Middle East, foreign relations: How Israel benefits the U.S. - latimes
Israel and the United States are putting the finishing touches on an agreement that But as always happens in relations between countries, the. The key political objectives of US aid to Egypt have been realized. on the costs and benefits of the US-Israel relationship in the context of foreign aid, see. The US-Israel relationship grew "by leaps and bounds" after , according to Barnett, owing largely to "a changing US containment and.
West Africa is also seen as a hub for the Lebanese community accused of financing Hezbollahwhose foreign funding has been a long-standing point of concern for Israel. Israeli intelligence and economic influencers have focused on the countries most prone to this Lebanese influence, such as Liberia and Cote d'Ivoire, establishing a number of investment institutions and encouraging Israeli businessmen to invest.
Increasing trade with West Africa Israeli trade with West Africa is still weak, as it has relations with only a few countries in the region. A report by the Israeli Export Institute found that Israeli exports to Africa represented only 1.
This means that Israel has yet to take significant advantage of the million-strong consumer base of the ECOWAS bloc, as well as its economic potential and varied natural resources. But Israeli diplomacy over the past few years has paved the way for further progress. However, Israel does have good relations with influential countries such as Nigeria, having formed a relationship after its independence from Britain in Israel was a generous supporter of Nigerian separatists in the Biafran War of and has a large and economically influential community there.
Tel Aviv has established important economic installations in the country, such as the huge construction firm Nigersal, and the electrical and mechanical engineering firm Etco Limited. Israel also has strong relations with Ghanacemented by then Israeli Foreign Minister Golda Meir's attendance at Ghana's independence celebrations in Critics will argue, as they usually do, that Israel is the reason the United States needs a military presence in the Middle East.
That argument is, at best, unfounded, and, at worst, malicious. Were it not for Israel, the United States would have needed to station troops in the region as a response to the Russian presence in Syria and the rise of the Islamic State in Sinai, and to guarantee the stability of Jordan. It is also important to note that the vast majority of the money Israel receives as part of the MoU — and in the near future, all of it — remains in the United States.
Israel will purchase equipment from U. Anti-missile systems that were developed by the two countries will become part of the American and European defense systems in the Persian Gulf. Likewise, the cooperation in cyber defense and cyber warfare is critical to the economic and military security of the United States. The MoU is an expression of the strength of the alliance.
In the 's, two unique foundations were created to fund joint research.
The Invaluable U.S.-Israeli Alliance – Foreign Policy
Ina relatively unknown agreement was reached that laid the groundwork for a vast array of nonstrategic relationships between Israelis and Americans.
Many of these projects have led to important scientific, medical and technological breakthroughs with wide-ranging practical applications. The creation of BSF set a precedent for the establishment of other foundations.
Since its inception, BARD has funded projects that have led to new technologies in drip irrigation, pesticides, fish farming, livestock, poultry, disease control and farm equipment. These foundations were created with little fanfare and continue to operate independent of economic or political pressures. In the last two and a half decades, they have played an important role in creating networks between American and Israeli researchers in academia, government and the private sector.
Of course, collaboration also continues outside the framework of these institutions. Another unique institution is the International Arid Lands Consortium IALCan independent nonprofit organization formed to explore the problems and solutions of arid and semiarid regions.
Forest Service and the Jewish National Fund. Shared Value Initiatives The United States signed a variety of cooperative agreement with Israel dating back to the s; however, Ronald Reagan dramatically expanded the number of areas for possible joint activities.
Just as he institutionalized military to military relations through formal agreements and mutually beneficial projects, so too did he begin to make bureaucracy to bureaucracy relations routine.
During the Reagan Administration, agreements were signed or renewed between nearly every U. Forest Service for cooperation in firefighting, conservation and land management. Inthe Department of Energy renewed its agreement with its counterpart and a new MOU was signed between the Security Exchange Commission and Israel's Securities Authority for cooperation in the enforcement of each other's security regulations.
Other local, state and federal law enforcement officials and first responders regularly visit Israel to share best practices. Though many of these MOUs are little more than pieces of paper, they symbolize an interest in cooperation that is broader and deeper than the United States has with any other nation. The Shared Value Initiatives undertaken through these agreements also help tangibly reinforce the values the countries do share in areas like protecting the environment, providing education and promoting health.
