Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, March 1987, page 16

180 Degrees

180 Degrees appears every Friday in Florida Today, parent publication of USA Today. Whenever space permits, the Washington Report will present a debate between George Thompson, a retired US Foreign Service Officer, and Dan Warrensford, an engineer, on some facet of Middle East affairs.

Listen up Dan, it's education time: There is a country in this world whose every wish is our command. It has but to cough, and we provide the handkerchief. It has but to sniff, and we wipe the tear. It has but to suggest, and we deliver. If every one country succeeded in hanging a ring in the nose of another, Israel has done it to us.

It began in 1948 when President Truman was warned by a Senator that being first to recognize Israel would alienate us from the entire Arab world. It was then that the President uttered a line which has become famous—or infamous—depending on your understanding of what the Senator had seen: "Senator, "How many Arabs do you have in your constituency?"

That Senator and many other like-minded colleagues have taken the hint. Our annual contribution to Israel—and the American national deficit—is currently $3 billion, a gift of $750 to every man, woman, and child living there.

American foreign policy in the Middle East has been on the skids ever since that conversation, often greased with American blood. More lives and countless billions of dollars have been—and will continue to be—squandered because of our inability to separate Israeli interests from our own.

The Iranian debacle is only the latest in the series. The whole world now knows it was Israel that cajoled the US—despite its own best interests—into selling arms to Iran, which the Israelis have been doing for years.

The time is rapidly approaching, Dan, when many American members of Congress and their constituents with de facto dual citizenship are going to have to choose sides. And they'd better do it damn soon, before the American flag sports another star—only this one will have six points.

—George Thompson

Brace yourself, George. I'll give you one point. US policy in the Middle East is the geopolitical equivalent of Brownian Motion or, if you prefer literary similes, a particularly distraught Don Quixote swinging wildly at several windmills. Enjoy this concession; you'll get few from me.

Now, get this: Israel-bashing isn't going to solve the problems in the Israeli-Arab dilemma. In fact, if I could wave a magic wand and make Israel disappear, the Middle Eastern turmoil would continue unabated; a US presence would still be needed. The key to US foreign policy is self-interest. However, we don't promote our national self-interest very well anywhere; and the Middle East seems to be an area where we manage to shoot ourselves in both feet with especial proficiency.

If Foggy Bottom ever gets its foreign policy act together, every initiative by the US will be for the purpose of: a) Ensuring the continuity of the flow of petroleum from the Middle East region; b) Precluding any direct Soviet presence in the area; c) Reducing Soviet Middle East client-states to zero.

The similarities between US and Israeli political philosophies and national goals make the two nations natural allies and, if you haven't realized it yet, it's much less expensive for Israel to represent our interests than, say, to station troops in the area. Incidentally, if you're truly getting frugal in your old age, you should worry about half our defense budget going to NATO. By comparison, our aid to Israel is a pittance.

The US should, of course, continue to act as intermediary between Israel and all moderate Arab states; in no case should we abandon Israel or the region to the likes of Syria and Libya (I suppose abandonment "would make your day," George, but forget it old bean—it ain't gonna happen).

—Dan Warrensford