Who’s meddling in Israel’s elections?

Israeli elections 2013

The Israeli general elections are just around the corner, due to take place next Tuesday, 22nd January. Campaigning is in high gear and party political broadcasts are dominating the media in all its forms.  All this is perfectly acceptable in a democracy such as Israel’s.

However there has been much unseemly meddling in Israel’s elections too, some of it from unexpected quarters.

The first meddler is no lesser a personage than the President of Israel himself, Shimon Peres. As President, he is not supposed to get involved in politics and is meant to stay above the fray, although this has obviously not prevented him from getting down and dirty with Israeli politics and doing what he loves doing best – bad-mouthing Israel’s government to the foreign press.  The Daily Telegraph reports on an interview given by Peres to the New York Times magazine, where he makes the outrageous and ridiculous assertion that “Israel’s government does not want to make peace with the Muslim world“:

Intervening in the country’s general election campaign, Israel’s elder statesman warned of the perils of his country isolating itself from America.

President Barack Obama was “not convinced” that Israel’s current leaders truly wanted peace, he said.

“If there is no diplomatic decision, the Palestinians will go back to terror. Knives, mines, suicide attacks,” Mr Peres said in an extensive interview with the New York Times Magazine.


Asked if Mr Obama believed that Israel shared his ambitions for peace in the Middle East, Mr Peres replied: “Of course he’s not convinced. He demanded an end to settlements and got a negative response, and they [members of Mr Netanyahu’s government] are to blame for the ongoing activity in the settlements. President Obama thinks that peace should be made with the Muslim world. We, the State of Israel, do not appear to be thinking along those lines.

“We must not lose the support of the United States. What gives Israel bargaining power in the international arena is the support of the United States.”


In his series of interviews with the New York Times Mr Peres told the Israeli journalist, Ronen Bergman, that Mr Netanyahu was not providing positive leadership.

“I think that if the people of Israel heard from the leadership that there is a chance for peace, they would take up the gauntlet and believe it,” he said. “There are two things that cannot be made without closing your eyes – love and peace.”

Peres is forgetting a third necessity for peace – a negotiating partner on the other side who is not committed to your destruction.  Peres does not mention the many acquiescences and capitulations that Israel has carried out towards the Palestinians in exchange for nothing. He does not explain – or even understand – the reason for Israelis’ apathy towards the peace process – that every appeasing act that Israel has ever taken towards the Palestinians has only ever been met with more violence, terrorism and lawfare. Peres’s delusional Oslo accords led to the worst terror war, and one with the greatest loss of civilian lives, in Israel’s history. He should apologize to the Israeli public and learn to keep his mouth shut before he covers himself in more dishonour.

Yisrael Hayom has a great and nasty take-down of Peres’ words:

I was especially touched by Peres’ wistful tone when speaking about Yasser Arafat, his Nobel Peace Prize partner. In Peres’ view, it would have been easier to advance the peace process with Arafat. Even if I am inclined to believe Peres, I am confident that no one else does, including himself.

In the short history of the State of Israel, the degree to which this president has interfered in the election process is unprecedented. Openly and discreetly, in public meetings and behind closed doors, Peres has tried assisting Left-wing and centrist parties – he was once a member of some of them – to topple the Likud government. The Israeli media, and now the foreign press, provide him ample opportunity to express views that fundamentally counter the Israeli government’s positions.

It’s easy to understand why the president is in a funk. For decades he optimistically fed Israelis a false vision of longed-for peace, simply waiting at the gate for us to let it in and change our lives. This peace cost us more lives than several of Israel’s wars. In the past there were many who bought his vision of a new Middle East. His dreams of peace won him a Nobel Peace Prize.

Now that Israeli citizens have already gotten the message and distanced themselves from foolish visions of imminent peace, the president is trying to rehabilitate its honor as well as his own.


