in return? Funny, I thought the way it worked is our pols vote $$$ for Israel, and get $$$ from AIPAC in return.
April 6th, 2009 at 2:10 pm
It’s certainly the case that this relationship is more important to Israel than to the US. I wouldn’t be so cavalier that they offer nothing of strategic value in return however. I suppose you could take the position that without Israel everything would be sweetness and light in the Middle East. I think that’s incredibly naive. There’s no reason to believe that they’re the cause of Iran’s current push to become regionally powerful or even dominant, for example. On the contrary they serve as a counterweight to Iran. Our relationships with our Arab allies in the region would be less complicated (although I think they’d still be complicated) but I don’t see how any of those states would be in any better position to push back against Iran if Israel weren’t there to do it.
April 6th, 2009 at 2:14 pm
If Israel wants us out of its hair, it should stop taking our money. As Rehnquist said, you have to take the bitter with the sweet. But I guess that only applies to welfare recipients.
April 6th, 2009 at 2:15 pm
I for one hope that the new Netanyahu government will keep up this type of statement, to give Obama a good reason to tell Israel to go fuck itself.
OK, yeah, I know Obama doesn’t have that kind of extraordinary cojones, but I can dream.
April 6th, 2009 at 2:16 pm
my rabbi
Liar!
April 6th, 2009 at 2:18 pm
I suppose you could take the position that without Israel everything would be sweetness and light in the Middle East. I think that’s incredibly naive.
I suppose Larry Birnbaum could take the position that Michael Jordan is the only player ever to score points in the NBA. I think that’s incredibly naive.
Of course, at a certain point you have to wonder why Larry holds this bizarre position. One wonders whether it’s simple — although perhaps unconscious — racism.
April 6th, 2009 at 2:19 pm
and they don’t have much to offer in return
More seriously, I think this is pretty wrong.
April 6th, 2009 at 2:28 pm
Um, nevermind. I misread that. Carry on.
April 6th, 2009 at 2:28 pm
So is Matthew Yglesias ultimately hoping that Obama will be the president who will let the muslims destroy Israel ?
April 6th, 2009 at 2:31 pm
I think Matthew Yglesias is hoping to be the muslim president who destroys Israel.
April 6th, 2009 at 2:36 pm
Arrogant, free-riding little prick. He’ll take our money but not our orders. But as we have seen during the recent debates about the banks, most Americans think that when the US government gives handouts, there should be strings attached.
Why are we giving so much money to a wealthy country like Israel anyway? Do these Israeli ingrates really need it? If they need all that military hardware, why don’t they pass the hat and pay for it themselves?
April 6th, 2009 at 2:38 pm
If only we could install Mark Sanford as president of Israel, all our problems would be solved.
April 6th, 2009 at 2:40 pm
He’ll take our money but not our orders
But, Dan, do you think that’s really accurate? It seems more likely that they will take most of our orders, they just won’t cop to it.
April 6th, 2009 at 2:48 pm
Well, they should cop to it SCMT. And Israel’s senior leaders should at least tell junior twerps like Erdan to keep their mouths shut.
April 6th, 2009 at 2:53 pm
In the grand scheme of things this comment from Minister Erdan, as they say, frosts my balls:
“Israel does not take orders from Obama,”
The proper term of address is President Obama, (f*ck you very much, Minister).
I’m with Glenn (above): I for one hope that the new Netanyahu government will keep up this type of statement, to give Obama a good reason to tell Israel to go fuck itself.
I’d settle for equally dividing US financial support between the Palestinians and Israel. The first item of US support for Palestinians should be US financed construction of a deep water port in Gaza (and US protection of peaceful shipping from that port), and an international airport in the West Bank (and guarantees of free access to airlines certified by the US government as complying with peaceful-only cargoes. Israel should have no veto (or boycott) over Palestinian ability to trade with the world to provide food, shelter, medical supplies and other necessities of life. A boycott is an act of war, and impermissible for a occupying power under international law.
