In the mid-1980's the US made two moves that rankled inside Israel's armor. Indeed, they are still quite bothersome to this day. First, they sold AWACS technology to Saudi Arabia over Israel's legitimate security objections. Second, at virtually the same time, they imprisoned Jonathan Pollard under the harshest prison term ever meted out in US history for someone who had committed his crime. The driving force behind both moves was then-Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger, an avowed anti-Semite.
The link between these two events is more than just topical. Indeed, the information Pollard passed to Israel, which should have been forthcoming in any case under a memorandum of understanding between the two countries but wasn't, concerned Arab military preparations, including the development of non-conventional weapons systems by Iran, Iraq, and Syria. This information also helped Saudi Arabia during the Gulf War when Iraq was threatening to use the weapons Pollard had warned about.
But during that war, Bush refused to allow Israel to defend itself against Scud attacks by warning that any unauthorized (read: Israeli) military flights would be shot down. Saudi AWACS planes were part of the over-all allied air umbrella meant to insure against unauthorized flights. So not only did the US refuse to uphold its commitments to Israeli defense capabilities by selling the AWACS to a potential Israeli enemy, they then used those very planes to prevent Israel from actively defending itself against active attack -- an attack Pollard warned could be non-conventional.
Today, the situation is somewhat reversed. Israel is planning to sell China advanced airborne radar technology that was developed by Israel. The US feels threatened by this. It seems that in the US estimation, Chinese acquisition of this advanced technology could pose a threat to Taiwan. The
US is supposedly sworn to protect Taiwan, and thus, Chinese advancement is a threat to US forces.
On the surface, the US position here makes sense. But let us dig just a little bit. The US has actively sought to increase trade with China over the objections of Taiwan, ever since President Clinton came to power. With the warming relations between the US and China over the past decade, one wonders what kind of defense the US would provide to Taiwan, and how it would differ from the defense with which the US assists Israel.
But that is neither here nor there. Let us look at the more immediate concerns of the US. The Americans suggest that the Phalcon radar system would create a Chinese threat to Taiwan, and thus to US interests. I say bull. Right now, without the Phalcon, China is to Taiwan as an elephant is to a gnat. Should the US come to the aid of Taiwan in a timely and effective manner (unlike their response in support of Kuwait), China would still hold the advantage of local turf, and the US would likely be in a similar position to what it enjoyed in Vietnam. In fact, it would likely be worse since there is much less territory in Taiwan upon which the US can gain a strategic foothold, and since China is a much more powerful enemy than North Vietnam ever was.
The Phalcon would give the Chinese elephant a slightly longer tusk. But since elephants generally deal with gnats by stepping on them, I suggest that the Phalcon is a non-issue in strategic terms.
What is more at stake here is American hegemony. The US has long objected to warming Israeli-Chinese relations, to the detriment of both Israel and China. And yet, Israel and China have thus far managed to develop those relations despite the US. Furthermore, Israel is now challenging the US as
a major supplier of weapons technology to a major military power -- something that only the US could accomplish only five or ten years ago. Plainly put, the US feels threatened by another player in the military arms field.
When Israel objected to the US supplying arms to Saudi Arabia, it did so out of immediate security considerations. Saudi Arabia lies barely 25 kilometers from Israel's southern border, and AWACS planes posed an immediate threat to Israel's aerial defense systems, which are Israel's most effective line of defense against attack, as proven in 1967 and again in 1973.
But Israel's objections mattered not a whit to the Americans. They sent the planes anyway.
For the US, Israel's sale of the Phalcon to China is a threat only to the American ego. There is no real increase in the military threat to American, or even Taiwanese forces. If China had really been interested in consuming Taiwan, they would have done so long ago. Rather, the US sees the Phalcon sale as an opportunity to remind Ehud Barak that he is nothing more than a "favourite toy" of Bill Clinton.
If Barak backs down from the sale, as indications are he might, he will achieve three things: First, he will prove that he is nothing more than Clinton's plaything. Second, he will lose an opportunity to pour $250 million directly into Israel's economy. Third, he will forever tie Israel to the whims of American foreign policy.
If, however, Barak pushes the sale through, he will achieve an improvement in Israel's marketability in the world's defense market, he will help Israel pull itself out from under the influence of US policy, and he will show the US that ignoring Israel's interests comes at a price.
If Barak were really smart, of course, he would link the Phalcon sale to the release of Pollard from American prison -- and then, once Pollard is free -- make the sale anyway. That would show Clinton further that going back on promises to Israel is a costly gamble.
Copyright 2000. Yehuda Poch is a writer living in Israel. Reproduction in electronic or print format by permission only.