Two more Israeli meddlers are former Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert and former Shin Bet head Yuval Diskin. Strictly speaking they are permitted to interfere to his heart’s content, but they should not be allowed to get away with smearing the present government and making ridiculous assertions intended to influence the Israeli voter, especially considering their own record while in office:

Former prime minister Ehud Olmert accused Benjamin Netanyahu on Friday of spending billions of shekels on unnecessary defense projects related to Iran. In an interview with Channel 2 News, Olmert said that the current prime minister “wasted” NIS 11 billion on “harebrained adventures that haven’t, and won’t, come to fruition.”

“We are dealing with expenditures that go above and beyond multi-year budgets,” said Olmert, adding that he believes “the projects won’t be carried out because 2012 was the decisive year.”

“They scared the world for a year and in the end didn’t do anything,” charged Olmert, referring to Netanyahu’s ongoing campaign to lead the world into action against Iran’s nuclear weapons program both by toughening sanctions and by using the threat of military strikes to derail the Islamic Republic’s uranium enrichment drive.

Olmert, who resigned the premiership in 2008 after being embroiled in multiple allegations of corruption — most of which he was later cleared of — also addressed comments made last week by former Shin Bet head Yuval Diskin. (Olmert was convicted of breach of trust, is on trial in a real estate scandal and faces the state’s appeal against hid acquittals in two major cases.) Diskin claimed Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak held sensitive meetings dealing with the Iranian threat, while smoking cigars and drinking alcohol. Olmert confirmed that he too had heard similar accounts and expressed support for Diskin for airing the issue publicly.

Netanyahu dismissed Olmert’s words as bizarre:

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Sunday blasted his predecessor, Ehud Olmert, dismissing as “bizarre and irresponsible” comments made by the former prime minister on Friday.


In an interview with Israel Radio, Netanyahu defended his government’s military spending, and asserted that it “did not waste a single shekel.”

“Investing in the security of Israel’s citizens is not a waste,” said the prime minister, insisting that what he had accomplished with defense spending “serves the State of Israel very well. We have developed both offensive and defensive capabilities, for the short and long term.”


Asked about the NIS 11 billion which Olmert claimed had been spent on the Iranian threat, Netanyahu refused to go into specifics of budgetary allocations. He noted, however, that the statement was “not at all accurate.”

When he took office in 2009, Netanyahu said, he approached the Iranian threat in two ways.

“The first… was to coordinate an international effort to impose an economic blockade on Iran by way of the sanctions,” he said. But what made the sanctions successful, according to the prime minister, was the second approach: to build “independent capabilities” for Israel to act if need be.

Netanyahu said that, after meeting with world leaders, he found that “one of the reasons, if not the primary reason, for their agreeing to impose sanctions [on Iran] was that they understood that we were very serious and determined to act in the event that there were no sanctions.”

The third major meddler in Israel’s electoral process is US President Barack Obama. Jeffrey Goldberg, who appears to be Obama’s mouthpiece towards the American Jewish community, writes in his Bloomberg article that Obama thinks that “Israelis don’t know what their own best interests are“.

When informed about the Israeli decision, [about building in E-1 -Ed.] Obama, who has a famously contentious relationship with the prime minister, didn’t even bother getting angry. He told several people that this sort of behavior on Netanyahu’s part is what he has come to expect, and he suggested that he has become inured to what he sees as self-defeating policies of his Israeli counterpart.

In the weeks after the UN vote, Obama said privately and repeatedly, “Israel doesn’t know what its own best interests are.” With each new settlement announcement, in Obama’s view, Netanyahu is moving his country down a path toward near-total isolation.

And if Israel, a small state in an inhospitable region, becomes more of a pariah — one that alienates even the affections of the U.S., its last steadfast friend — it won’t survive. Iran poses a short-term threat to Israel’s survival; Israel’s own behavior poses a long-term one.


On matters related to the Palestinians, the president seems to view the prime minister as a political coward, an essentially unchallenged leader who nevertheless is unwilling to lead or spend political capital to advance the cause of compromise.

The sneering condescension expressed by Obama towards both Netanyahu and Israelis in general is quite breath-taking, even for someone not known for his affinity to Israel.

