Posts tagged ‘war’

August 27, 2019

The Sandal that Slapped the Tank

by mkleit

In December 2018, the fighting Yemeni parties have conducted peace negotiations to pave the way to an end of the brutal war that has torn the country apart, especially with the military intervention of a Saudi-led coalition in favor of one of the parties. The negotiations did some change on the ground, yet in the art of war, the side that imposes its conditions must be the one that has the upper hand, and so far, that’s not the zone the Coalition is in.

The Yemeni military forces have targeted on the 17th of August ARAMCO’s Shaibah oil field and refineries, near the Saudi – Emirati borders, with 10 military drones, which makes it the second time the Yemenis target the strategic depth of the Saudis in the war that has started mid-March 2015.

Yemeni military spokesman, Yehya al Saree’, who goes by the command of the Yemeni government in Sanaa, said that on the morning of the 17th of August, the Yemeni aerial forces have launched its largest attack on Saudi Arabia since the start of the Saudi-led Coalition war on Yemen by targeting Shaibah oil field and refineries with 10 military drones. He promised “bigger and wider military operations on their (Saudis) vital facilities… the coming operations will be more hurtful for the enemy.”


Yemeni military spokesman, Yehya al Saree, announcing major attack on Saudi Arabia’s oil refinery in Shaibah


This peculiar development isn’t the first of its kind, if we’re speaking of an attack on Saudi Arabia’s vital oil facilities, where the Yemenis have targeted main oil pumps in central Saudi Arabia last May. It has caused some surges in oil prices as well as a change in the tone of Saudi officials and their allies inside Yemen – mainly in southern regions – towards the nature of the war they’re fighting against a Yemeni government located in Sanaa.

The Emirates, the Saudi’s most prominent regional allies in this war, has committed to withdraw its forces from Yemen after a series of attacks on its interests such as oil tankers in Dubai port, military drone operations on Abu Dhabi airport, and its military presence in Aden, south of Yemen. In addition to the international pressure from some governments and rights groups because of alleged war crimes committed against civilians in southern areas, such AP’s report on secret prisons where rape and torture is being practiced on opposers to the Emirati presence in the capitol of the Yemeni south, Aden, supervised by Emirati generals.

Report of Yemeni Army air force targeting Abu Dhabi Airport


The Emirati decision has indirectly led to sporadic clashes in Aden between Emirati-supported Southern Transition Council and the pro-Yemeni President Abed Rabbu Mansour Hadi forces, supported by the Saudis. This tension between both sides has shaken the trust among the members of the Coalition, especially with the different goals each party has from the war. For the Saudis, it’s about political control over the Yemenis, and the Emiratis are in it for the ports, especially Aden, Socotra, and Houdeidah, which would act as a vital replacement for the strategic Dubai port considering recent developments in the Persian Gulf and the potential big rivalry that the Chinese-funder Pakistani Gwadar port would create. As for the Hadi government, it’s acting basically as the Saudi’s political puppet to enforce the latter’s control over the country that has always been directly related to the national security of kingdom; while the Transition Council is looking for independence and separation from the Northern part of Yemen, taking he country back to a time before the unification in 1990.

This turbulence, alongside that in the Northern front, would mostly lead the Saudis to one of two options:

  • Conduct direct peace talks with the Sanaa government, especially the Houthis, alongside the revival of the agreements signed in Decemeber’s talks in Stockholm. This would pave the road to an end to the entire war and the sufferings of the millions of Yemenis whom are either displaced, suffering from famine, diseases, malnutrition, and injuries.

Even though the warring parties have signed several agreements that would be a starter in lasting peace process, yet, due to the direct and indirect intervention of many global players in the war, the agreements weren’t fully applied on ground, with the exception of the Houdeidah agreement where the clashes were halted and UN peace-keepers supervised the peace treaty there, in which lies the only port that’s an access for humanitarian aid to more than half of the country’s population.

It’s worth noting that there has been huge international pressure on Saudi Arabia and the UAE to stop the war from governments and International NGOs, and recently there has been a notable statement on the 20th of July by the Saudi Ambassador to the UN, Abdullah al-Muallimi, where he said that “we do not want war with Iran in Yemen or elsewhere… it is high time that the war in Yemen should end and the Houthis should accept UN resolution 2216 by ending their illegitimate occupation of power in Yemen.” This statement could serve as a beacon of light to end this catastrophic war.