States Build Bridges to Israel Americans and Israelis have always had relationships at the state and local level, but a milestone in formalizing these contacts occurred in when the Texas-Israel Exchange was created to promote mutually beneficial projects between the Texas Department of Agriculture and Israel's Ministry of Agriculture.
The Invaluable U.S.-Israeli Alliance
Since then, at least 32 other states and the District of Columbia have signed agreements with Israel to increase cooperation in trade, tourism, research, culture and other activities of particular interest to individual states. It has now become routine for governors to lead delegations of business leaders, educators and cultural affairs officials to Israel and for state agencies and institutions to initiate joint projects.
A Wellspring of Sympathy The gradual evolution of the relationship from friendship to alliance could not have been achieved without the support of the American publicthe majority of which consistently sympathized with Israel. Americans see much of themselves in the Zionist struggle. Like the early American pioneers, the Jews who originally settled the land had a commitment to manual labor to build the nation. Like newcomers to America, immigrants to Israel have tried to make better lives for themselves and their children.
Americans' affinity for Israelis also stems from our shared Judeo-Christian heritage. Public sympathy toward Israel can be influenced by Presidential attitudes and events, as we saw during the Lebanon war when support briefly dipped to its all-time low. The public also has shown less love for Israelis than distaste for the Arabs. It was not until the late s and early s that Americans began to distinguish between Arab countries and, in a few instances, to feel more positively about Arab countries than Israel.
Even so, the rise of Islamic fundamentalism, and dramatic terrorist incidents attributed to Arabs, have perpetuated negative stereotypes that have helped insure Israelis are viewed in a relatively favorable light.
Also, unlike America's Arab allies, Israel never attacked U. One quantitative index of the relative support of Israel and the Arabs for U. Israel has annually been at or near the top of those countries voting most often with the U.
In addition, today, the Israeli lobby is indeed influential. Though its influence is limited primarily to issues where Congress has a say, in particular, economic matters, the organization also serves as a watchdog to deter anti-Israel policies from being adopted. Jews also occupy more positions of influence today than ever before.
For example, in the th Congress Jewish members comprised 10 percent of the Senate and nearly 4 percent of the House Jews comprise only 2 percent of the U. Three of the nine Supreme Court Justices are Jewish. Dozens of Jews have held cabinet and other key administration posts. Bureaucracies that historically have been hostile to Israel, and sometimes outright anti-Semiticsuch as the CIA and State Department now employ Jews at the highest levels.
The evolution of the relationship has also been influenced by the ideologies of the Presidents, or more accurately, how consistent particular policies were with their ideologies and objectives.
In those cases where a pro-Israel policy was inconsistent, even the sympathetic presidents became opponents. This was the case, for example, when Harry Truman imposed an arms embargo on Palestine.
In that case he was convinced U. Dwight Eisenhower is often considered anti-Israel because of his Arabist orientation for the first several years of his presidency and reaction to the Suez War. By the end of his term, however, his attitude changed completely and he viewed Israel as the only reliable pro-Western country in the Middle East.
What are Israel's goals in West Africa?
Johnson, for example, spoke about how the Bible stories are woven into my childhood memories as the gallant struggle of modern Jews to be free of persecution is also woven into our souls. And Carter wrote in his memoirs that he believed very deeply that the Jews who had survived the Holocaust deserved their own nation, and that they had a right to live in peace among their neighbors.
I considered this homeland for the Jews to be compatible with the teaching of the Bible, hence ordained by God. These moral and religious beliefs made my commitment to the security of Israel unshakable. Bush saw the Jewish state as just another country. Bush demonstrated that a President openly critical of Israel could affect the quality of the relationship. Bush also set the negative precedent of openly interfering in an Israeli election, making no secret of his contempt for Yitzhak Shamirand desire to see Yitzhak Rabin elected Prime Minister.
Harry Truman and Ronald Reagan felt gut-level, emotional sympathy toward Israel, which was translated into landmark decisions that established and strengthened the relationship.
No president, including these two, pursued policies that were entirely pro-Israel. Furthermore, he punished Israel by temporarily holding up arms deliveries and suspending strategic cooperation. Bill Clinton falls into a similar category, and is now considered by many people the most pro-Israel President in history. Clinton's pro-Israel reputation has been largely won by what he has not done, that is, publicly criticize Israel or take punitive measures against it.