Nile Gardiner in the Daily Telegraph correctly calls Obama’s words a slap in the face for Israel:

President Obama’s contempt for Netanyahu is already well known, as he amply displayed in a private meeting with then French president Nicolas Sarkozy at the G-20 in November 2011, where he reportedly told his French counterpart in reference to the Israeli PM: “you’re fed up with him, but I have to deal with him every day!” Obama refused to meet with Netanyahu when he visited the United States in September last year, while finding the time to appear on the David Letterman show, and has a long track record of snubbing the Israeli PM.

Obama’s latest comments, conveyed by Jeffrey Goldberg, take the US president’s hostility against Netanyahu to new heights, and are a major diplomatic faux pas ahead of next week’s Israeli election, which Netanyahu is widely expected to win. It will undoubtedly set the tone for his entire approach towards Israel, and will further strain relations between Washington and Jerusalem during his second term. They also reveal a remarkable degree of antipathy towards America’s closest friend and ally in the Middle East, and an unhealthy willingness to intervene in the internal affairs of a sovereign nation state. There are echoes of the president’s unwelcome intervention in the British debate over membership of the European Union last week, when the senior State Department official for European affairs specifically warned Britain against an EU exit.

Barack Obama’s sneering reference to Israel as “a small state” that is already “a pariah,” and one that may not even survive unless it changes its “behaviour,” smacks of staggering condescension, and will be music to the ears of every enemy of Israel on the face of the earth. This is not a message the president of the United States should be sending to a brave ally that faces a huge range of threats, from Iran’s nuclear programme to a host of terrorist organisations, including Hamas and Hezbollah. President Obama claims to be a friend of Israel, but his words and actions strongly suggest otherwise.

Well said Mr. Gardiner.

An excellent reply to these accusations of war-mongering and acting against our own best interests has been produced by Daniel Gordis in Friday’s Jerusalem Post. In “A dose of nuance – We gave peace a chance” he writes:

What’s been hardest has been watching the worldview on which I was raised crash and break like a ship washed violently against a forbidding shore. I was raised in one of those (then-) classic American Jewish suburban families. Democratic voting, opposed to the Vietnam War, passionate advocates for civil rights, my parents taught their kids that most people were reasonable and that all conflicts were solvable. When it came to the Middle East, the prescription for resolution of the conflict was clear – we would give land, and we would get peace. The only question was when.

We were not the only ones who believed that, of course. A significant portion of Israeli society believed the same thing – until the Palestinian Terror War (mistakenly called the second intifada) – that is. Those four years destroyed the Israeli political Left because they washed away any illusions Israelis might have had that the Palestinian leadership was interested in a deal. And, to be fair, why should the Palestinians be interested in a deal? Their position gets stronger with each passing year. No longer pariahs, they are now the darlings of the international community. They have seen the world shift from denying the existence of a Palestinian people to giving them observer status at the UN. If you were the leader of the Palestinian Authority, would you make a deal now? Of course not. With the terms bound to get sweeter in years to come, only a fool would sign now.

Our enemies are not fools. But they are consistent.


ISRAELIS LIVE in a world of utter cognitive dissonance. On the one hand, our region is becoming ever more dangerous and our foes ever more honest about their desire to destroy the Jewish state. And on the other hand, much of the world insists that “land for peace” simply must work; some American Jewish leaders actually urged Israel, even in the midst of the Gaza conflict, to return to the negotiating table. It would be funny were it not so sad and so dangerous.

That is why the upcoming election, sobering though it is, may actually prove important. Israelis across the spectrum are acknowledging what they used to only whisper: the old paradigm is dying.


To give up hope for peace is not to choose war. Egypt’s present and Jordan’s future indicate how little is guaranteed by a treaty; the Palestinian present shows that we can have quiet even in the face of stalemate. What Israelis now want is quiet, and a future. Nothing more, nothing less. And most importantly, no more illusions.

The demise of the peace addiction is no cause for celebration; it is merely cause for relief. There is something exhausting about living a life of pretense; with the death of illusion comes the possibility of shaping a future. After a new government is formed, a genuine leader could actually lead Israelis into a “what next” conversation. Deciding what comes next, now that we sadly know that the idea of “land for peace” is dead, will not be easy. Israel could make wise decisions or terrible mistakes.