Heads of both Yemeni delegations, Khaled al-Yamani (left) and Mohamad Abdul-Salam (right), shaking hands, with the presence of UN secretary general Antonion Guterres (center) at the closing of the Yemen peace talks in Stockholm (December 2018)


  • The second option would be getting the upper hand in the war over the Sanaa forces and the Houthis, yet it’s easier said than done considering the recent balance-tipping developments, whether it be in Dale’ governorate in the south, just north of Aden, the capitol of the Saudis’ Yemeni allies; as well as, and most notably, the losses the Kingdom is suffering from at the border fronts, where the Saudis have lost several towns and around three cities, clashes going on near other cities, air fields like Abha and Khamis Mousheyt are being constantly hit by military drones and ballistic missiles, and border outposts are being taken over by a few men wearing nothing but slippers and a traditional Yemeni outfit, unlike the Saudi-led coalition which is fully equipped with body armor, night vision scopes, state of the art machine guns, and protected by formidable air and ground forces.

History has taught us that one the hardest battles that any army would fight is against a group that has no fear of death nor does it have anything to lose. The Yemenis have fought 6 wars in the past 30 years, unlike the Saudis, who have entered their first actual war.

In addition to that, the problem that lies in this expectation is that several of the key allies of the Saudis are taking a step back from supporting them, such as the US, France, and UK, after reports on war crimes and human rights abuses by Saudi-led coalition forces. Yet that doesn’t mean that these three elite nations aren’t getting paid in billions in return for weapons for the Saudis and Emiratis. Human rights aside, money still has the higher ground in the case of Yemen.

Nevertheless, the Houthis and their allies in Sanaa are still producing and improving their military arsenal to repel the Coalition’s attacks in the north, which has been a surprise to the Saudis and a heavy punch that they’re trying to cope with.



Sanaa-supported Yemen military generals standing in front of newly developed missiles’ replicas


In conclusion, the most reliable option here is a total cease-fire in all of Yemen, though it’s hard to practically impose on the warring sides due to the lack of trust between them, yet it will open a door for serious negotiations to put an end to the war, or, to say the least, apply the agreements that have been signed between them in Stockholm last December.

July 31, 2015

Ottoman Hustler

by mkleit
Turkish president Recip-Tayyip Erdogan

Turkish president Recip-Tayyip Erdogan

Turkish president Recip-Tayyip Erdogan has understood the economic and geopolitical importance of the Iranian nuclear deal. Iran will have now more power in the Middle East to support its affiliates, especially Syria, which would diminish Erdogan’s hopes in toppling Bashar al-Assad’s regime. This would explain the policy-change Erdogan took towards ISIL, by supporting the US-led coalition against the terrorist group, and in return, US would support Turkey in toppling the Syrian regime and support his plan to create a buffer zone in Northern Syria.

Map of Middle East with Kurdistan

Map of Middle East with Kurdistan

The Turkish government has done its best to practice madness in politics and military in the past few weeks, and sometimes, schizophrenia. First, it has a dream to topple neighboring Syria’s regime, thus it supported armed opposition divisions, as well as radical brigades like Ahrar al-Sham and others. Then, it logistically aided ISIL, whom are anti-regime and anti-opposition and are looking for build their own state. And finally, bombing sites for Kurdish brigades, whom have their own dream of an independent Kurdistan. A dream that Turkey has always fought to stop, politically and militarily.

It’s not a surprise why the Turkish government would raid several PKK sites in Syria and Iraq, but it’s strange that this would happen after a terrorist attacks targeting a pro-Kurdish rally in Suruc, southern Turkey, on July 23rd, killing 32 persons and wounding 100 others. The Turkish government later on held ISIL responsibility of the attack. But wait a minute! Turkish government accuses ISIL yet it attacks Kurdish forces in Syria and Iraq? Yes.

Erdogan’s has succeeded in making use of the terrorist attack by launching air-strikes on the Kurds and ISIL at the same, with the Kurds suffering the most of it. In the end, Turkey wouldn’t go too far in bombing ISIL, the group that Turkey itself trained and opened routes in and out of Syria and Iraq, as well as opening a market for ISIL-connected oil smugglers coming from oil-rich areas of Deir al-Zour and Raqqa in Eastern and Northern Syria.

Kurdish fighters heading for Kobane in Northern Syria to fight ISIL

Kurdish fighters heading for Kobane in Northern Syria to fight ISIL

He also used the “humanitarian crisis” to support his claims during a press conference at one of Turkey’s airports before heading to China on the 28th of July, when saying that creating a buffer zone in Northern Syria “would help a million and 700 thousand refugees go back” and then adding “no peace process with those who endanger Turkish unity”, meaning the creation of an independent Kurdistan which would take part of Turkish lands. But the Turkish government, headed by Erdogan’s right-hand man, Ahmet Davutoğlu, is resuming talks with Turkish political parties, including the Kurds, to create the new government, which just adds to dichotomy.

