JINSA July 24, 2023
Click here to read the report.
,
.
As Iran’s nuclear program advances and U.S. Iran policy falters, the United States – executive and legislative branches alike – should immediately begin preparing to blunt Iranian retaliation in the likelihood that, absent possible American intervention, Israel acts militarily to stop Iran from crossing the nuclear threshold.
If Israel is forced to take matters into its own hands, it will be fulfilling enduring bipartisan U.S. policy to prevent a nuclear Iran. American officials might disapprove, or even resent, such Israeli action, believing, erroneously, that containing a nuclear Iran is preferable to the risks of preventing it militarily. Should Israel act, however, such concerns should be laid aside.
In the immediate aftermath of an Israeli strike, the interests of the United States and Israel will be aligned. Both countries will be best served by close cooperation to ensure a less bloody, narrower, and shorter conflict. To achieve that goal, American policymakers must start preparing now.
U.S. policymakers should be guided by the basic principle of demonstrating no daylight between America and Israel. Immediate and unwavering U.S. support for Israel on the day of a strike and strong pressure on Tehran and its proxies, especially Hezbollah, in the days after holds out the best prospect of mitigating inevitable Iran-led retaliation. The United States should follow the president’s own words about countering Iran’s nuclear weapons program, as emphasized by the U.S. ambassador to Israel earlier this year: “Israel can and should do whatever they need to deal with it and we’ve got their back.”
The JINSA Gemunder Center’s revamped Iran Policy Project brings together former senior military officers, high-ranking government officials, energy experts and business leaders to address the pressing challenges to U.S. national security posed by Iran and the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) on Iran’s nuclear program.
****
|
|
|
|
|
SEBASTIEN-
Is 100% correct.
TRUMAN was an Anti-Semite. In his memoirs he states that “a Jew never crossed my doorstep, nor ever will”. His wife Bess actively hated Jews he said.
None of the rest was any better. They were basically forced to “be nice”
(with close strings attached ) to Israel because of the influential Jewish political and donor presence .
Also Israel gave the US priceless Intelligence…Priceless.
The benefits they gave with one hand carried crippling restrictions with the other. Of all the Presidents until Trump, an avowed Israel lover, I believe Nixon was the best for Israel, despite Metternich-Kissinger.
Truma…..n He recognised Israel ONLY because he’d heard that the Russians were going to try to be FIRST in recognition. and it was De Facto, not De Jure.
@John All of them gave with one hand and took back with the other. Truman imposed an arms embargo. He recognized Israel de facto right away but waited until the following year to recognize it de jure. The Soviet Union recognized it de jure within the week and became an enemy the following year.
Kennedy permitted the sale of defensive missiles to Israel while giving aid to Egypt and harassing Israel about revealing nuclear research and taking back Arab refugees from 1948. He also introduced UN resolutions against Israel over bombings of enemy installations.
Actually, the most hostile president was Eisenhower, who tried to criminalize voluntary contributions to Israel and impose sanctions in the UN over Sinai, when it was too late to do anything about it, he said was a mistake, long after he was president.
https://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/front-page/who-was-the-first-genuinely-pro-israel-u-s-president/2017/08/30/
Ford supported aliya for Soviet Jews while also demanding Israel withdraw from Sinai.
George H.W. Bush supported Ethiopian and Soviet Aliya as Vice President and as CIA director and got the “Zionism is racism” resolution repealed at the U.N. as president but harassed Israel about Jewish settlement.
And I just learned from this article in today’s Jewish Press that the military aid was compensation from Carter for the withdrawal from Sinai:
“On March 14, 1979, under the headline, “Carter Is Said to Put New US Aid for Israel and Egypt at $4 Billion,” the NY Times reported: “United States officials said today that the conclusion of an Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty would cost the American taxpayer $4 billion and was likely to lead to new but relatively loose security arrangements between the two countries and Washington.”
NYT correspondent Richard Burt wrote: “The American readiness to pledge additional aid to Israel and Egypt is said to have made both sides more willing to agree to the peace treaty,” and explained: “Having agreed to withdraw from Sinai, Israel believes it now faces new security problems that can be ameliorated by American arms. … some officials expect the bigger part, perhaps as much as $3 billion, to go to Israel for the replacement of air bases and civilian settlements being abandoned in Sinai under the proposed peace treaty.”
Since the 1967 victory, the Sinai served as a vast training ground for the IDF and the IAF. Giving it back introduced huge costs, both immediate and ongoing. The Carter administration had a solution: the US would pay Israel $3 billion annually to defray those costs. Since then, the basic amount has not varied or adjusted for inflation. Only in 2016 did the Obama administration revamp the aid agreement, raising it to $3.8 billion annually for ten years, which will come to an end in 2027.”
https://www.jewishpress.com/news/us-news/buoyed-by-the-usual-suspects-ny-times-pushing-for-an-end-to-us-military-aid-to-israel/2023/07/23/
But with the condition that Congress could not give Israel additional aid which Trump reversed and got for Israel.
Trump also allowed Israel to fix the bugs in the F-35 and sell the fix back to the U.S. for $2 million.
But, he waited until the eleventh hour of his presidency to come up with his own version of the TSS which more generous to Israel but still a TSS in principle even if conditions the Palestinians would never agree to were attached (and conditional upon his re-election) and then tabled even partial sovereignty for the Abraham Accords which are good but which, as we have seen of late with the the behavior of the UAE, in particular, are by no means carved in stone, a Hudna, at best.
Eisenhower was the most hostile president to Israel.
https://www.jta.org/archive/eisenhower-reveals-his-1957-aims-to-penalize-israel-on-sinai-issue
But, it was he who first ordered that the evidence of the Holocaust in the camps be filmed for the historical record as they were liberated by U.S. troops led by him and made available to the public.
Since 1948, Israel has had American presidents who have helped: Truman, Trump, Nixon and some administrations that pretty much hate Israel: Clinton, Obama, Carter, Biden and some who didn’t care much either way: Kennedy, Johnson, Ford and the Bushes.
Today the Democrat Party hates Christians and Jews and embraces Islam.
Israel has $200 billion in foreign reserves. Time to use that to start an aerospace initiative so it doesn’t need US aircraft any more or its aid that the US uses to tell Israel what to do.
Watch Full Webinar on JINSA
“U.S. ambassador to Israel earlier this year: “Israel can and should do whatever they need to deal with it and we’ve got their back.”
In Biden-Speak, it means sticking a knife in Israel’s back. I wouldn’t trust that dead-shark-eyed Obama sock-puppet further than he can trip up stairs. Blinken, Kerry and most of the so-called Democrats, make no secret of their hatred of Israel. Israel needs to forge deep links with India as her EU, US and UK “allies” are about as “allied” as they were after WW2 when they turned their backs on Israel, hoping that the Arabs would finish Hitler’s job, they could then claim “clean hands, and the “Jewish question” finally dealt with. With the US actively enabling the genocidal Ayatollahs and ol’ dead-shark-eyes Biden refusing to meet Bibi, who needs “friends” like that.