•
Shared Interests Bind U.S., Israel
Continued from Page L-1
beginning in the 1950's, Israel had
to rely on European suppliers for its
military defense until 1962. Even
then, Israel had to purchase the
U.S.-made anti-aircraft missiles; it
was not a form of military aid.
In fact, in the 1948 to 1967
period, U.S. foreign policy was
decidedly cool toward Israel and
favorable toward the Arabs. For
example, the United States refrained
from challenging Arab violations
condemning Israel for responding to
Arab provocation, and pressured
Israel to withdraw from the Sinai in
1957.
It was not until 1967, after
France refused to sell aircraft to
Israel, that the United States agreed
to fill the defense gap. In 1973,
when Israel was being battered by
Arab armies on all fronts, the United
States sent an airlift that helped
Israel withstand and reverse the
massive attack.
The late 1970s and 1980s were
marked by both intensive diplomatic
efforts by the United States to
establish peaceful relations between
Israel and the Arab nations, and a
much closer military and political
alliance between the United States
and Israel. In fact, these two trends
went hand in hand: to the extent
that the Arab nations perceived
American support for Israel to be
solid, they understood that further
aggression against Israel would
damage those nations' ties to the
United States.
In the aftermath of the U.S.-
sponsored Camp David Accords and
the Israel-Egypt peace treaty, U.S.
aid to Israel climbed to $3 billion
annually, $1.2 billion of which is
used to help Israel repay prior loans
from the United States and $1.8
billion enables Israel to make
purchases from the American
defense industry.
However, the 1967 and 1973
wars sowed the seeds of strain
between the two nations, over the
issue of Israel's control of the
territories in Judea, Samaria, and
Gaza. The United States was
particularly upset by Israel's
annexation of the Golan Heights
and of East Jerusalem. Every
American peace proposal since
eh affbi/
f
THE JEWISH NEWS
27676 Franklin Road
Southfield, Michigan 48034
May 10, 1991
Associate Publisher Arthur M. Horwitz
Jewish Experiences for Families
Adviser Harlene W. Appelman
L-2
FRIDAY, MAY 10, 1991
1967 has included eventual Israeli
withdrawal from the territories.
As of the early 1990s the U.S.-
Israel relationship continues to
contain both encouraging and
distressing elements. On one hand,
despite pressures from many
quarters to reduce foreign aid (of
which Israel is the largest recipient),
the form and level of aid have been
enlarged. The United States now
cooperates with Israel in many
projects involving strategic
cooperation which are of direct
benefit to Israel (and the United
States, too). The United States has
also agreed to guarantee bank
loans that Israel needs to resettle
and house the hundreds of
thousands of Soviet olim.
On the other hand, following
the American-led victory against
Iraq, the United States is attempting
to use its increased leverage to
pressure Israel in the current peace
process. Israel's dependence on
American foreign aid provides the
United States with an implied threat
should Israel choose to ignore
American wishes.
influence in the Middle East and
Arab terrorism against U.S. targets.
As the Soviet Union's threat
diminishes and given America's
cooperation with its former enemies
Syria and Iran in the defeat of the
third troublemaker, Iraq, the
strategic alliance rationale may lose
significance in the years to come.
We who want Israel to flourish
need to do all we can to help
strengthen and preserve the U.S.-
Israel linkage. However, that linkage
hinges on the willingness and ability
of Israel's advocates to remind other
Americans in general and U.S.
leaders in particular about the
underlying basis of the U.S.-Israel
bond.
David Gad-Harf is executive director
of the Jewish Community Council
of Metropolitan Detroit.
The Source of American
Support for Israel
As has occurred during
previous periods of strain, the two
nations will likely patch up their
differences before risking a divorce.
The reasons go well beyond Israel's
dependence on the United States.
American support for Israel hinges
on basic, enduring factors, deeply
embedded within the belief system
of the American public.
Americans feel a deep sense of
affinity with the land and people of
Israel. We and our fellow American
citizens see Israel as a nation of -
democratic values, a nation
committed to a sense of progress
that we share, and a nation
embodying the pioneer spirit that
was so integral to America's
development.
America's sense of justice and
morality has also triggered public
support for Israel as the refuge from
the Holocaust and from religious
persecution in the Arab world,
Soviet Union, Ethiopia and
elsewhere.
America's Christian majority,
particularly those who cherish the
Five Books of Moses, also value
Israel as the land of the Bible. For
many Christians, American support
for Israel is intimately connected to
their religious beliefs, and these
feelings are reinforced by trips to
Israel that include visits to the holy
places of the Bible.
While not as deeply rooted as
the above-mentioned factors, a
strategic alliance has undergirded
U.S.-Israel relations during the past
decade. The alliance was
established to counter Soviet
r`
7 1,%e
J.";
(-
k;e4;::". ..
Ori`rtiff :4:1117 ted—
se.•
ptr,c.
am ActAll• &
aims .. .. asatia•t ittli.,
":17:::LIIIrl; MUL411 .1.11.1 " ".. r •
-Mt:T:V=7.t.t1 )
Famous Facts
Q. Which state of the Union was the last to accord full political
rights to Jews?
right to vote. However, the right to
A. The Constitution of the
United States, formulated by brilliant hold office was often limited. New
Hampshire, one of the original
and original thinkers like James
thirteen states, did not allow non-
Madison and Benjamin Franklin,
Protestants to hold high office until
had assured full political rights for
1876. The prejudice was in
all citizens regardless of creed.
practicality
directed against
However, many individual state
Catholics more than Jews, of whom
governments continued long-
there were never more than a
standing religious practices by
handful. However, well into the
favoring Protestants over Catholics,
twentieth century, a clause in the
Unitarians, dissenters, freethinkers
and Jews. The separation of church New Hampshire constitution still
ordered that "every denomination of
and state was not as widely
Christians . . . (our italics) shall be
accepted and as natural in the
equally under protection of the law."
eighteenth century as it would
become later. The new states never
Compiled by Dr. Matthew and
restricted the practice of religions,
Thomas Schwartz.
nor did they refuse any citizen the