But there’s a reason for this new rhetoric, since war a sign to escape the loss in the recent parliamentary elections and the upcoming government, as well as winning people’s support, by manufacturing fear and insecurity. Thus the war on the Kurds would make the latter think twice before forming Kurdistan, as well as joining Kurdish areas in northern Syria after it was dismantled by ISIL militants.

Erdogan making the ISIS beast a friendly pet

Erdogan making the ISIS beast a friendly pet

Although over six ISIL-related attacks occurred in Turkey and threats of more to come, as German intelligence warned Turkish governments of attacks targeting metro stations and malls in Istanbul; Turkey has not placed ISIL on its terrorist list yet.

Nonetheless, ISIL was able to succeed in one thing – if it was ever intentional; it loosened the Kurdish forces’ pressure on northern Syria by shifting the latter’s fights gradually towards the Syrian – Iraqi – Turkish joint borders, as well as letting Turkey focus on bombing Kurdish military sites in Iraq and Syria – as if Turkey never wanted that to happen.

While the Kurds have also made use of the ISIL attacks by forming their own local security forces in Kurdish cities in Southern and Eastern Turkey. Soon enough, roadblocks, identity checks, questioning of passengers, and prevention of state security from entering those areas will soon be evident in the aforementioned cities.

Through all this, the “war on terror” rhetoric that Erdogan has been waving recently, seems to be another PR campaign for his political party, in addition to a pretext to start a war on the Kurds, and possibly the Syrian army. But his newly-made war may turn into a war of three fronts: ISIL, Kurds, and Syrian army, which Erdogan wouldn’t be sure he could handle, knowing that the first two are inside Turkey already.

Published also on: Teleghraph

April 27, 2015

Former U.N. Envoy Says Yemen Political Deal was Close Before Saudi Airstrikes Began

by mkleit

Joe Lauria at and Margaret Coker


A Houthi rebel in San’a, Yemen on Sunday walks past a building damaged by the Saudi-led air campaign against the Iranian-backed force. PHOTO: KHALED ABDULLAH/REUTERS

UNITED NATIONS—Yemen’s warring political factions were on the verge of a power-sharing deal when Saudi-led airstrikes began a month ago, derailing the negotiations, the United Nations envoy who mediated the talks said.

Jamal Benomar, who spearheaded the negotiations until he resigned last week, told The Wall Street Journal the Saudi bombing campaign against Iran-linked Houthi rebels has hardened positions on a key point—the composition of an executive body to lead Yemen’s stalled transition. This will complicate new attempts to reach a solution, he said.

“When this campaign started, one thing that was significant but went unnoticed is that the Yemenis were close to a deal that would institute power-sharing with all sides, including the Houthis,” said Mr. Benomar, a Moroccan diplomat.

Mr. Benomar is scheduled to address the U.N. Security Council behind closed doors on Monday and report on the suspended political talks.

Most Yemeni political factions agree talks were progressing in the run-up to the Saudi air campaign, but their views vary on Mr. Benomar’s assertion that a deal was close.

This round of U.N.-brokered talks—which began in January and included 12 political and tribal factions—represented a crucial part of a mission to install a unified government in Yemen, the poorest Arab country and home to al Qaeda’s most dangerous offshoot.

The Houthi rebels, who have overrun significant parts of the country in the past eight months, had agreed to remove their militias from the cities they were occupying under the deal that had been taking shape. The U.N. had worked out details of a new government force to replace them, Mr. Benomar said.

In exchange, Western-backed President Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi, who has since fled the country, would have been part of an executive body that would run the country temporarily, Mr. Benomar said.

The Houthis had agreed to that reduced role for Mr. Hadi until the Saudi military intervention began on March 26. At that point, the Houthis hardened their position on this key point and opposed any role for Mr. Hadi in government, Mr. Benomar said.

Saudi-backed factions have also hardened their positions, saying the Houthis shouldn’t be granted political power.

Several Yemeni political factions, which were also interested in power-sharing, said the military tensions in the capital led to feelings of unease during negotiations. In their takeover of the capital, the Houthis kidnapped members of rival political parties.

“We did not like the Houthi plan on the table, but we were willing to sign it since it reflected reality. It was either that or no deal,” said Mohammed Abulahoum, president of Yemen’s Justice and Building Party.

The air campaign transformed Yemen into a battlefield for a broader contest over regional power between Shiite Iran and Sunni countries led by Saudi Arabia.