April 6th, 2009 at 3:12 pm
Why is the Environmental Protection Minister talking smack?
April 6th, 2009 at 3:16 pm
Re JimfromPortland
A boycott is an act of war, and impermissible for a occupying power under international law.
Really? Apparently to Mr. Jim, firing Qassems into Sderot is not an act of war. But of course, to the Jims of the world, Jews are expendable.
Re Dan Kervick
I absolutely agree with Mr. Kervick. Aid to Israel should be phased out so that the Government of Israel can tell President Osama to go fuck himself when he withholds his permission to defend themselves.
April 6th, 2009 at 3:19 pm
Larry,
Israel is a net negative strategically. The difficulties surrounding it have allowed Iran to gain clients in the Arab world. It acts as justification for Iranian military build up, which probably will never be used against Israel. It paralyzes opposition to Iran by Arab states because Iran sells it actions as anti-Israel.
Stategically, Israel offers less than nothing.
April 6th, 2009 at 3:21 pm
SomeCallMeTim, hey long time no see; here and over at Henley’s digs, ObWi, etc., I’ve been wodering how you’ve been.
April 6th, 2009 at 3:21 pm
We give them a lot of money, and a lot of close defense cooperation, and they don’t have much to offer in return.
Aside from defense cooperation on a number of weapon systems, the attached link from todays’ Washington Post indicates that the experiences of the IDF in Lebanon have set off a furious debate in the Pentagon over future US defense policy. That sounds like they are offering quite a lot.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/05/AR2009040502235.html?hpid%3Dtopnews&sub=AR
April 6th, 2009 at 3:30 pm
Yeah, Israel gets its ass handed to it in Lebanon, so the Pentagon wants to emulate them everywhere else.
Most of that article demonstrates astonishing naivety about 4th Gen War. The notion that insurgents can be countered by “sensors and robotics” is next to idiotic.
How is that working out for Skynet?
April 6th, 2009 at 3:41 pm
I almost shat myself, having attended school with a Gilad Erdan back in ‘78… about when Minister Erdan was 9.
April 6th, 2009 at 3:47 pm
Fuck Israel. I’ve always believed very strongly that we should stay out of the middle east completely and remain completely neutral. Our support for Israel is the cause of all of the problems we’re having with Iraq, Iran, and the rest of the world’s Muslims.
April 6th, 2009 at 3:47 pm
Aid to Israel should be phased out so that the Government of Israel can tell President Osama to go fuck himself when he withholds his permission to defend themselves.
Israel appears to get a lot more from the US than just economic aid. AFAICT, it’s US support that does the major work of keeping Israel’s status from collapsing to that of a pariah state (irrespective of whether that status is deserved). In the absence of US support, I suspect Israel is substantially less viable (for non-military reasons). While I believe that the US gets non-trivial benefits from this relationship, the costs seem obvious and significant. Given that, it doesn’t seem like too much to ask for a little deference and the odd blowjob when we’re lonely.
April 6th, 2009 at 3:50 pm
Maybe the US is for Israel what Fannie Mae was to the mortgage industry — a well-intentioned enabler providing too much easily-accessible leaverage that right wing Israel polititicans booked on way too many reckless wagers.
April 6th, 2009 at 3:52 pm
Your rabbi was right. We Americans cannot afford to be associated with the Israeli tactic of employing disproportionate force and collective punishment as demonstrated in Lebanon and Gaza. Let them chart their own course for awhile.
April 6th, 2009 at 3:59 pm
They don’t take the orders, just the money.
April 6th, 2009 at 4:15 pm
Re Richard Steven hack
The Israel experience in Lebanon is a textbook example for the US on what not to do.
April 6th, 2009 at 4:55 pm
I’m sorry, right-wingers, but it’s time for Israel to grow up and stand on its own. No more military aid of any kind.
They are allegedly a sovereign country, yet some in the US treat it as if it were our 51st state. Hell, the ISRAELI press is more critical of their government than our press is.
