(Continued from p.10)
only provide an American $25,000, that's not right." And for good measure he takes the Israel "lobby" to task forpressuring on foreign aid, adding, "maybe the Israelis are willing to give Syria $10 billion if they can get $80 or $90 billion."AFSI supports Callahan and American taxpayers should read this article, contact their legislators and sew zippers on their pockets.
Seth Lipsky, editor of the Forward, in the first editorial of this century, discloses that he keeps a handwritten note tacked to the wall of his editorial room. It reads, "Who Lost Jerusalem." This somber question seems timely now. The Forward editorial quotes Ha'aretz journalist Nadav Shragai. In a recent column entitled "Jerusalem: On the Brink of Partition," Shragai asserts that "recent reports about new Israeli proposals, which amount to the city's partition, have only one goal: to prepare Israeli public opinion for the compromise that is expected not only on the Golan Heights but in Jerusalem as well. This is being talked about almost openly in the offices of those who are directing the negotiations." Lipsky further notes that a halt has been put on construction of new units in Ma'aleh Adumim, a Jerusalem suburb, leading him again to wonder who lost Jerusalem? Who indeed.
This editorial is right on target, except for its use of the words "compromise" and "lost." Compromise in negotiations means that both sides give on some issues. With Israel it's all give--no take--hardly a compromise. And the word "lost" is too innocent for this particular tragedy. A sober nation does not "lose" its capital. Jews do not "lose" their patrimony. Loss is not the noun here. A shameless series of Israeli governments, Likud and Labor alike, have recklessly sold out Jerusalem and every inch of the Jewish State.
Ruth King is a member of the Executive Committee of Americans For a Safe Israel.
(Continued from p.1)
devote to military service and the regular army, too, can be drastically cut back. And, of course, it will save huge sums now devoted to obtaining the sophisticated armaments required for modern warfare. Under these circumstances, far from further subsidizing Israel, the U.S. should ask for some of its money back.The other possibility is that Syria (like Israel's other peace partners) is not genuinely interested in peace, and Israel will be far more vulnerable to attack after it gives Syria the Golan Heights (which acted as a deterrent because of its proximity to Damascus). In that event, Israel will indeed need billions of dollars of the most sophisticated equipment (Elyakim Haetzni lists some of it in his article in this issue) to attempt to compensate for the loss of vital strategic ground. It is this possibility that Israel's very demand for all those billions of dollars suggests is uppermost in the minds of Israel's Prime Minister.
But if this is the case, why give Syria the Golan? Why potentially endanger American servicemen who are liable to be stationed there? What is the point of this entire vastly expensive exercise? As Professor Eliyahu Kanovsky of Bar Ilan University's Center for Defense and Peace Economics has pointed out, Syria's motivations are clear. Having rejected any and all liberalization and privatization, Assad has converted Syria into an economic basket case. He was saved temporarily by the Gulf War when President Bush, anxious for Arab "allies" against Iraq, in effect bribed Syria to participate. (Kanovsky estimates Syria received $4-5 billion from the U.S.) But now the money is gone and Syria believes it can receive the same treatment Egypt did for accepting the Sinai -- cancellation or easing the debt burden of its foreign loans, large scale economic aid, removal from the U.S. terrorism blacklist, and massive U.S. rebuilding of its military forces. (Kanovsky points out that according to one estimate, about half the Syrian air force is now grounded for lack of spare parts and appropriate maintenance.) Syria thus looks forward to American money to underpin its bankrupt economy and despotic political system.
American dollars will not buy peace between Israel and Syria. Genuine peace will only come if both sides desire it. In that event the economic rewards will be substantial, without any U.S. involvement. In the meantime, Congress's watchword must be: Not one cent!
Herbert Zweibon is chairman of Americans For a Safe Israel.
January 2000 - 11 - Outpost