But if, as a result of this election, we begin to have a conversation about a future that we can actually have, the Jewish state will be much better off.

Israel, though, is likely to make much better choices if it is joined in its hardearned realism by forces outside the country too. Now that Israelis are getting honest, the question is whether the international community – and then American Jews – will follow suit. On the former front, there are occasional causes for optimism. The Washington Post, for example, recently acknowledged that the international community’s rhetoric has become an obstacle rather than a help. “Mr. Netanyahu’s zoning approval is hardly the ‘almost fatal blow’ to a twostate solution that UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon described… If Security Council members are really interested in progress toward Palestinian statehood, they will press Mr. Abbas to stop using settlements as an excuse for intransigence – and cool their own overheated rhetoric.”

Amen to that. But what about American Jewish leaders? They will likely find admitting that “land for peace” is dying no less difficult than anyone else. Will they listen carefully to what the Israeli electorate, across the spectrum, is saying? I hope so. Because loving someone means helping them to fashion a future that is possible, not harboring an exhausted illusion that can only yield pain and disappointment. The same is true with loving Israel.

This article ought to be compulsory reading for all of Israel’s “well-wishers”, for all those who speak more in sadness than in anger in patronising condescension against a nation who has done more to withstand terrorism and constant war and yet keep hold of its humanity than any other nation on earth.

This entry was posted in International relations, Israel news and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to Who’s meddling in Israel’s elections?

  1. NormanF says:

    Israeli voters have the right to decide if the critics are justified. But the condescending and sneering tone from the critics won’t win them a respectful hearing. All the evidence shows the Arabs don’t want peace. And Israeli voters will reach the appropriate conclusions next week even if the rest of the world doesn’t want to hear it.

    • anneinpt says:

      The rest of the world indeed don’t want to hear it, and when they do, they’ll accuse Israel once again of acting against its own interests – as if we are stupid children or dumb natives, not responsible adults voting with bitter experience in mind.

  2. reality says:

    I know that Jews are the creators & masters of Chutzpah but Peres really gets the prize. Hasn’t he realised that perhaps the general public are not left leaning ? The country has gone more towards center right over the last few years due to the various peace/war efforts ,settlement freezes etc & are sick of it. If 4 years ago they voted Netanyahu in & again this coming week surely this proves the leftists are wrong.(I know they feel slighted & that we don’t know whats best for ourselves but thats why we have a vote -its called democracy even if we don’t choose to be leftists due to thier veiws).& as for Obama- talk about pot calling kettle black(oops!) He whined & complained that Netanyahu was meddling in USA voters affairs(with no direct proof) but here he is doing exactly that!I wish we could tell him to get lost!He hates us, loves his muslim friends although even he is too clever to show this too openly. Its time Israel took a stand against him. As for we’ll be” pariahs among the nations” what a joke as if we’ve never been! & yet we’re still here despite them (much to their chagrin!)We have a higher power looking after us-even higher than Obama although he couldn’t possibly imagine something higher than him!We should try to do without US aid & cope on our own -that’ll really be the answer to a lot of our troubles. Olmert should realise that NOBODY was happy with him .He would’ve given the entire state away to save himself from jail. The people of Israel are fed up with all these left leaning shenanigans which have only brought death & intifadas -never peace ,& will vote for whom THEY want to lead the country , Obama,Peres or Olmert et al.

    • anneinpt says:

      Hasn’t he realised that perhaps the general public are not left leaning ?

      Sure he has, and he’s furious. He thinks he knows better than us what’s good for us, even if the ‘good’ that he has in mind led to thousands of Israeli victims.

      As for we’ll be” pariahs among the nations” what a joke as if we’ve never been!

      Very good point. I didn’t think of that.

      We should try to do without US aid & cope on our own -that’ll really be the answer to a lot of our troubles.

