Israeli independence is mitigated by its strategic alliances. The relationship with the United States and other alliances entail significant dependencies that influence policy across military, diplomatic, and economic spheres.
Steve Rodan’s In Jewish Blood states: “Washington has provided Israel with billions of dollars a year in military aid that sustains the elite. This includes commissions to arms dealers, jobs to ex-generals and officials, contracts to lobbyists, grants to industrialists and projects and scholarships to academics. Israel has repeatedly agreed to strategic concessions to preserve the annual check from Washington.”
While Israel possesses its own machinery of government, its capacity to set and implement political, military, economic, health, and other policies is significantly diminished by its network of international relationships, alliances, and dependencies. Foremost among these is the strategic alliance with the United States, but relations with other global and regional powers also play crucial roles in limiting Israel’s options and shaping its constraints.
The US has consistently provided billions of dollars in annual military aid to Israel, creating a system that benefits various elites, including defense industry leaders, former military officials, and lobbying groups.
This reliance creates US leverage, with diplomatic and military support being delayed or conditioned to influence Israeli actions or policies.
Furthermore, historical examples show that Israel has indeed made significant strategic concessions in its foreign policy and territorial decisions that can be traced to US diplomatic pressure and the desire to maintain the flow of military aid.
Rodan’s assertion that US military aid sustains an elite within Israel is supported by evidence regarding the professional affiliations of former Israeli officials. Many former Chiefs of Staff of the IDF transition to prominent roles in Israeli politics, with some even becoming Prime Ministers or serving in the Knesset. Others enter the business world, leveraging the connections gained during their military service.
Also, a significant number of former Chiefs of Staff have also held the position of Defense Minister, highlighting the blurred relationship between the military and political echelons.
Connections to defense industries are also evident. This pattern of former high-ranking officials joining defense companies that benefit from US military aid suggests a mechanism for sustaining an elite within this sector.
Contracts with lobbying firms further support Rodan’s statement. AIPAC is a prominent and influential pro-Israel lobbying group that actively advocates for policies, including military aid, that benefit Israel. As a top lobbying client, AIPAC expends significant resources to influence US decision-makers. Other groups like J Street and Christians United for Israel also contribute to this lobbying tribe. They seek to ensure the continued flow of US military aid to Israel.
Finally, Rodan’s charge that Israel has repeatedly agreed to strategic concessions to preserve US military aid is supported by historical evidence. The 1979 peace treaty with Egypt, where Israel withdrew from Sinai in exchange for increased US aid, is a prime example. The US role in forcing the Oslo Accords and Wye River Memorandum, which involved Israeli territorial concessions, also demonstrates a link between US diplomatic pressure, often coupled with threats of aid cutoff, and Israeli strategic decisions. The 2005 Gaza expulsion, while presented as unilateral, was compelled by US desires. The US has also used the threat of withholding aid to pressure Israel on issues like building freezes and aid access to Gaza.
This relationship creates deep-seated dependencies that constrain Israel’s autonomous decision-making, and ultimately translates into a heavy cost in lives.
