America’s Israel

by C.G. Estabrook

The proper way to begin to understand the “Israeli-Palestinian problem” is to recognize that Israel is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the United States government. Criticism of its racist and oppressive policies towards non-Jews and of its brutal and illegal occupation of Palestine is necessarily criticism of the policies of American governments, Republican as well as Democrat, that have made these things possible.

During the Cold War, it was fashionable to sneer at the Cuban economy as “unviable” because it depended on money from the Soviet Union, principally in exchange for Cuba’s sugar crop (owing to the long-standing US embargo); but every year for a generation Israel has received much more money per capita from the United States than Cuba received from the USSR in its best year. The present Israeli economy is of course unviable — it survives as a military outpost of the US, armed to the teeth to prevent the emergence in the Middle East of any domestic radicalism that would threaten US control of the world’s greatest geopolitical prize, Mideast oil. To control world energy resources is to control the world economy, as the US has done for generations — and intends to continue to do. Israel is vital to its plans, and therefore successive US governments have been willing to put up with Israel’s enormities in regard to the Palestinian people.

But it has been pointed out that our principal client is a racist state in the legal — and not just psychological — sense of the term. A legally racist state is one in which privileges for a certain group defined by descent — and disabilities for those not so descended — are enshrined in law and governmental practice: disregarding anything thought or done, you belong to the privileged group if your parent(s) did, and if not, not. That was the case in South Africa from 1948 to 1991 and in many southern states in the US for the first half of the 20th century. Those states ceased to be legally racist when those laws were abolished, although psychological racism remained.

Israel of course is racist in a legal sense in that one group defined by descent, Jews, are privileged. (It is not of course a matter of religion, the majority of Jews in Israel not being religious.) Indeed, Israel is a uniquely racist state, in that all states, democratic and dictatorial, are taken to be the states of their inhabitants — but not Israel: it is by law the state of one group defined by descent, the “Jewish people world-wide.” It is as if a radical faction of the Irish Republican Army should come to power in Ireland and declare Ireland the state of the “Irish people world-wide,” so that an Irishman in South Boston (or Urbana) had more rights in Dublin than an Englishman (or a Jew) whose family had been there for generations. (There is not to my knowledge any such faction in the IRA.)

It is surprising in the extreme to see self-styled “supporters of Israel” write rabid letters to editors in this country whenever the state of Israel or any of its government’s policies are criticized. If they really loved Israel and its people, as they profess, you’d think they would want to encourage a situation in which the citizens of Israel could live in peace with their neighbors and prosper in an open, democratic society that was not the economic dependence of another state. Instead, they support Israel’s expanding moral corruption as a militarized colony, its prime ministers including men inspired by a nazi ideology (in the Jabotinsky tradition) and guilty of war crimes. Beleaguered and hated by the people surrounding it (and many in it) and armed with illegal nuclear weapons, Israel threatens the world with massive destruction. The Air Force officer in charge of nuclear strategy for the last US administration, Gen. Lee Butler, said, “It is dangerous in the extreme that in the cauldron of animosities that we call the Middle East, one nation has armed itself, ostensibly, with stockpiles of nuclear weapons, perhaps numbering in the hundreds, and that inspires other nations to do so.”

What could Israel do to cease being a pariah state, if its Washington masters permitted it? First of all, it could end the occupation of Palestinian territory, declared illegal by the UN Security Council thirty-four years ago, and not just pretend to do so by maintaining the proposed Palestinian statelet as a set of Indian reservations, controlled by the Israeli military. It could withdraw the settlements that cover the map of the West Bank and Gaza like a rash, settlements illegal under the Forth Geneva Convention (1949). It could establish the rights of non-Jewish citizens within Israel and come to an agreement on a “law of return” for Palestinians and their families driven out of Israel fifty years ago. (The existing Law of Return applies only to Jews, whose forbears may have left the area in the time of the Roman Emperor Titus, or before.) And it could move towards agreements on disarmament and economic cooperation with its neighbors, with the goal of an economically self-sufficient region, not dependent on US handouts. (Israel, followed distantly by Egypt, is by far the largest recipient of US aid.) The route to peace in the Middle East begins and ends in Washington. CP

Carl Estabrook teaches at the University of Illinois and is the host of News From Neptune, a weekly radio show on politics and the media. He writes a regular column for CounterPunch.

December 01, 2015
John Wight
From Iraq to Syria: Repeating a Debacle
Conn Hallinan
Portugal: the Left Takes Charge
Mike Whitney
Putin’s Revenge? The Fight for the Boarder
Sami Al-Arian
My Ordeal: One of America’s Many Political Trials Since 9/11
Bilal El-Amine
The Hard Truth About Daesh and How to Fight It
Pete Dolack
Solidarity Instead of Hierarchy as “Common Sense”
Dan Glazebrook
Rhodes Must Fall: Decolonizing Education
Colin Todhunter
Big Oil, TTIP and the Scramble for Europe
Eric Draitser
Terror in Mali: An Attack on China and Russia?
Gilbert Mercier
Will Turkey Be Kicked Out of NATO?
Linn Washington Jr.
Torture and Other Abuses Make Turkey as American as Apple Pie
Randy Shaw
Krugman is Wrong on Gentrification
Raouf Halaby
Time to Speak Out Against Censorship
November 30, 2015
Henry Giroux
Trump’s Embrace of Totalitarianism is America’s Dirty Little Secret
Omur Sahin Keyif
An Assassination in Turkey: the Killing of Tahir Elci
Uri Avnery
There is No Such Thing as International Terrorism
Robert Fisk
70,000 Kalashnikovs: Cameron’s “Moderate” Rebels
Jamie Davidson
Distortion, Revisionism & the Liberal Media
Patrick Cockburn
Nasty Surprises: the Problem With Bombing ISIS
Robert Hunziker
The Looming Transnational Battlefield
Ahmed Gaya
Breaking the Climate Mold: Fighting for the Planet and Justice
Matt Peppe
Alan Gross’s Improbable Tales on 60 Minutes
Norman Pollack
Israel and ISIS: Needed, a Thorough Accounting
Colin Todhunter
India – Procession of the Dead: Shopping Malls and Shit
Roger Annis
Canada’s New Climate-Denying National Government
Binoy Kampmark
Straining the Republic: France’s State of Emergency
Bill Blunden
Glenn Greenwald Stands by the Official Narrative
Jack Rasmus
Japan’s 5th Recession in 7 Years
Karen Lee Wald
Inside the Colombia Peace Deal
Geoff Dutton
War in Our Time
Charles R. Larson
Twofers for Carly Fiorina
John Dear
An Eye for an Eye Makes the Whole World Blind
Weekend Edition
November 27-29, 2015
Andrew Levine
The Real Trouble With Bernie
Gary Leupp
Ben Carson, Joseph in Egypt, and the Attack on Rational Thought
John Whitbeck
Who’s Afraid of ISIS?
Michael Brenner
Europe’s Crisis: Terror, Refugees and Impotence
Ramzy Baroud
Forget ISIS: Humanity is at Stake
Pepe Escobar
Will Chess, Not Battleship, Be the Game of the Future in Eurasia?
Vijay Prashad
Showdown on the Syrian Border
Dave Lindorff
Gen. John Campbell, Commander in Afghanistan and Serial Liar
Colin Todhunter
Class, War and David Cameron
Jean Bricmont
The Ideology of Humanitarian Imperialism
Dan Glazebrook
Deadliest Terror in the World: the West’s Latest Gift to Africa
Mark Hand
Escape From New York: the Emancipation of Activist Cecily McMillan
Karl Grossman
Our Solar Bonanza!