      I remember reading that when Netanyahu (or someone else?) suggested exactly that, the Americans panicked. They WANT us under their sphere of influence precisely so that they can influence our decisions.

      He would’ve given the entire state away to save himself from jail.

      Him and Ariel Sharon both.

  3. DavidinPT says:

    If I were Prime Minister:
    My first state visit would be to Russia then to China, following an announcement that the Israeli government is interested in looking into its foreign policy alignment alternatives.
    I would invite the Russians to talks about offering them port facilities for their Med-fleet in Haifa, should their bases in Syria become unuseable.
    When the President of the USA sends his personal envoy, I would be too busy meeting a trade union delegation from, say, Latvia, to meet with him, and I would instead send the assistant-deputy-manager of Israel’s Western-Hemisphere (North) desk to sit with him.
    I would work towards getting invited to Congress again, but “be unavailable” for any meetings with Obama.
    I would publicly warn the Palestinians that amongst Israeli responses to any future intifada would be mass permanent deportations into Syria, Lebanon, Gaza and Sinai.
    I would announce a review of Israel’s continued membership in the United Nations (sic), which, if terminated, would also result in the immediate cancellation of all UN-affiliated bodies operations in Israel or on our borders (UNWRA. UNIFIL, TIPH, etc).
    I would (publicly) reduce intelligence-sharing with the USA, especiallly on forthcoming terror attacks on USA homeland.
    I would “clarify” that in the absence of a USA led successful nuclear busting programme against Iran, Israel WILL go it alone, and soon, and any WMD response from them will be met by our own WMD weaponry (“We will not be the first state in the area to introduce WMD”)
    I would make it clear that any economic pressure or sanctions against Israel by the USA would result in Israel immediately suspending its service on foreign debt.
    I would revive Israel’s fighter-jet project and arrange pre-sales to Taiwan, etc.
    Vote ME!!!

    • anneinpt says:

      I add my vote to Reality’s! I would only be a little bit wary of cosying up too much to the Russians. They have a nasty habit of trying to take over, more so than the Americans. ditto the Chinese. But in principle I like your ideas very much.

      Even if they are a bit impractical, we can dream.

  4. reality says:

    ok you have my vote -go for it can you do this in a week? if not please please talk to Netanyahu or Bennet or anyone who will listen, tell us & we’ll vote for them. Do this fast as there’s no time to be lost!

  5. Forgive me for my lousy English (I offer you to re-write my main thyme in better English and publish it over the Net).

    I really don’t understand those who call to stop US military aid to Israel. Israel is the highest US state department assistance’s receiver country. But Japan, S. Korea, Germany, Saudi Arabia, Persian gulf monarchies and others play the so-called “Israeli role”, by having US soldiers on their soil and much more amount of American money paid for that pleasure (through defense ministry budget, and not from the foreign office, as Israel gets).

    First, Most of the US money given to Israel doesn’t even leave the US but paid to military factories and associates, as decided in the cooperation agreement, that give jobs to ten of thousands of US citizens. If the US aid will stop to flow to those factories many employees will go home. I’m not sure that Israel will buy all their products from the US. Sure Israel will prefer to calculate her steps by economically standards and buy her need in the global market or producing some of those products by herself. Remember how the US pushed Israel to stop “Lavi” aircraft project, because she wanted Israel to stay dependent on US’s help.

    Second, the close and intimate security relations between both states influence the nature of how things done. Israeli high qualified and high sophisticated technology, scientific know-how, military components, gadgets, experience, inventions and developments flow to the US almost for free and benefit the US security interests and save them huge amount of money which they might intended to allocate to the same missions. Israel gives or sells to the US more than 2000 kind of military and security objects from missiles and pilots’ glasses, electronic valves to soldiers’ boots.

    Third, as long as US money given to Israel, Israel is not free to sale her military products and know-how to any country they wish, without the US pre-approval. In such process the US control most of Israel technological and military export. That’s plays to the commercial benefit of the US and hurts Israel interests.