The Saudis want to restore Mr. Hadi to the presidency and also support a separate armed political faction named Islah, which is anti-Houthi. Iran supports the Houthis, who abide by a Shiite offshoot of Islam. Many Yemenis accuse both countries of meddling in their affairs.

The Houthis took over the capital San’a and the government and then advanced on the south.As they approached the port city of Aden, where Mr. Hadi had taken refuge, he fled the country and ended up in Saudi Arabia.

Yemen’s troubles mark an abrupt turnabout from what the international community had once hailed as a success story.

The 2011 Arab Spring protests triggered political change in Yemen, a largely peaceful transition from dictatorship to democracy. Groups that felt oppressed or excluded for decades under the former regime, such as the Houthis, were supposed to take part in the new government.

But that transition stalled in 2014. In the two months leading up to the Saudi air campaign, the Houthis and other parties insisted on a reduced role for Mr. Hadi, blaming him for the slow pace of reform.

Mr. Hadi, his Saudi allies and other political factions opposed the terms for the presidency being hammered out by Mr. Benomar.

“A very detailed agreement was being worked out, but there was one important issue on which there was no agreement, and that was what to do with the presidency,” Mr. Benomar said. “We were under no illusion that implementation of this would be easy.”

Two other Arab states—Qatar and Morocco—were willing to host new rounds of Yemen peace talks. But after both countries joined the Saudi-led military coalition, the Houthis rejected those venues, according to Mr. Benomar.

President Hadi has suggested that talks resume in the Saudi capital of Riyadh under Saudi auspices. But that was a non-starter for the Houthis.

A senior diplomat familiar with the negotiations said the Saudis also intervened to prevent a power-sharing deal that would include the Houthis and that would give 30 % of the cabinet and parliament to women.

Saudi Arabia declared last week that it was shifting to a new phase in the Yemen campaign more focused on seeking a political solution. But it left open the option of continued military action, and has kept up airstrikes at a robust pace since the declaration.

Mr. Benomar said he would tell the Security Council on Monday that only U.N.-led talks in a neutral location can have any chance of success.

On Saturday, Ismail Ould Cheikh Ahmed of Mauritania was named as the new U.N. envoy for Yemen.

On Sunday, Yemeni officials reported several apparent strikes by the Saudi coalition against Houthi targets amid deadly clashes between Houthi militants and forces aligned with Mr. Hadi.

Strikes hit the capital San’a as well as targets in energy-rich Marib province, officials said. Several southern provinces also saw strikes, including one that hit a convoy of Houthi fighters heading to the southern port city of Aden.

Tags: , , , , , ,
August 26, 2013

American Attack on Syria Announced by Israel

by mkleit
Super-Dvora 3“On the Way to the Attack”
Yediot Ahronot, August 26, 2013

The banner above was the main headline of Yediot Ahronot—the largest paid Hebrew newspaper—on August 26, 2013. The text reads “On the Way to the Attack” and shows images of USA’s President Obama and Syria’s President Assad.

The article it illustrated wasn’t about the ongoing violence in Syria, but one describing the details of an American-British attack on Syria.

Wagging the Dog*

On April 28, 2013, there was a 4-hour long meeting of the Israeli Cabinet,** which according to official sources was the first one of the new Netanyahu’s government to deal with the War in Syria. The decisions taken were not published; however, a significant part of the IDF Intelligence Directorate (AMAN) assessment was published, in an attempt to manipulate public opinion.

Winds of WarWinds of War
Fahrenheit 451

On April 29, much of Aman’s proposed plan for an American War on Syria were published by Haaretz, an Israeli newspaper closely related to the Shin Beth. The newspaper cited Brigadier General Ytai Brun, Head of Aman-Research, the most strategic part of this organization.

Understandably, he couldn’t speak for the actions of an army belonging to a different country. Yet, even the details published are significant since they are directly related to the survival of 75,000 Americans and millions of people in the Middle East.

The main problem faced by Israel, is that the red-line endlessly cited by Western media, namely the use of chemical weapons, would not be crossed by the Syrian government. Thus, Aman has redefined the issue as “two entwined red-lines.” It claims that beyond the use of chemical weapons, there is a second line, the Syrian “lose of control of its chemical weapons depots and production sites.” AMAN proposed a massive American ground attack on Syria.

