DancesWithCamels

One of the most heated issues within U.S. foreign policy circles is the question of Israel’s strategic importance to U.S. interests in the region. Does Israel, widely interpreted as a dagger in the heart of the Arab world by its neighbors, act as a strategic liability that complicates and harms U.S. relations with more strategically important Arab states of the region? Indeed, Israel certainly appears much less strategically important than say the GCC states, home to the lions share of world energy reserves and a source of massive investments in U.S. assets. Unyielding U.S. support for Israel strains the U.S.-GCC relationship and often leads to mistrust and opposition to U.S. policies in the region out of suspicions that they are designed to increase Israel’s security. It appears that anti-Israeli sentiments in the region have also contributed to the widespread anti-Americanism so rampant as well (see photo).

However, despite extreme antagonism toward Israel the U.S. is still the leading patron and security guarantor of numerous Arab states. Let us consider for a moment the U.S.-GCC relationship. While many in the Gulf, for their own reason of being, have jockeyed to host American bases it remains questionable how beneficial this strategic relationship is in the long term. Oil for security remains the foundation of the bond. The U.S. must maintain major troop levels in the Gulf at all times to guarantee the flow of oil, sometimes paying exorbitant fees for basing rights. Most often, U.S. troop presence in the Gulf is a highly controversial issue for Gulf governments. The Saudis, due to domestic pressures from extremist Wahabbi’s and international jihadists like Bin Laden were compelled to request that the U.S. leave their territory. Furthermore, the Gulf states, though purchasing large quantities of high-tech U.S. weaponry, continue to maintain largely inefficient military forces geared more for internal stability than defense against an external enemy. The arrangement is supposed to guarantee the U.S. affordable and readily accessible oil not only for themselves but primarily for world consumers. The Gulf states, especially the Saudis, are tasked with ensuring that the price of oil doesn’t climb too high. Simultaneously, many Americans find the relationship distasteful. It seems paradoxical for many that the U.S. act as guardian of archaic, tribally based regimes that actively or tacitly condone religious fanaticism, however misleading this assumption is. While for the Gulf states, periodic calls from U.S. presidents for democracy, American style, and an agenda promoting human rights often presents itself as a revolutionary threat to the very regimes the U.S. is supposed to be protecting.

The U.S.-Gulf relationship presents myriad problems for all parties involved. But at least the U.S. knows what it’s getting in the Gulf. What then is Israel providing the U.S., strategically speaking. While it doesn’t harbor half of the world’s energy reserves, Israel does have strategic value beyond the tired justification that it is an example of democracy in the region. Israel provides the U.S. a true ally in the region, meaning it is supported by not only the government but the population at large. The U.S. need not station troops in Israel to defend it, while heavily dependent on U.S. arms Israel has proven it has the ability to defend itself against larger neighbors without the physical intervention of the U.S. Israel is often cited as a main motivation for the rise of militant Islamist groups such as Hezbollah and Hamas, however these groups may have emerged regardless of Israel’s existence. The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, a forbearer of Hamas in Gaza, was established in 1928 long before anyone could fathom the Jewish states creation. Hezbollah obviously had grander goals than banishing Israel from Lebanese territory as can be seen through their current attempt to re-forge the political arrangement in Lebanon. Israel now acts as a regional check on their power, a function the governments of Lebanon and Palestine are incapable of carrying out. Islamist groups have also emerged in Iraq to vie for power in that country. And it’s a stretch to link Israel’s existence with the genesis and rise of the revolutionary Islamic government in Tehran. Another strategic benefit of the U.S.-Israeli relationship is the fact that it is more than that. Yes, Israelis sometimes feel upset about the pervasiveness of American cultural influence in their society but one shouldn’t expect Israelis to violently attack the U.S. at home or abroad to ‘protest’ or ’struggle’ against this.

Overwhelmingly unbalanced support for Israel perturbs the Arabs and can stress U.S.-Arab relations threatening the U.S. strategically as it did during the 1973 war which led to the Arab oil embargo. But the U.S.-Israeli relationship is unlikely to drive an irreconcilable wedge between Arab states and America. Certainly, the U.S.-Israeli relationship is more firmly based upon non-strategic factors, but it doesn’t defy strategic logic all-together. Moreover, it is improbable that the U.S.-Israeli relationship is at the root of all of the problems facing U.S. policy in the region and it’s unrealistic to assume the Arab world would become more amenable to American policies if U.S. support for Israel would decrease or cease altogether. However, a U.S. brokered resolution of the A-I conflict would greatly relieve Arab governments of a long standing domestic affront to their U.S. relationship and would certainly lead to an improvement of U.S. regional standing.