    Forth, if the US boycotts Israel then Israel will be free to create other partnerships with various states such as France, Russia, India, and China in order to fix her Geo-political alliances. That will hurt the US stand in the Middle East; the US economy that lays much on selling products to Israel; and the Israeli contribution to US industry and technology.

    1. The US gains very warm entrance into Israel core of military, scientific and political leadership and know-how and have a vast base to manipulate the Israeli politicians into American interests (an exemplary case is the “Lavi” project).
    2. The 2.7B$ a year is paying back mainly through US military compounds and industries that give huge “blood pressure” to those factories and keeping their employees on jobs.
    3. Israel keeps close ties with the factories she buys from and with the US army / navy / air force and advices them how to improve military projects and how to adjust them to meet the battle needs. Some military Israeli products are playing major roll in Iraq and Afghan arenas and save American soldiers’ lives (UAV, Optical gadgets, communication assets, operation know-how). US soldiers are trained in Israel in military tactics which help them to operate in ME desert’s environment and terrain.
    4. Israel new inventions, adjustments, gadgets, experience, know-how, technologies and developments flow to the US almost for free and help the US industries and armies and soldiers at battle fields. The “Arrow” project is not just partially subsidized by the US, but the ownership and the future profits are theirs too. So apart from the fact that the US benefits its dollars again she also benefited from acquiring the new systems’ technological breakthrough of the “Arrow” and the tactical new operative concept of the system. The “Arrow” is only the most known example, but there are many others which didn’t get yet known to the public (Some hint mentioned: the Laser bean system, air to air and air to ground missiles and “’Iron Dome” missile-defense system).
    5. Let’s take for example the UAV drone projects. Israel was the first country that took this matter seriously in the early 70th and developed huge and fascinating UAV industries that lead the world with new developments and breakthrough concepts and technologies. The US woke up only 20 years later and Israel helped hers military industries to start their UAV’S project and created co-partner companies to investigate and produce better UAV and to study the tactics and the strategic benefits of these aerial vehicles. Now, the US and alliance forces in Afghanistan and elsewhere are using Israeli drones, or drones that were produced on those states with the help of Israeli technology. Using the UAV in Afghanistan and Yemen saved the lives of many US and allies’ soldier.
    6. More than Israel wants the military US aid, the US wants to give it to Israel. The 2.7B$ a year turns Israel to be more tied and depended on US interests and makes the US more influential over Israel, which gives her more political value and strength in the eyes of the Muslims states.
    7. Israel combatant expertise were taught in the US, Britain, Australia, France military units, and some of the combatants came to Israel to be trained at Israel military facilities. Not to mention that this expertise is saving lot of the coalition’s soldiers lives in Iraq and Afghanistan.
    8. Israel industries produce lot of technology and military excellent products which are well sold everywhere. But she can’t sell these goods to countries that the US thinks will harm her own interests, while the US sells almost everything to everyone, even to Israel’s enemies, without asking Israel’s opinion. This is the best situation that the US can wish for herself, and that is one of the reasons for the US policy to give Israel this annual aid which lets her almost control the Israeli security selling on global markets. The US even influencing Israel by stopping Israeli new military projects that may weakened the Israeli military ties and dependent on the US, such as the closure of the fighter ‘Lavi’ project in late 80th. Too militarily Independent Israel doesn’t serve the US interests, to be polite.
    9. I’m sure that I can raise more issues to explain why the special US-Israel connection benefits the US more than Israel, but I’ll let others to add, for now.
    10. I’m sure that your first reflection will be astonishing and then unbelieving which lead you to reject the truth and taking you to denial. In any case your short sighted brain brings chaos to your naïve view over Israel. But as long as you study the facts you won’t be able to escape the truth.

    • Ooooopss….. Israel is NOT (NOT) the highest US state department …….

    • anneinpt says:

      Abe, thank you for long and detailed comment (and your English is very good, don’t worry!) and welcome to my blog.

      You have really explained very well the intricate and intimate relationship between Israel and America and the idiocy and absurdity of those trying to cause a break between the two countries.