By the way, it’s not anti-Semitic to think that Israel is a poor citizen of the world. It’s time for the US to say “you’re on your own”. Frankly, if we don’t, the lunatics in charge of that government will pull us into a nuclear war.
April 6th, 2009 at 5:28 pm
I’m as critical of Israeli policies as anyone, but I believe that the reason we give Israel so much aid relates to the Camp David accords that Carter arranged between Israel and Egypt. Essentially, we’re still paying them for clearing out of Sinai back in the late 70s. We also pay Egypt lots of money to basically not be too much of a dick to Israel. So the implications of the US stopping aid to Israel are a bit more complex than people think.
April 6th, 2009 at 5:38 pm
Firstly he’s right, any country should take this attitude, even with their friends. Nations shouldn’t take orders from each other. Isn’t the whole essence of diplomacy to say things like this and when in fact you do take orders nobody should admit such.
And secondly it’s refreshing to see a little frankness. One problem with Israeli-US relations is that the talking points are pre-determined and pretty much unchanged for decades.
April 6th, 2009 at 5:52 pm
SLC:
April 6th, 2009 at 5:52 pm
Ugh, stupid HTML.
April 6th, 2009 at 6:45 pm
Re SS
I only think that you should take the idea to it’s logical conclusion, and have the US abstain when Security Council resolutions demanding long-overdue sanctions on Israel come up. Tis only fair, right? They should be free to defend themselves on their own.
I spit on the UN old brick; as the late William F. Buckley once put it, the UN is the worlds antisemitic rooting society.
April 6th, 2009 at 6:49 pm
30 “I’m sorry, right-wingers, but it’s time for Israel to grow up and stand on its own”
Right-winger ? I am sorry, my honorable friend, but on this one you are in the same boat as Pat Buchanan, James Baker or Brent Scowcroft. The anti-Bush bias was so ridiculous that some of the left began to praise those awful guys, just to oppose the more idealistic approach of the neoconservative movement. But at least the anti-Israel right had coherent realistic reasons to act so (oil, oil, oil). We wonder why the left should like dictators and/or religious extremists, instead of the sole true democracy (with Iraq) in the region.
31 “the reason we give Israel so much aid relates to the Camp David accords that Carter arranged between Israel and Egypt”
Indeed this is more complex. The so-called “peace processus” itself was initiated after the support from the arab world (except Arafat btw) the Bush 41 administration got when liberating the Koweit.
April 6th, 2009 at 7:12 pm
The left didn’t have to “praise” James Baker or Brent Scowcroft to point out that they were recently being saner than the Bush Jr. administration hawk ideologue dumbasses.
April 6th, 2009 at 7:17 pm
Well the Israelis might change their decisions if they knew they had to pay 100% of the cost themselves. Or, they might decide that another apartment building is totally worth the cost of another IDA offensive with all the associated suicide bombings and rocket attacks that such a decision would bring. Who knows. It would certainly be better for me if I didn’t have to help pay for Israeli apartment buildings and associated warfare.
April 6th, 2009 at 7:44 pm
We wonder why the left should like dictators and/or religious extremists, instead of the sole true democracy (with Iraq) in the region.
Because they have oil or substantial numbers of people, and so certain deals with certain countries serve our national interest. This isn’t that hard. Insofar as Israel does what we tell it to do when we tell it to do so, our relationship with it might also serve our national interest. But that’s the relevant justification. Foreign policy shouldn’t be run as a charity for other countries.
April 6th, 2009 at 7:44 pm
All we agreed to do was give Egypt 2/3 of whatever Israel gets, if that went to $0 we’re obligated to give Egypt 2/3 of $0.
April 6th, 2009 at 8:31 pm
Congress will agree to eliminate Social Security before it would cut a nickel of the political hush money it pays Israel. Junior level Israeli cabinet ministers dis the President of the U.S. because they can. We are their bitch, and will remain so forever.