On April 28, Former Mossad Director Meir Dagan (he recently survived a liver transplant in Belarus, no other country agreed to treat him) said during the Jerusalem Post Annual Conference in New York that Bashar al-Assad didn’t sanction the use of chemical weapons. Dagan may have committed many war crimes along the years, but he is not a fool. He understands that the claim that Assad used chemical weapons “doesn’t hold water” (Hebrew idiom for a false argument, like a bag full of holes). Yet, the IDF wants an American Holy-Democracy Attack on Syria.

One decade after the Mother of All Battles, Israel is again attempting to wag the dog.*

The Grandmother of All Battles

Obama Options on Syria 

Obama Options on Syria according to Israel
Damascus is the large city inland, Beirut the largest one by the sea


Unaware of its inconsistency, Yediot Ahronot claimed on the same article that Bashar al-Assad is winning (this is true, see Syrian-Kurds Exodus = Assad’s Victory?) and a few lines later that he “had used chemical weapons out of despair.” Any trick is kosher in the attempt to wag the dog into the Grandmother of All Battles.

After thinking that its propaganda had convinced the readers, the newspaper continued by portraying President Obama’s options. It used the graphic reproduced above. Let’s review what Israel recommends Obama:

1. Air strike on the units that attacked with chemical weapons. Disadvantage: Time is needed to collect intelligence.

2. Air strike on Syrian air force and ballistic missiles units. Disadvantage: Sinking in the Syrian mud.

3. Enforcement of a non-fly area in Syria. Disadvantage: It will not neutralize Syrian artillery (many times stronger than the Israeli).

4. Taking control of chemical weapons depots. Disadvantage: It demands a ground attack and the Americans oppose.

Then the Israeli article, which looks written by the military intelligence, goes on describing the desired attack. Also in this case, it published a very graphical depiction of the event. Here it is:

American-British Attack Desired by Israel 

American-British Attack Desired by Israel


It marks the main chemical warehouses in Syria, and the American-British forces Israel wants to use in order to destroy them. Cyprus (the British Colonial Empire still owns two air-force bases on the island) and Jordan would provide the military bases needed for air-strikes to be conducted by American F-16 and British Tornado fighters. Tomahawk missiles would be launched by American and British war ships while British Trafalgar class nuclear submarines will fill an undisclosed task.

Most veterans will recognize this as a schematic Order of Battle.

Bashar al-Assad Reacts

These are strange times. An Order of Battle is made public by one side of the conflict before the battle while the other side reacts publicly on the same day. How would Sun Tzu have reacted on this ridicule?

Russian Izvestia published an impressive interview with Bashar al-Assad. Let me just quote a few remarkable sentences:

“From the beginning of the crisis, the USA, the UK, and France have tried to get militarily involved. They tried to change the positions of China and Russia in the UN Security Council, but they failed. They failed to convince the world that this is an intelligent step. They can open a war, but they know neither how long will it be nor to which areas will it expand. They understand that they have no control on that. What is going on in Syria is not a popular revolution, but terror. Western leaders cannot tell their people: ‘We enter Syria to support terror.'”

“Failure awaits America as it has happened in all its wars from Vietnam onwards.” He is mistaken. The USA utterly defeated Grenada.

“Why Israel opens fire against our forces every time we defeat the terrorists next to the border?”

The claims on the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian Government were defined by Assad as “an insult to the intelligence. It is nonsense. First, they put you on trial and only after they collect evidence…. On Wednesday, we were blamed, and only two days later the USA announced it would start to collect evidence.” This is not the first time that the American Government displays a misunderstanding of the term “evidence” (Iran Shows Captured Drone; USA Claims “No Evidence”).

Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs Sergey Lavrov has also publicly denied the existence of proofs that Syria had used chemical weapons. The Western mercenaries are the most likely users.

Certain things could not be said openly by Bashar al-Assad; luckily, this diplomatic limitation has been solved eons ago. Halef al-Maftah, a senior member of Assad’s party who until recently was the assistant of the ministry responsible for PR, gave on the same day an interview to American Radio Sawa in Arabic. He explained the mysterious hints in the Assad interview:

“Damascus considers that Israel is behind the violence and thus it will be under fire. We have strategic weapons, and we can react. Basically, the strategic weapons are aimed at Israel. If the USA or Israel will commit the error of attacking us using the chemical issue as justification, the entire area will experience unending fire.”



