January 1994, Page 18
From the Hebrew Press
Israeli Cultivation of Cuba Reflects Contempt
for U.S. Policies
By Dr. Israel Shahak
As confidence grows that there will be no U.S political
or financial pressure on Israel so long as Bill Clinton occupies
the White House, writers for the Israeli press feel increasingly
free to describe the contempt with which the government of Yitzhak
Rabin regards American attempts to dictate Israeli policy at any
level.
The right word to describe the previous 30 years of
Israeli political dependence on the U.S. was coined by Davar's
political commentator Daniel Ben-Simon, who wrote on Oct. 18,
1993 of "American tutelage" of Israel. But, he adds:
"The Oslo agreement put Israel's patron to
shame. While the chiefs of the State Department were busily overseeing
the progress of Israeli-Palestinian formal negotiations, Rabin
and Peres closed the deal in provincial Oslo. The Americans were
notified of the agreement barely a few days before its finalization,
as a gesture to spare them overt insult, and in order to make
it still possible for them to disburse money needed for the agreement's
implementation. "
In fact, the signing of the agreement on principles
of peace on the White House lawn was pure show business. The deal
was done by Israel without U.S. knowledge or involvement. For this
reason, Ben Simon concludes that "the main loser from this
rapid increase in the Israeli power of diplomatic maneuver is the
U.S.''
Israel's New Foreign Policy
Israeli-Cuban relations provide a vivid example of Israel's new
foreign policy, in particular, of Israel's efforts to free itself
of American tutelage, and the Rabin government's contempt for feeble
Clinton administration protests against Israeli policies.
Writing about Israeli-Cuban relations, Shlomo Slutzky
reports in the Oct. 20 Ha'olam Ha'zeh that the main go-between
for trade has been the notorious Mossad veteran Rafael (better known
as Rafi) Eitan. Israelis have nicknamed him "the stinking Rafi
Eitan" to distinguish him from another Rafael Eitan, the former
chief of staff and current head of the Tsomet Party.
"Stinking" Rafi Eitan has an impressive
record of carrying out on Israeli government orders acts hostile
to the U. S. He was the director of LEKEM (the Hebrew acronym for
"Office of Scientific Contacts"), which supervised the
espionage against the U.S. secretly carried out by U.S. Naval counter-intelligence
specialist Jonathan Jay Pollard. Eitan himself evaluated Pollard's
information and reported it directly to the Israeli Minister of
Defense. As a consequence, Eitan no longer dares to enter the United
States, where he could be arrested.
Israeli trade with Cuba is coordinated by "Business
Enterprises Corporations" (BEC), which has its main offices
in Tel Aviv. Eitan's position within BEC has never been defined,
Slutzky writes, because, "as usual, Rafi Eitan likes to hide
behind the scenes." Nor "has he ever actually visited
Cuba." Instead, Slutzky reports, he "has sent other Israelis,
some of whom remained there as major advisers." In order to
impress the Cubans, Rafi Eitan arranged the visits of some of their
experts and high officials to Israel. Their visits took place early
this year, ostensibly in order to let them see an agricultural exhibition
then being held in Tel Aviv, really in order for them to meet Minister
of Agriculture Ya'akov Tsur.
As Israel has become increasingly involved in Cuba,
management of Cuban citrus plantations has fallen into Israeli hands.
Of several such areas, one alone exceeds the total area of citrus
groves in Israel. According to Slutzky, the Israeli experts sent
by Rafi Eitan found that Cuba's citrus yield was "less than
one-tenth of Israel's." They were expected to raise it, and
are working to increase the efficiency of the Cuban economy, especially
its agriculture.
Despite never having visited Cuba, Slutzky reports,
Rafi Eitan "represents in Cuba a large number of Israeli trading
companies. The high esteem accorded by the Cuban regime to an unofficial
representative of the Israeli intelligence establishment can only
proveas a proverb puts itthat 'money never stinks.'
"Rafi Eitan has good access to all Cuban ministries,
where he closes deals worth many millions of dollars with people
whom, when he was an adviser on terror (to the Israeli prime minister),
he defined as 'hard-core communists abetting anti-Israeli terror
gangs who will not shrink from planning assaults on laws throughout
the entire world.' Since business comes before pleasure, Eitan now
makes good business, first of all for himself, then for Cuba and
in the last place for Israeli companies which need him to capture
the Cuban market."
When Slutzky asked at the Israeli Foreign Ministry
how it views Eitan's exploits, he was told that "Israel maintains
absolutely no relations with Cuba and is not interested in establishing
any." The Foreign Ministry officials appeared surprised when
told that "a well-known Israeli, Rafi Eitan, is doing business
there, and has involved many Israeli companies, to the tune of millions
of dollars." The officials in the Foreign Ministry's economic
department who, as Slutzky observes, "should know about such
things," assured him that they had never heard of BEC.
When told by Slutzky that the company was located
in Tel Aviv, they asked him for its phone number. After a delay
of a few days, they told Slutzky they needed further time "for
inquiries and consultations." And that was the end of the affair.
They apparently decided simply to continue to deny any knowledge
of BEC and its doings.
As for the U.S. government's position on Israeli involvement
in Cuba, Slutzky writes, "about two weeks ago the State Department
told Israel in no uncertain terms: 'We request Israel to refrain
from renewing its relations with the communist regime of Cuba, especially
at this time.' . . . According to my information, the letter in
question reached its destination in the Foreign Ministry, but it
strikes me that the latter was not the proper addressee. The officials
of that ministry keep reiterating that 'all relations between Israel
and Cuba were severed on Cuban initiative 20 years ago (during the
1973 war) and we have done nothing to re-establish them."'
Apart from this timid intervention, the Clinton administration
has done nothing. Israel clearly expects it to continue to do nothing
for the foreseeable future.
Yet even without risking a clash with Congress over
the magnitude of U.S aid to Israel, any U.S. administration has
potent means at its disposal to impose its will. Under Bush or Kissinger,
any Israeli obstructionism would have been followed by calculated
leaks to the American press, revealing things which Israel would
prefer to keep under wraps, especially in the U.S.
Such leaks would in turn be instantly relayed by the
Hebrew press. The exposure would not only force the Americans to
protest, but also set in motion Israeli domestic pressures on the
government to yield to the U.S. demands.
Peculiar for the Cuban case is the fact that some
of the most zealous supporters of Israel in the U.S. are extreme
right-wingers and Christian fundamentalists who abhor Fidel Castro.
They could be expected to respond with hostility if they learned
that Pollard's overseer was now Castro's friend. Under Clinton,
however, Israel can be sure that the U.S. administration will meekly
acquiesce in whatever Israel may do.
This story has strong implications for Middle East
politics. If the Clinton administration does nothing about Israelis
who ignore the U.S.-backed embargo on Cuba, it can safely be assumed
the U.S. will do nothing to stop any policy Israel chooses to pursue
in the Mideast, or press Israel to adopt a policy it does not like.
Increasingly, the Israeli government assumes it can operate without
any constraints, and still demand full American support.
Dr. Israel Shahak, a Holocaust survivor and retired
professor of chemistry at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, is
chairman of the Israeli League of Human and Civil Rights. |