April 6th, 2009 at 8:41 pm
I cannot understand qwe’s attempt at an analogy. As to what, exactly, is racist about pointing out that their are deadly conflicts in the Middle East that have nothing to do with Israel — Shia vs. Sunni, Persian vs. Arab, Arab vs. African Muslim — well, I can’t understand that either. That’s the nicest thing I can say about a scurrilous and reckless charge like that.
Njorl, I don’t agree with your claim. The Shia in Lebanon would still be allies / clients of Iran if Israel weren’t in the picture. Note that the ruling clique in Syria are Alawi (also a form of Shia). So it’s not at all clear that Iran wouldn’t have Arab allies in the Middle East if not for Israel.
Iran’s government is opposed to Israel on religious / ideological grounds obviously. But there is also the practical strategic fact that Israel is their chief regional impediment to regional hegemony. I suppose Turkey might be as well. But Turkey until quite recently has been facing Europe, not the Middle East, and has been trying not to get too involved there. Plus Turkey and Iran share a common cause in disempowering the Kurds.
April 6th, 2009 at 8:57 pm
moshe dayan, many years ago: “Our American friends give us money, arms and advice. We take the money, we take the arms but we decline the advice.”
April 6th, 2009 at 10:21 pm
SLC:
Two thoughts:
1. Quoting William F. Buckley on racism is a bit rich.
2. If you have such an opinion of the UN, you should have no problem with sanctions then, no?
Sanctions will, no doubt, cause the State of Israel to go out of business, as you like to say, much faster than any kind of Hamas action. And it won’t be violence that does Israel in, but rather Chapter 11.
April 6th, 2009 at 10:49 pm
Israel are the ultimate ‘freeloaders’ — sick..
I just remembered this shit:
Overstretched US cuts aid to Israel
By Damien McElroy and Tim Butcher in Jerusalem
Last Updated: 2:08AM BST 10 Aug 2007
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1559881/Overstretched-US-cuts-aid-to-Israel.html
…and they have the audacity to scream at us demanding money under their terms///
April 6th, 2009 at 10:59 pm
Erdan is right, of course. Israel doesn’t take orders from the US. It gives them.
April 7th, 2009 at 2:14 am
Juan Cole wasn’t the only one noticing Israel’s hand around our leaders neck.
David Hughes is the Daily Telegraph’s chief leader writer. He has been covering British politics for 30 years::
“Ehud Olmert snaps his fingers and George Bush comes running”
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/david_hughes/blog/2009/01/13/ehud_olmert_snaps_his_fingers_and_george_bush_comes_running
…and now Obama has Bibi’s Democrat helpers in Congress to make sure the grip not loosened.
“Bibi Allies On Hill Gearing Up To Blunt Obama Moves”
http://www.thejewishweek.com
April 7th, 2009 at 2:34 am
What kafka said….
“Some came running” is a play that never ends in Congress when it comes to Israel.
April 7th, 2009 at 3:06 am
“I have my doubts about all that.”
And what are those? Your ex-rabbi sounds like a wise dude.
April 7th, 2009 at 3:09 am
The chief of staff of the President of the United States served as a volunteer at one of his nation’s military base during the 1991 Gulf War.
April 7th, 2009 at 5:15 am
The US has colluded in making Israel the most powerful threat to world peace. As a consequence of that disastrous decision , she can now dictate American foreign policy from her position in the eastern Mediterranean. Good thinking Mr Bush!
The US Congress Office of Technology Assessment has recorded Israel as a country generally reported as having undeclared chemical warfare capabilities, and an offensive biological warfare program. Officially Israel neither confirms nor denies possessing nuclear weapons. The International Atomic Energy Agency regards Israel as a state possessing undeclared nuclear weapons.
Israel has not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Israel is also not a signatory to the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC). It is assumed that the Israel Institute for Biological Research in Ness Ziona develops vaccines and antidotes for chemical and biological warfare.