* “Wag the Dog” is a 1997 film starring Robert De Niro and Dustin Hoffman, which describes a situation in which the “tail wags the dog.” An unnamed President of the United States is caught in flagrante with a young girl scout less than two weeks before the elections and a hired political gun (De Niro) is brought in to take the public attention away from the scandal. He decides to construct a fake war with Albania, hoping the media will concentrate on this instead.
He contacts a Hollywood producer (Hoffman), who helps construct a theme song, build up interest and fake some footage of an orphan in Albania. In the end, with the President re-elected, the producer is about to call the media to “set them straight,” when the President’s aide has him killed to save his political boss.
The movie illustrated certain interpretations of events within the US. However, for those who were in Israel prior to the Second Gulf War, it reminds a different situation. The hysteria in the Israeli newspapers regarding Iraqi weapons of mass destruction began much before the war or similar publications in the American media. Those weapons turned out to be Weapons of Mass Distraction used by Israel and others. Nothing was found in Iraq.
Wag the Dog | Staging a WarWag the Dog | Staging a War
Wag the Dog

Yet, after the Israeli public was convinced that the weapons existed, the second stage of the campaign began. Analysts working for the main Israeli newspapers claimed Israel should adopt the same tactic used by Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir during the Mother of All Battles, namely the First Gulf War. It should let the US destroy the perceived enemy.
The reality was that Israel could not attack. In sharp contrast to what most media publishes, Israel is unable to conduct an ongoing military operation against Iraq. Simply, after the first air-strike, all the forces surrounding Israel would join efforts in averting the strikes. Israel has only one advantage; the possibility of surprising Iran with an air strike. Even that is questionable; only missiles can nowadays reach faraway targets fast enough to keep the surprise factor. After the initial strike, the game changes dramatically.
Following these publications, pressure was put on the Jewish community and organizations in the US to help protect Israel against Iraq. Subsequently, the US attacked Iraq in 2003, without even declaring war.
The tail had wagged the dog.

** A long time ago, Israeli Prime Ministers discovered that their governments are dysfunctional. They are large and plagued with coalitional interests. The temptations to publish secret deliberations by ministers who know that they cannot be fired are significant. Thus, they created the “Cabinet” a small and informal body of ministers who meet regularly to take decisions delicate issues. Ministers wishing to keep their place in this exclusive body are forced to remain silent.

+ See Israel Intelligence Directorate Sends America to War

December 5, 2012

A synopsis of The Israel Lobby: The Great Benefactor

by mkleit

shared as it is from: Exposing the Truth

“Tell Congress: Spend our money at home, not on the israeli military” stop$ Los Angeles campaign


This chapter serves to provide substantiation of the authors’ assertions that not only does Isra

el receive more foreign and military aid from the US than any other country in the world, yet that the amount of financial support, along with the conditions and concessions that are packaged up with our monetary gifts, make for quite an inordinate presentation of support in relation to other countries, most particularly in consideration of other countries’ proportional needs for our support.

While the US was supportive of the UN creation of the state of Israel, we also realized that providing overt financial aid of the state’s placement upon Arab lands would be treading on the thin ice created by the murky waters of the Cold War, as Russia and America both realized the importance of cultivating allies in the area.

Accordingly, US economic aid was initially reluctant, and surprisingly enough, John Foster Dulles ¹, of all people, then Secretary of State(and concurrently, killer of children, and conqueror of countries), threatened to rescind our agreement for aid to Israel, if Israel continued its offensive of aggression in the attempted land grab they launched against Egypt that was the Suez Canal War.
Israel agreed to the US’ demands that they stop trying to steal other people’s land and move back behind the established borders of their country, but, as we can now observe to be their usual fashion, Israel never truly lived up to their agreement, and so started their dance of manipulating the US, a dance in which we invariably let them take the lead.

1967 brought the Six Day War, with Israel attacking Egypt, Syria, and Jordan simultaneously. There had been tension in the area, as Russia fed Egypt false intelligence that Israel was going to attack Syria, prompting Egypt to mass its troops on Israel’s border, and exacerbating a dispute over whether Egypt and Syria were able to regulate passage in the Straits of Tiran.

Israel said it had a legal claim to be able to operate in the waters, but when Egypt offered to take the case to the international Court of Justice, Israel flatly refused. It seems like they must not have had much of a case as they said they did, or they would’ve welcomed the offer of taking it to court, and it is no surprise that Israel turned out to be lying once again.
Egypt declared the waters closed to any Israeli ships, and unable to prove its case in court, Israel did what they do even better than lying, and started bombing everybody instead, and taking their land.

Apparently, America liked their “go-getter” attitude in attacking Arab lands, and illegally occupying them, as foreign and military aid increased rapidly after the Six Day War, peaking in 1976, when Israel topped the list of US foreign aid recipients, and they have been at the top of list ever since. They are currently receiving $3 billion a year in foreign aid from the US, which is but 2% of their GDP.

