Heeding the War Secretary’s Advice

Is Supporting Israel in the United States’ Strategic Interests?

U.S. Secretary of War, Chuck Hagel, recently spoke to the National Defense University. In his speech, Hagel advised USA’s officer corps to “always keep three questions in mind before making a decision”:

Is this in America’s strategic interests, which include the political, economic, and moral dimensions? Is this worthy of the service and sacrifice of our men and women in uniform, and their families? Does this help protect [U.S.] national security?

When applying these questions to the United States’ relationship with Israel, candid answers guide U.S. policy away from an alliance with the Zionist State.

Is supporting Israel in the United States’ strategic interests, which include the political, economic, and moral dimensions?

Multiple authorities, including (ret.) U.S. Colonel Larry Wilkerson and Meir Dagan, have labeled Israel a strategic burden to the United States. But that doesn’t stop Israel’s most ardent U.S. allies from attempting to classify Israel as a strategic asset. Their claims rely on three falsehoods: a) the U.S. benefits from intelligence sharing and counterterrorism cooperation with Israel; b) the U.S. benefits from joint efforts in missile defense and development of unmanned aerial vehicles; c) the Pentagon can purchase state-of-the-art Israeli weaponry. None of these claims withstand brief scrutiny.

Instead of benefiting from intelligence sharing and counterterrorism cooperation with Israel, the United States finds itself a victim of rampantIsraeliespionage. Mossad simply uses the pretext of “intelligence cooperation” to imbricate itself deep within the U.S. Intelligence Community.

Instead of benefiting from joint efforts in missile defense and UAV development, U.S. taxpayers find themselves funding ineffectual Israeli missile platforms in the amount of hundreds of millions of dollars each year. Furthermore, USA leads the world in exploiting drone technology, as evident by the X-47B, Reaper, and Predator programs; Israeli UAV development is extraneous.

Finally, the Pentagon doesn’t need to purchase Israeli weaponry. The U.S. military-industrial complexflourishes irrespective of Israeli participation. Israel’s supporters claim the Pentagon can purchase Israeli weapons of war, but ignore the fact that U.S. taxpayers fund the very development of said weaponry. Israeli weaponry provides the U.S. with no strategic benefit.

In addition to enduring the aforementioned strategic burdens, the U.S. gives Israel many other gifts: vetoing UN Security Council resolutions, which are critical of Israel, over 40 times; deliberate Congressional silence about widespreadIsraeliespionage against U.S. interests; more than $3 billion per year, gratis; and defundingUNESCO when Palestine was admitted as a member. The U.S. receives nothing tangible in return.

These are enormous political and economic costs, which no country should endure, especially a country whose national debt nears $17 trillion.

Admittedly, morality is rarely a factor in U.S. foreign policy decisions, as history attests. Nonetheless, there is no reason for the U.S. to shoulder additional immorality by supporting Israel’s morally untenable position. A handful of Israel’s depraved activities include:

Breaking bones and beating Palestinians;

Shooting Palestinians at point blank range with rubber bullets;

Shooting Palestinians with live fire;

Assaulting journalists and friends of journalism (once, twice, thrice, and numerous other times);

Denying Palestinian refugees the Right of Return, a right which is guaranteed under international law;

Supervising/conducting massacres, including Sabra & Shatila and Deir Yassin;

Attacking United Nations’ compounds at Qana and Khiyam;

Attacking a U.S. intelligence ship, the USS Liberty, killing 34 service members;

Mossad posing as U.S. intelligence operatives when conducting intelligence missions;

Killing at least two U.S. citizens: Furkan Dogan (2010) & Rachel Corrie (2003);

Spraying “skunk” juice on Palestinian homes as a punitive measure for protesting apartheid;

Usingwhite phosphorous against civilians in densely populated areas;

Breaking numerous truces and ceasefires;

Pretending to care for Muslims, while simultaneously perpetuating a racist and islamophobic society, which practices daily acts of segregation and apartheid;

 Attacking numerous countries and private citizens: Sudan, Syria (September 2007, May 2013, July 2013), Iraq, Lebanon multiple times, Turkish citizens in international waters,

Palestine, and Egypt, among others;

Killing at least 308 Palestinian children in a 22-day military assault.