  6. Some truth on US-Israel close relations:
    The annual US aid to Israel is paid mostly to the US military industries and keep thousands of jobs for good Americans. Yet Israel, differently from other states, gives the US back the same or more amount of money value, passing to the US highly hers developed technologies and scientific inventions that improve American military and industrial abilities. Israel gives or sells on low prices about 2000 systems, breaking through knowledge, gadgets, etc., to the US. We know only few of the assets of that partnership, but the few we know the more we can imagine. Israel gives the US the items we are always talking about, such as:
    • ‘Arrow’, ‘Magic Wand’ & ‘Iron Dome’ missiles new technologies;
    • UAV’s and the UCAV technologies and co-partnership;
    • Israeli Kibutz Sasa’s “Plasan” survivability and combat-proven armor solutions for vehicles, airborne platforms and personal protection for Oshkosh armor vehicles. That project already saved the lives of hundreds if not thousands of American soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan;
    • ADM-141 TALD (Improved Tactical Air Launched Decoy)- device used to protect U.S. warplanes from enemy fire.
    • AGM-142 Have Nap “The Popeye” – a precise bomb which hits specific coordinates/
    • Python missile – A major air to air missile.
    • M120 mortar – A 120 mm Mortar developed by Soltam Systems.
    • SMAW – An Anti-tank guided missile developed by Israel Military Industries, based on the Israeli B-300.
    • Cardom – A 120mm Recoil mortar system using modern electronic navigation, self-positioning, and target acquisition.
    • Gabriel missile – A sea skimming Anti-ship missile.
    • SIMON breach grenade – A rifle grenade designed to breach through doors. A variant is currently in service with the United States army.
    • LITENING targeting pod – A precision targeting pod designed to increase combat effectiveness of aircraft.
    • International MaxxPro – An MRAP armored fighting vehicle.
    • Samson Remote Controlled Weapon Station – A Remote weapon system.
    • And that’s only the few!

    The idea of Americans protected by Israel, however, may have broader applications than vehicle armor or antimissile defense, or even weapons systems in general. It could extend to the entire way Israeli military contractors give far more bang for the buck—and all with a Defense Ministry supervisory force of fewer than 300 people. Our Pentagon, by contrast, relies on some 30,000 bureaucrats to do the same oversight—the equivalent of two full Army divisions.

    I’m sure that France, Britain, Russia and China will love to share their thoughts with the highly developed Israeli technology and scientific abilities and know-how, if the US will decide sometime in the future that Israel is too big burden upon her soul.

    • anneinpt says:

      Very true. And when Israel did try to go it alone with the Lavi fighter jet, it was the Americans who stopped her because it threatened their sales of F15s to Israel.

      Similarly when Israel wanted to sell some military technology (I can’t remember if it was missiles or planes) to China. It caused a huge diplomatic problem for Israel with China. And the US kicked up a fuss when Israel sold similar stuff to India.

      People need to remember that as far as Israel and America are concerned, the aid is actually a two-way street, as you so clearly point out.

      • You sure mean the Falcon [Israeli intelligence-gathering plane] deal, which Bush vetoed. The Falcon is an Israeli made electronic devises for intelligence gathering, observation and target marking assignments, even in difficult weather conditions. No American parts on it. Israel wanted to sell to China the first version of this system. The Americans as I said vetoed that deal.

        First, if we speak on China, China has never been infected with the anti-Semitic virus, and even a superficial survey there will reveal a distinct level of high regard for Israel and the Jewish people. The problem with China is that she still thinks she is the leader of the “third world”, being neglected to enter the “first world” , which will force her to meet democracy with pleasant will at home.

        Second, China and Israel developed some close friendship on the basis of mutual economic and agriculture entrepreneurs. Israel tried to proceed with these relations by selling China of a second degree military know-how. Israel never offered China the first line of developed weapons, as agreed with the US. Some say that Israel sold China the “Lavi” plans which are the basis for their J-10, their main combat plane today.

        • anneinpt says:

          Thanks for reminding me of the name of the plane – Falcon. I had completely forgotten it. Also thank you for the insight about Israel’s relationships with China.

Comments are closed.