This breaks down to about $500 per Israeli citizen, while much more impoverished countries, with people literally starving, are receiving much less per person in foreign aid from the US, while Israel was ranked as the 17th largest economy out of 187 countries in 2011 by the UN.

The authors’ state that, ‘In 1997, for example, Mitchell Bard, the former editor of AIPAC’s Near East Report, and Daniel Pipes, the hawkish founder of the pro-Israel Middle East Forum, wrote that “Israel has become an affluent country with a personal income rivaling Great Britain’s, so the American willingness to provide aid to Israel is no longer based purely on need.”,

and that, ‘Representative Lee Hamilton said in 1991 that Israel is one of three countries whose aid “substantially exceeds the popularly quoted figures” and said that the figure was closer to $4.3 billion.’ Regardless, as the official figures are stated, as of 2005, Israel had received $154 billion(in 2005 dollars) from the US since its creation, as well as other additional material support. It’s not quite $16 trillion, but that would certainly go a long way towards paying off our deficit, in my opinion…

You would think that anyone would be happy with this kind of arrangement, but Israel is a beggar who demands to be a chooser as well, eventually persuading the US to be the only country to be allowed to receive its aid in one lump sum payment, thereby giving them the ability to earn interest on the money, whereas no other country is given that opportunity.

Because the U.S. government normally runs budget deficits, transferring the aid all at once requires it to borrow the necessary amount of money up front, and the Congressional Research Service estimates that it costs the US “between $50 and $60 million per year to borrow funds for the early, lump-sum payment.”

The authors’ point out that, ‘according to the U.S. embassy in Israel, early transfer of FMF funds has enabled Israel to earn some $660 million in extra interest as of 2004. Israel has also received “excess defense articles(surplus U.S. military equipment provided to friendly nations either free of charge or heavily discounted) beyond the normal limits imposed by the 1976 Arms Export Control Act.’

Israel has also manipulated the US into conceding to provide Israel with “loans” instead of grants, because grants come with pesky oversight committees that Israel would, quite frankly, rather not be bothered with. Israel never pays the “loan” back, and presto!, they have coerced us into giving them a grant with no oversight, which is another exclusive privilege for Israel.

This, of course, means that our money can be used to fund Israel’s efforts to build settlements in the illegally occupied territories of Palestine, or any other number of ventures that the US would not approve of, if we had oversight, as the current line from Washington is that they overwhelmingly support Israel, but do not openly support their building of settlements in what they term to be illegally occupied territories. At least that’s what they say on the record, wink, nudge, while they give Israel $3 billion a year to buy tanks, and fighter jets, and bombs.

The continued list of exclusive privileges that the US accepts the imposition of, is that Israel is not resigned to investing all of the proceeds provided for their military funding in the US. The authors’ emphasize that, ‘The FMF program normally requires recipients of U.S. military assistance to spend all of the money here in the United States, to help keep American defense workers employed.                                                                                                                 

Congress grants Israel a special exemption in the annual appropriations bill, however, authorizing it to use about one out of every four U.S. military aid dollars to subsidize its own defense industry. “No other recipient of U.S. military assistance has been granted this benefit,” notes a recent CRS report, and “the proceeds to Israeli defense firms from purchases with U.S. funds have allowed the Israeli defense industry to achieve necessary economies of scale and become highly sophisticated.” By 2004, in fact, Israel, a comparatively small country, had become the world’s eighth largest arms supplier.’

The authors also assert, regarding joint military tehcnology resarch and development projects(above and beyond our established aid), that, ‘The United States has also provided Israel with nearly $3 billion to develop weapons like the Lavi aircraft, the Merkava tank, and the Arrow missile.

These projects were funded through the U.S. Department of Defense and often portrayed as joint research and development efforts, but the United States did not need these weapons and never intended to purchase them for its own use. The money that Washington pays to help Israel’s defense industry develop or produce these “joint weapons projects” is in reality another form of subsidy. The United States sometimes benefits from the technology that Israeli firms develop, but America would benefit even more if these funds were used to support high-tech industries in the United States.’

The list keeps growing, as another exemption from US foreign aid policy is that Israel can also accept contracts for military spending for less than $500,000 without any oversight from the US. This financial loophole was utilized in the 1990s by Brigadier General Rami Dotan, the director of Israeli Air Force procurement at the time, to divert and embezzle literally millions of dollars of US foreign aid money. It must be nice to have your own personal US of ATM machine, well, at least until you get caught, that is…

As if all that weren’t enough, every time Israel goes and invades another country to steal their lands, we then have another round of what are called “peace treaty talks”, but should be more appropriately termed, “stop Israel from invading talks.” At these talks, Israel bullies everyone at the table, and holds the negotiations hostage for the ransom of expanding both the amount of aid that they receive from the US, as well as additional exemptions from US foreign aid policy.