These harsh realities, a posteriori, lead one to conclude that it is not in the United States’ strategic interest to support Israel.

Is U.S. support for Israel worth the service and sacrifice of our men and women in uniform, and their families?

Take the 2003 Iraq War, for example. As Professors Walt and Mearsheimer indicate, powerful actors within the Israel Lobby pushed very hard for the United States to go to war with Iraq. This war cost the United States more than $2 trillion and over 4,400 lives. Violence still ravages Iraq daily; Over 100,000 Iraqi civilians have been killed as the result of U.S. aggression. Clearly, this war was not worth the “service and sacrifice,” which toppled the only regional military capable of putting a dent in Israel’s military hegemony.

Many individuals assert that the 2003 Iraq War would have been conducted even without pressure from the Israel Lobby. To them, one proffers the following grave warning.

Since assuming office, the Obama Administration has increased U.S.-Israel military cooperation to “unprecedented levels,” while promising Israel future gifts of $4billion per year. Currently, the U.S. Armed Forces are interlinked with the Israeli military to such an extent that it will be nearly impossible for the Pentagon to refrain from direct combat (on the side of Zionist colonists) if a regional war breaks out. Eschewing another land war in Asia, as former War Secretary Robert Gates advises, is a responsible part of caring for the U.S. Armed Forces and their families.

The Israel Lobby’s current target is Iran. The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) has sponsored numerous bills aimed at sanctioning Iran for exercising its rights under the NPT. As each bill passes, more innocent Iranian civilians go hungry and more innocent Iranians are denied adequate medical supplies. Although this form of economic warfare requires little “sacrifice” from U.S. uniformed personnel, long-distance torture still isn’t worth it; no human should sanction innocent humans from thousands of miles away.

Waging warfare on behalf of Israel is not worth the sacrifice.

Does U.S. support for Israel help protect U.S. national security?

Supporting Israel and its ceaseless ethnic cleansing and oppression of Palestine doesn’t protect the United States. Rather, it provides a justifiable grievance against the United States around which millions of global citizens unite; women and men worldwide loathe the United States for contributing to the daily violation of Palestinians’ fundamental human rights. Immediate extrication from the alliance with Israel is crucial to U.S. national security and to help redeem the United States’ humanitarian profile.

Unconditional support for any nation is foolhardy, since no two nations share identical goals or identities. Today, the U.S. citizenry must heed George Washington’s advice and “steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world,” specifically the Israeli apartheid regime.

Secretary of War Chuck Hagel affirms:

“We cannot simply wish or hope our way to carrying out a responsible national security strategy and its implementation…  In order for this effort to succeed, we need to be steely-eyed and clear-headed in our analysis, and explore the full range of options for implementing our national security strategy.”

Given the full range of options, the choice is clear: the U.S. citizenry and its global peers must extricate the United States from its bloody and costly alliance with Israel.

# # # #

Christian Sorensen, BFP Contributing Author & Analyst, is a U.S. military veteran. His writing has been featured in CounterPunch and Media Roots.

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by SUBSCRIBING, and by ordering our EXCLUSIVE BFP DVDs.

FB Like

Share This

This site depends….

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by SUBSCRIBING and/or DONATING.


  1. Rose Mary says:

    Awesome collection of good links

    (I am less optimistic about separating head from body … that will be interesting chirurgy)

  2. ProudPrimate says:

    This is an article by Maidhc Ó Cathail (Mike O’Cawhill) that makes the point of your article in spades:


    Take the quiz!

  3. Rose Mary says:

    Your source seems to rely on muslim sources

    What do they have in common these agents for war with Saddam?
    1) they were “Zionists” (all other actors were filtered out in the first place) 2) they were all “Jewish” = that is what Muslims thinks 😀

  4. Rose Mary says:

    Your source seems to rely on muslim sources

    What do they have in common these agents for war with Saddam?
    1) they were “Zionists” (all other actors were filtered out in the first place) 2) they were all “Jewish” = that is what Muslims think 😀

Speak Your Mind