Israel has signed but not ratified the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC). There are speculations that a chemical weapons program might be located at the Israel Institute for Biological Research (IIBR) in Ness Ziona. In 1993, the U.S. Congress Office of Technology Assessment WMD proliferation assessment recorded Israel as a country generally reported as having undeclared offensive chemical warfare capabilities.
Israel is widely believed to possess an estimated 75 to 200 nuclear warheads and the recently updated Jericho III high-impact ballistic missiles capable of delivering those warheads, possibly up to 7,000 km
It is estimated that the Jericho III entered service by 2008.
It is believed to have a three-stage solid propellant and a payload of 1,000 to 1,300 kg. It is possible for the missile to be equipped with a single 750 kg nuclear warhead or two or three low yield MIRV warheads. It has an estimated launch weight of 29,000 kg and a length of 15.5 m with a width of 1.56 m. It likely is similar to an upgraded Shavit space launch vehicle. It will probably have longer first and second-stage motors. It is estimated that it will have a range of 4,800 to 7,000 km (2,982 to 4,350 miles), and probably significantly greater with a payload of 350kg (one Israeli nuclear warhead).
It is believed that the Jericho 3 is inertial guided with a radar guided warhead and silo-based with mobile vehicle and railcar capabilities.
The Jericho 3 gives Israel nuclear strike capabilities within the entire Middle East and Europe. The range of the Jericho 3 also provides an extremely high impact speed for nearby targets, enabling it to avoid any ballistic missile defenses that may develop in the immediate region.
On 17 January 2008 Israel test fired a multi-stage ballistic missile believed to be of the Jericho III type reportedly capable of carrying “Special warheads”.
April 7th, 2009 at 7:00 am
Nice info on Israel’s BM capabilities.
And people are shitting bricks because of a failed North Korean launch and a botched North Korean nuclear test.
Israel is also rumored to be engaged in “genetic warfare” research, seeking a genetic weapon to be used again “non-Semites” whoever that includes (can’t see how they’re going to use it against anybody in their vicinity without significant blowback to the citizens of the own country – unless of course they’re really targeting “goyim”…)
Once again, Israel is an illegal, rogue, terrorist state that regularly engages in terrorism, illegal assassinations in other countries and war crimes against the Palestinians and neighboring countries such as Lebanon, Syria and the Sudan, not to mention that, as a Jewish Member of the British Parliament said recently, “Israel was born of terrorism.”
April 7th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
Re Bluecanary
The Congressional Office of Technology Assessment has been out of business since 1994, when the Rethuglican takeover abolished it.
Re Richard Steven Hack
Once again, convicted armed bank robber and ex-con Mr. Hack posts another stupid comment. Apparently, his smack supply has back up to snuff.
Re Steve Sailer
Because he is missing part of a finger, Mr. Emmanuel could not join the US Military. The IDF is rather less picky.
Re Ed Marshall
Actually, it’s slightly greater then 2/3, more like 70%. However, I would be in favor of continuing the Egyptian bribe after the Israeli bribe is phased out.
April 7th, 2009 at 4:38 pm
The Congressional Office of Technology Assessment closed on September 29, 1995 and recorded Israel as a country generally reported as having undeclared chemical warfare capabilities, and an offensive biological warfare program then and that assessment is unfortunately still valid today. Israel’s nuclear, biological and chemical weapons capability is still undeclared and therefore unable to be scrutinized by the International Atomic Energy Agency.
Iran OTOH is a signatory and is subject to inspection. Where then is the threat?
April 7th, 2009 at 5:13 pm
Re Bluecanary
14 year old information is rather out of date. In addition, as the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Mr. ElBaradei has reported, Iran has not allowed inspection of all its facilities.
April 8th, 2009 at 7:06 pm
This is quite a hot info. I think I’ll share it on Digg.
April 15th, 2009 at 5:03 am
This is quite a hot information. I think I’ll share it on Delicious.