U.S. Aid to Israel vs. Lebanon/Palestine

[Clarkie1]

I can across some interesting figures today...

"While the United States provides about $2.5 billion in military and economic aid to Israel each year, U.S. aid to Lebanon amounts to no more than $40 million. This despite the fact that the per capita GDP of Israel is among the highest in the world at $24,600, nearly four times as high as Lebanon's GDP per capita of $6,200.

Lebanon's lack of wealth is matched by the Palestinians -- three out of every four Palestinians live below the poverty line. Yet the vast majority of our giving in the region flows to Israel. This kind of geopolitical inconsistency and shortsightedness has contributed to the Arab-Israeli conflict that the Western world seems content to allow to perpetuate endlessly."

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/07/18/dobbs.july19/index.html

My first thoughts on reading this is that this crises cannot be solved militarily. In others words, we cannot end terrorism against Israel (and by extension ourselves) by merely military means. What this means in the present conflict is that we need to be aiding the forces of Democracy in Lebanon. Hezbollah gets much of it's strength from poverty. If we could, after the Israeli military has taken out Hezbollah or a significant portion of Hezbollah, go in with massive economic aid, along with an international presence working with the Lebanese military to keep militias like Hezbollah from reappearing or rearming, that would be a great step. But it would have to be done in a big, committed way.

In Palestine, we need to make clear that such increased aid is dependent on Hamas renouncing all terrorism, and a declaration of Israel's right to exist. That is the required prerequisite. The very reason Israel has historically required such massive aid to exist is it is a tiny country surrounded by countries who as stated policy want it annihilated.

A parallel can be drawn, of course, with Iraq. Despite the massive amounts of money spent in Iraq, not enough has been done to rebuild the infrastructure. It was a mistake going into Iraq in the first place, but we never commited the level of resources necessary to secure the country, rebuild it, and empower Iraqis economically.

[sellitman]

1. I agree with you

In Palestine, we need to make clear that such increased aid is dependent on Hamas renouncing all terrorism, and a declaration of Israel's right to exist. That is the required prerequisite. The very reason Israel has historically required such massive aid to exist is it is a tiny country surrounded by countries who as stated policy want it annihilated.

Thanks for adding the above. It seems missing in many posts on this board. It's very refreshing to see.

Nominated and kicked!

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

2. The requirements are a bit chicken and egg, no?

Why is it that we require Palestinians to make all the efforts in order to receive anything near equitable aid, yet we require absolutely nothing on the part of Israel?

Do you not understand that these people fear that the moment they disarm that Israel will run rampant over them and that the U.S. will not be there to support them? Can you not comprehend the immense distrust involved here? Obviously not, since what you're asking as a requisite for aid is a leap of faith well beyond the imagination of most people. Furthermore, the Palestinian people have nearly nothing. It is not because they believe terrorism is the right way to go that they elected Hamas. It's because Hamas has been the only group that has done ANYTHING positive on their behalf. As such, it's going to be impossible to just sit there and tell them to disarm without doing anything to solve the needs of the people first.

How about this plan: We tell Israel and the Palestinians we will aid them equally. They will each have a separate state. The United Nations will be put in place to provide border security, with cooperation from Israeli and Palestinian forces, for the first 10 years. Jerusalem will become a neutral nation-state held in the trust of the United Nations. If either of the governments breaks the terms of the peace, as determined by the United Nations, they will not only suffer the entire loss of aid, but will also be forced to deal with a full scale military intervention by us. The United Nations will also assist the Palestinian security forces for the first 10 years in ensuring terrorist organizations are disarmed.

Under this plan, no one has to give anything up before anyone else does - no one has to "flinch". Everyone gets something and an international body will handle border security. Sounds pretty equitable to me.

[Clarkie1]

3. Your entire post is based on a false premise.

Israel has no want or desire to "run rampant" over them. Hezbollah and Hamas, however, do want to "run rampant" over Israel and destroy it.

If you do not understand this fundamental difference, or refuse to acknowledge it, there is no use carrying on the discussion. I have pointed this out before in previous threads...not you in particular, but to others.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

4. So says you.

The Palestinians feel otherwise. Hell, Golda Meir even perceived overwise, herself fearing that David Ben Gurion would become nearly as bad as Hitler himself. This is not a false premise by any means for the meer reason that it is perceived to be true. And do you want to explain to families that have had their houses bulldozed, been killed by missile attacks by fighter jets, imprisoned on mere suspicion, and brutally maimed by illegal flechette rounds that this perception has no grounds whatsoever? Good luck on that one. Perception is reality, is it not?

Therefore, the premise is no where near false. You are not going to get terrorist groups to dismantle until you tangibly provide aid and security to the people of Palestine - period.

[Clarkie1]

5. Sorry, but I don't thinking aiding states that support terrorism

and have a stated goal the destruction of a neighboring sovereign state is a good idea.

I really think we have nothing further to discuss if you aren't going to change your view on this most critical point. Have a good day.

[jsamuel]

6. Hezbollah has 2 seats in the Lebanese government.

Hezbollah is not the Lebanese government

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

11. We support Israel.

So are we not supporting a state that supports terrorism there?

[bloom]

9. the right wing types

in this country - at least - are already saying that any sort of Two-state solution is off the table. As far as they are concerned - Israel has won. They have "run rampant" over the Palestinians - Daniel Pipes brags about it.

[Ignoramus]

7. Terrorism is bad no matter who's it is

Bombing of civilians by Israel or non-state entities is both bad and counter productive. Israelis dont deserve to be killed because of the policies of their government. But I don't agree with your condition, which is essentially the Bush philosophy (once evil is ended, we'll stop killing). The welfare of Palesinian people should not be made by a policy, to be dependent on the actions of an organization among them.

Hamas is not all Palestinians. Hezbollah is not all Lebanese. Israel is not every Isreali. Saddam Hussein is not every Iraqi. Al Qaeda is not... etc.

The notion that it is okay to kill people for the actions of someone among those people is at the heart of Terrorism, whether it's Israel's terrorism or Hezzbolah's terrorism. Would you have been okay with bombing Boston because there were IRA supporters there?

A person is not a country. A country is not a non-state entity.

A country can be bound to laws. A person can also be bound to a law, but a group of people can't be expected to perfectly follow a law. So, the solution is to outlaw state terrorism, and to arrest individual terrorists. At the same time stop equating groups of people with the policies of the people with guns among them, e.g. Israel's army among the Israeli's, and Hezzbolah's fighters amon the Lebanese.

[Spazito]

8. I agree with you while adding one more action that needs to be

part of any real action towards resolution and that is Israel adheres to UN resolution 242:

By resolution 242, the Council called for a just and lasting peace which included the withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in 1967 and respect for the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in secure and recognized boundaries.

[Full Metal]

10. No other country gives more aid to Palestine than the u.s.

..................................