That’s a great little scam they’ve got going, once again manipulating the US, in this case, into allowing Israel to establish a pattern of being rewarded for punishable behavior, but of course, Israel remains the perpetual petulant child, and why wouldn’t they, when we consistently cave in to their demands?

The last exclusive privilege that I will highlight in exposing merely the tip of the iceberg of Israel’s exemptions from US policy, is that Prime Minister Shimon Peres revealed that
Israel’s clandestine nuclear program was largely financed by private contributions during the 50s and 60s. The authors’ also mention that, ‘According to the Israeli journalist Michael Karpin, a key coordinator of this fund-raising effort was Abraham Feinberg, a well-connected U.S. businessman, philanthropist, and political adviser, and contributors to the campaign reportedly included Canadian beverage magnate Samuel Bronfman and several members of the Rothschild family.’ ² With the Rothschilds involved, anyone who knows anything about world history and affairs is sure to draw the conclusion that Israel is acting in collusion with the Rothschilds in the Rothschilds’ quest for, quite literally, world domination.

Speaking of Israel’s “clandestine nuclear program”, according to the authors’, ‘When CIA Director Richard Helms came to the White House in 1968 to inform [President] Johnson that U.S. intelligence had concluded that Israel had in fact acquired a nuclear capability, Johnson told him to make sure that nobody else was shown the evidence, including Secretary of State Dean Rusk and Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara.

According to the journalist Seymour Hersh, “Johnson’s purpose in chasing Helms- and his intelligence- away was clear: he did not want to know what the CIA was trying to tell him, for once he accepted that information, he would have to act on it. By 1968, the President had no intention of doing anything to stop the Israeli bomb.”

In addition to its nuclear arsenal, Israel maintains active chemical and biological weapons programs and has yet to ratify either with the Chemical or Biological Weapons Convention. The irony is hard to miss: the United States has pressured many other states to join the NPT, imposed sanctions on countries that have defied U.S. wishes and acquired nuclear weapons anyway, gone to war in 2003 to prevent Iraq from pursuing WMD, and contemplated attacking Iran and North Korea for the same reason. Yet Washington has long subsidized an ally whose clandestine WMD activities are well-known and whose nuclear arsenal has given several of its neighbors a powerful incentive to seek WMD themselves.

Israel gets its aid despite its refusal to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty and its various WMD programs. It gets its aid when it builds settlements in the Occupied Territories(losing only a small amount through reductions in loan guarantees), even though the U.S. government opposes this policy.

It also gets its aid when it annexes territory it has conquered(as it did on the Golan Heights and in Jerusalem), sells U.S. military technology to potential enemies like China ³, conducts espionage operations on U.S. soil, or uses U.S. weapons in ways that violate U.S. law(such as the use of cluster munitions in civilian areas in Lebanon).

It gets additional aid when it makes concessions for peace, but it rarely loses American support when it takes actions that make peace more elusive. And it gets its aid even when Israeli leaders renege on pledges made to U.S. presidents. Menachem Begin promised Ronald Reagan that he would not lobby against the proposed sale of AWACS aircraft to Saudi Arabia in 1981, for example, but Begin then went up to Capitol Hill and told a Senate panel that he opposed the deal.’

Apparently, if there are three things that Israel excels at, they are lying to people, bombing people, and then claiming they have the moral high ground, and that they are “defending” themselves, while stealing other people’s land. My scorecard, since the creation of the state of Israel by the UN, says that there have been 11 cases of escalated hostilities, and out of those, Israel has been the aggressor nine times.

This simply rearranges the cyclical logic(or apparent lack thereof), to bombing people, claiming defense and the moral high ground while stealing other people’s land, and then fabricating more lies to cover up the lies they’ve already told.

In summary, the whole of the Middle East is still indeed a Cold War proxy prize, as both Russia and China are threatening to get involved militarily if Israel keeps attacking and invading everyone, yet still the US is proceeding into uncharted territory of the realms of self-imposed ignorance.

America is set on autopilot, asleep at the controls, with a faulty Israeli GPS system navigating us directly towards the murky Cold War waters that could very well end up engulfing us in World War III, in the most extreme example of how it is not in our best interest or wisdom to blindly follow Israel’s influence simply to retain an ally that keeps creating more enemies for both of us…
%d bloggers like this: