Inside the Middle East
October 15, 2010
Posted: 558 GMT
Avigdor Liberman, pictured in Jerusalem, is not known for his diplomatic style.
Avigdor Liberman, pictured in Jerusalem, is not known for his diplomatic style.

Solve your own problems before you lecture us about ours.

That was the blunt message Israel's combative and controversial foreign minister, Avigdor Liberman, gave to counterparts visiting from France and Spain earlier this week in Jerusalem.

In comments widely publicized in the Israeli media Monday, Liberman told Spanish Foreign Minister Miguel Angel Moratinos and French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner that European countries needed to work on the conflicts in their own backyards before advising Israel on how to handle its decades-old dispute with Arab neighbors.

"I do expect you at least to solve problems in Europe before you come to teach us how to resolve conflicts. After you solve conflicts in the Caucasus, Cyprus, in Transnistria or the ongoing fight between Serbia and Kosovo - come to us and then I will be ready to accept your advice."

Liberman also wanted the visiting diplomats to know that Israel could not be pushed around like he said some European countries were on the eve of the Second World War.

"In 1938 the European community decided to appease (Adolf) Hitler instead of supporting its faithful ally Czechoslovakia and sacrificed it without receiving anything in return," Liberman told Moratinos and Kouchner, according to media reports. "I'm telling you: we will not be the 2010 version of Czechoslovakia. We will defend our essential interests."

And to make things crystal clear to the visiting diplomats, the Israeli foreign minister explained some of the faults of recent diplomatic efforts.

"It seems like the international community is trying to hide its failures to resolve conflicts in Somalia, North Korea, Afghanistan, Zimbabwe, Sudan and other places by pushing for an Israel-Palestinian agreement in one year..."

Liberman warned that the push for a quick resolution - despite being the stated policy of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu - may, "instead of achieving quiet ... could well lead to the opposite - it could lead to a big explosion, like it did in 2000 after the Camp David summit between (former) Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and (Palestinian leader Yasser) Arafat."

An official at the Foreign Ministry acknowledged that Liberman said some things "that needed to be heard" but characterized the meeting with the two European ministers as being "very good," and denied suggestions in the Israeli media that the comments were made in anger.

Delivery style aside, they were not the most diplomatic of words from the Jewish state's foreign policy chief, but then Liberman is not known for rhetorical nuance.

Last month, Liberman shocked diplomats from around the world - and members of his own government - with a United Nations speech in which he called for a re-drawing of borders which would place much of Israel's Arab population in a future Palestinian state in exchange for Israel holding on to its West Bank settlement blocks.

The remarks prompted a statement from Netanyahu's office saying that the foreign minister's comments did not reflect Israeli government policy.

Liberman, who immigrated to Israel from the Soviet Union in 1978, is the leader of Israel's right-wing Yisrael Beiteinu, a nationalist party that enjoys a great deal of support from Israel's large Russian community and is the second largest member of Netanyahu's coalition government.

A former club bouncer turned politician, Liberman prides himself on a plain-spoken and take-no-prisoners style. Whether demanding Palestinian citizens of Israel swear loyalty oaths to the state, going head-to-head with Israeli religious authorities to assert a greater degree of secularism or publicly articulating foreign policy directly at odds with that of his own prime minister, Liberman has always marched to the beat of his own drummer.

His verbal bomb-throwing and hard-line domestic policy positions have long drawn accusations of racism from his fiercest critics and plaudits from his right-wing base, but his performance as the country's top diplomat is increasingly coming under fire.

In a Tuesday editorial, the liberal Haaretz newspaper castigated Netanyahu for playing politics and allowing Liberman to contribute to Israel's diminished international reputation.

"Liberman's flawed behaviour, which repeats itself, raises suspicion that the leader of Yisrael Beiteinu has transformed the foreign service of Israel into a springboard for advancing his lot in the right-wing. At a time when the prime minister, ministers, ambassadors and even the president are trying to explain to leaders throughout the world that Israel seeks an agreement quickly with the Palestinians, the foreign minister does not miss a chance to present them as delusional. "

An official in the prime minister's office, who asked not to be identified because of the sensitivity of the relationship with Liberman, stressed that all national security decisions were made by Netanyahu and that the phenomena of a foreign minister espousing a completely divergent foreign policy was "not new to Israeli politics." It's the reality of coalition politics, the official said.

While disagreements between foreign ministers and prime ministers are not unheard of in the rough and tumble world of Israeli coalition politics, Liberman is charting new territory, according to Alon Liel, a former career diplomat who served as the director-general of Israel's foreign ministry.

"With Liberman, things have gotten absurd," he observes. "I don't remember a foreign minister who voluntarily excludes himself from the peace talks.

"We never had a foreign minister criticizing and contradicting the prime minister on an international platform like the U.N. assembly in such a brutal way."

Liel says there were hopes and an expectation that when Liberman took the foreign minister position he would rise above party politics and become a statesman for Israel. According to Liel, that never happened.

"He sees himself as an envoy of the people who elected him, not as an envoy of the Israeli government," he said.

The result, Liel says, has been the growing isolation of the Israeli foreign ministry, a foreign minister whose positions have become "irrelevant," and a deteriorating image of Israel internationally.

A foreign ministry official refused to respond to the criticisms other than to say that the foreign minister is a consistent defender of Israel's image and national interest abroad.

Liberman is not welcome in the capitals two of Israel's most important neighbors - Egypt and Jordan - and he has very little dealings with the United States.

A current Israeli diplomat said Liberman's "disregard" for career diplomats was "very open" and that an increasing number of foreign service personnel were becoming "discouraged and demoralized." The source, who did not want his identity revealed, said management problems have plagued the ministry for a number of years, but "resentment" among rank-and-file employees had grown under Liberman's watch.

As much as Liberman's performance has upset diplomatic circles here, there is a belief among some that beneath the uncompromising exterior is a very practical politician.

"It is difficult to say that he is on the left of Netanyahu, but he is much more pragmatic and opportunistic than Netanyahu," says Yossi Beilin, a former Israeli deputy foreign minister and one of the architects of the Oslo peace process in the 1990s.

"So far he has supported all of Netanyahu's decisions - the two-state solution, and then the freeze - they accepted it," he said, referring to Liberman's party.

Acceptance of these ideas, however, does not mean the foreign minister thinks they will happen. In practice and in public comments, Liberman's attitude to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is what one policy observer has described as "benign neglect."

Einat Wilf, a Labor parliamentarian and member of the Knesset's foreign affairs and defense committee, said that while Liberman has been able to articulate some "difficult truths," he can only be effective when he has the ear of the world and "in that respect he been a complete failure."

Posted by:
Filed under: Israel

Share this on:
Wilson   October 15th, 2010 10:06 am ET

We should all play by Israels rules.

1. They want Israel to be recognized as a Jewish state. Fine but they must also recognize that all western states are for Christians. And all Jews living in the west must be deported to their Jewish state of Israel.

2. Israel will defend itself. Fine, let them do so. No more aid to Israel as they claim they can manage themselves. And while we are at it, Israel can start to pay back the 3 billion dollars aid they have received from America each year for 60 years.

I completely agree with Liberman. Let the Jews sought out their own problems. No more support from corrupted western politicians who rob their tax payers to fund Israel.

Israel is just for Jews. Fine send all the worlds Jews there. Europe and America is just for Christians.

Jews look after there own self interests and all other faiths should be the same.

If they claim Christians are anti semitic, because we don't want to help them any more, then we will claim they are anti Christian for constantly demanding that we give to them without receiving anything in return.

In reality, Jews all around the world are embarrassed by Israel and feel threatened by the Fascist image Israel gives all Jews.

Seraph   October 15th, 2010 2:12 pm ET

Lieberman is right. Too bad he forgot to mention the Basque struggle and the Catalans. When the French and Spanish figure those ones out, come preaching to Israel. Otherwise, they should butt out.

kumba   October 15th, 2010 2:45 pm ET

Arrogant, stupid, no class.
Certainly not a peace maker, but a looser.

Patrick   October 16th, 2010 12:54 am ET

There's already plenty of proof and statements, but for the deniers here' some more facts that you can't escape. What's this got to do with the west's relations with the middle east? It has everything to do with it!!

Evidence indicating that the collapse of the World Trade Center was a controlled demolition has been propelled back under the national spotlight following the University of Copenhagen’s announcement that dust obtained from the rubble of the twin towers contains evidence of highly explosive material.

The energetic material that was found in the WTC dust by an international team of scientists led by Niels Harrit of the University of Copenhagen in Denmark, consists of “nano-engineered iron oxide and aluminum particles” that “exhibit the same characteristics as advanced energetic materials developed in US national laboratories in the years leading up to 9/11.”

The red chips have “no reason to be in this dust” points out an Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth story concerning the samples and could not have been naturally formed from either the impact of the jetliners nor the collapse of the towers, unless a highly pyrotechnic explosive was used to implode the buildings.

Only the blind and the guilty deny 911 was an inside job.

CNN, this is an unstoppable truth and it will be recognized by everyone within 10 years. You better start doing some real investigative reporting so that you don't look complicit when the criminals in Washington go down.

And Israel, for all your lies and manipulation, you should now be very afraid.

Nahrain Al Yasseri   October 16th, 2010 4:29 am ET

I Cannot understand how those Israelis who claim that they are the only democracy in the region have elected such crime gangster one like Lieberman , let him go back to Russia he and his punch of Russian gangster.

Ariely   October 16th, 2010 11:57 am ET

Lessons and implementation.

What the European should learn from their colonial period and ongoing conflicts in Europe.
Hopefully the Americans will not be trapped to repeat the same mistakes.


A: Example of unsolved conflicts
1:Vive le Quibec Frances? – Solved?
2:Belgian Valones and Flames separation desired- solved?
3:Scottish independence from UK desire- solved?
4:All Balkans wars and conflicts- solved?
5:Wars in Caucuses -solved?
6:Tibetan independencies desire- solved?
7:Burma minorities war for independence solved?
8:African many wars as result of European policy of slip or unite tribes in artificial states -solved?
9:Kurds desire for independence in Turkey and Iraq –solved?
10: Kashmir ?
11: Chasing of Christians and all non Muslims people in Muslim countries?
12; The civil wars Lebanon artificially created by France.-solved?
B: Solutions example
1:The split of Czechoslovakia into the Czech and Slovakia countries.
2:In the Swiss famous peaceful coexistence between German, France groups a canton has been spleet into: Jura-France and Bern-German.
3: Turkey and Greece don’t fight for the last 90 years following the population exchange between these two countries. Approximately 1.5 million Greeks from Turkey and about half a million Muslims from Greece were uprooted from their homelands.
4:Turkey force partition of Cyprus into a Christian and Muslim control areas is a problem or the solution? Following the partition on the ground no casualties

1: Minimize the creation of conflict continuation while defining boarders.

2: Muslims governed by Arabs.
Jews and others governed by Israel.

3:Israel will hand over to Palestinian government land inhabited by Arabs from Israel and the Jews from settlements will be governed by Israel.
Both the Arabs and Jew will remain in their current homes nobody will have to move physically.

miriam   October 17th, 2010 1:11 pm ET


Not even Leiberman talks of deporting the Arab population. Israel respects its non-Jewish citizens and grants them the same rights as all other citizens. His proposal is that since the Palestinians want a state free of Jews and to acquire 100% of the West Bank, then Israel should be able to keep the largely Jewish cities situated along the 1949 Armistice Line and in exchange, the PA could control some Arab cities close to those lines.

Not surprisingly, the Israeli Arabs, despite all their rhetoric, don't want to live under the PA.

miriam   October 17th, 2010 1:19 pm ET


You obviously have a poor understanding of democracy and elections.

In real democracies, it is the right of every citizen to stand for election if they so desire.
Similarly, in democratic elections, one cannot ban citizens from voting for a candidate.
In Israel, there is no ban immigrants standing for Parliament and you do not have to have been born in Israel or be a Jew to lead a party and potentially become Prime Minister.

Israeli politics are more democratic than almost any other country, with all views represented, including your own.
Just imagine, if you were an Israeli citizen, you could vote for a party that supports the destruction of the Jewish state!!!!!!!!!!

miriam   October 17th, 2010 1:27 pm ET

Leiberman is certainly atypical of foreign ministers and secretaries of state, however he may be a more honest politician than most of his counter-parts.

Perhaps, the world's problems are in a large part due to the "diplomatic" workings of Foreign Ministries, too concerned at in keeping their own interests protected rather than making an honest attempt at dealing objectively with the real issues.

Any diplomat knows how hard it is to express their own opinions, stepping carefully through the mine-field of foreign policy. Maybe the time has come for increased honesty and less intimidation.

John A   October 17th, 2010 7:50 pm ET

If you want to preserve a tiny amount of credibility, you should not attempt to defend everything Israeli.

Avigdor Liberman has made himself and Israel look vile and stupid on many occasions. Your defense of Liberman may put you in the vile and stupid clan.

miriam   October 18th, 2010 11:20 am ET

John A,

Anyone who honestly knows anything about Israel realizes the ignorance in your comment(s).

Israeli society and politics is full of wide and varying opinions so that is impossible to defend "everything Israeli".

However, when faced with comments on this blog that are so hateful and full of false, baseless propaganda not unique to this page but being deseminated in many public forums, it is the right of any individual to refute the statements.

And as for Leiberman, he has such a wide range of political views, he is capable of attracting support and opposition from one individual in just one sentence. You might be surprized to know that there are many in the international community who respect his openess and admire his personality, even if they also don't agree with his every word and his diplomatic tact.

Smith in Oregon   October 19th, 2010 1:26 am ET

It's clear that Israel doesn't care about international laws nor being reminded of the multiple serious international crimes that the European Union criminal experts have determined are supported by substantial evidence against multiple Israeli Officials.

The European Union should begin pressuring Israel to turn over Israeli Officials for international crimes trials, and place an embargo on trade with Israel until they comply.

John A   October 19th, 2010 11:41 am ET

The European Union would love to. Trouble is America will start trade wars and threaten any nation which wants justice in the middle east.

Do you really think that USA forces have been found torturing and killing Iraqis at random because they care about justice.

Your politicians control your army and your politicians are controlled by lobbyists and special interest groups.

First bring open and just democracy back to America and many of the international problems will soon melt away. Its corrupt US politics which has manufactured nearly every major problem in the world. And when you study the worlds problems its amazing how many times you will trace a link to Halliburton.

miriam   October 19th, 2010 11:44 am ET


You are right.

There are most likely a number of EU "experts" who are criminals.

As a former EU leader recently stated, "don't apply rules to Israel that you would never dream of applying to your own country".

If Israeli "officials" are accused of "crimes", then EU "officials" are equally, and probably more, guilty of equivalent "crimes".

Your hypocritical comments have been directed against Israel, the US and the EU. Clearly, your sympathies lie with those who violate most international laws and whose legal systems bare little resemblence to Western values.

University Rector   October 19th, 2010 9:18 pm ET

Miriam, when did the EU murder aid workers in international waters? The EU is nothing like blood curdling Israel. Grow up!

Ariely   October 20th, 2010 1:33 pm ET

Some people claim in their comments to stand for:
peace, democracy, human and women rights.

However they support Muslims courtiers that opose all those values.
Stated by leaders of the 58 Muslim countries in Kuala Lumpur summit.

They don’t demand the Muslims to stop the violation of the values they claim to stand for.
They don’t demand the Muslims to join the 21 century desire of freedom, equality,religious freedom and stop the preaching and teaching of the 7 century narrative; One religion- Islam:
One government- Chalifat: One law- Sharia.

They deny the right of the Jews 3500 years culture rooted in Israel the right for their country.
Jewish nation and culture that existed long before their cultures ( partially based on Judaism) and countries have been created.

Could they be undercover Anti-Semites

John A   October 21st, 2010 9:12 am ET


Don't bother trying to gain support by whipping up your racially charged arguments. That just shows how low and desperate you have become. Why don't you make political adverts for Jack Conway, or perhaps you already have hahahaha

The reasons boarders evolve between nations is because we don't all want to live the same way. Arabs live in their land they way they want. Westerners also do the same. We can question values from any society i.e. porn and gambling are rife in western states. Do you hold these activities as moral because they are western?

Each country should be left to its own ways. Thats exactly why Israel should stop occupying foreign land such as Palestine, which all the world recognizes except for the criminal state of Israel.

miriam   October 21st, 2010 2:07 pm ET


Members of the EU have certainly been involved in maintaining blockades, many of which have resulted in war and mass casualties.

Have you heard of the Battle of Trafalgar, Battle of Navarino, War of 1812, WW1, WW2 etc.

Under international law, it is legal to maintain a blockade during war-time and enforce it in international waters. Boats must obey the request to stop for inspection by the blockading nation. If necessary, the boat can be diverted to a harbour and if the boat refuses to stop it can be captured. If there is resistence to capture, the resisters can be attacked. Obviously, if the boarding soldiers are themselves attacked and their lives are in danger, it is permissable to kill in self-defence.

Very few people are still fooled into believing that any of the victims were aid-workers.

By the way, which of the three foreign ministers is now out of their job?

proud zionist   October 21st, 2010 9:30 pm ET

university r

murder aid workers in international waters? I never heard of aidworkers making video shihad testaments before sailing on a "peace" mission.

but let me not confuse you with facts, go on spewing your lies and your hate

John A   October 22nd, 2010 6:27 pm ET

Proud Zionist,

Liar, liar, pants on on fire.

I'm trying to communicate with you according to your own mental age.

Ariely   October 23rd, 2010 7:43 am ET

John A: Commented: ""Each country should be left to its own ways""

In principle we agree
The world is versatile and countries and cultures should find the way of peacefull coexistence.

Compete for people acceptance by proving that life is better in one system compared to the other and not by imposing by sward.

Do you accept; " My way is to walk around rob,rape and kill 'people –this is my right " or limits should be imposed?
It should not be accepted and limits should be imposed.

1;The free people world wide should oppose countries sponsoring ideology or religion desiring to impose their own religion, culture on others people by force.
Such entities or sponsoring countries should not be permitted to gain the power to implement their desire and should be stopped by any means.

2: Countries that are dining basic human rights such as minority's rights to learn their language, follow their individual culture, oppressing women should be boycotted by the others,

3:Additional universal moral values of behavior should be considered

Ariely   October 23rd, 2010 7:59 am ET

John A Commented:. ""Arabs live in their land they way they want. Westerners also do the same. Do you hold these activities as moral because they are western?""

Indeed? Are we leaving the same period?

Arabs want to impose their culture all over the places they immigrate to.
A s soon Arabs are over 2% of population in a Western country they want to impose Sharia.
Arabs impose their culture on the minorities leaving in Arab controlled countries.

miriam   October 23rd, 2010 5:25 pm ET

John A,

There was never a sovereign Palestinian state.

Israel captured the WB from the Jordanian occupier, whose control over the territory was not internationally recognized, in a defensive war.

So what occupation of Palestine are you talking about?

John A   October 24th, 2010 11:46 am ET


As always you forget not a single Arab nations occupies another land with its military.

Meanwhile Israel occupies Syria and Palestine. America occupies Iraq and Afghanistan.

The facts concerning occupation and forced rule don't support your racial prejudice & political fantasies. Its your prejudice and your politics which motivates your war on Muslims. It has nothing to do with defense.

Muslim armies are not in any other land apart from their own. You can't say the same about Israel or America?

So try to grow up a little Ariely, or at least ask your mum to help supervise your Internet blogging activities.

Ariely   October 25th, 2010 1:59 pm ET

John A Commented:, Not a single Arab nations occupies another land with its military.""
Reply: Are we leaving on the same planet?
Arabs are attacking, losing wars, later to demand getting back lost territories . Later to attack once again.
Arab aggressors should pay for their aggressions.
As always don’t take responsibility for their faults- only blaming others.

* 1948-Armies from 7 Arab armies attacked the defending Israel. The defending Israel managed to stay alive.
1:The secretary general of the Arab League, Azzam Pasha:
Advice given to the Arabs to :
2: Arab League declaration when 7 Arab armies attacked Israel in 1948:
"This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres"

Commented:" Meanwhile Israel occupies Syria and Palestine"
Reply; Are we leaving on the same planet?
1967-Armies from 4 Arab countries willing to destroy the defending Israel. The defending Israel managed to stay alive.
1:The battle will be a general one and our basic objective will be to destroy Israel."
Statement by President Nasser to Arab Trade Unionists (May 26, 1967)
2; Advise was given to King Hussein not to join the war .But he preferred to attack.

Commented:"" Muslim armies are not in any other land apart from their own"".
The global war was declared by Arabs in the 7 century against all cultures.
The war never stopped, and today the world has to deal with the tactical tool- the global terroris.
Their empire imposed by Muslim armies started in Hedjaz and spread up the gates of Paris, Vienna, and Moscow, India.

Some managed to push back the Muslims aggression- and typically the Muslims blame the defenders.

miriam   October 25th, 2010 7:58 pm ET

John A,

Your pre-occupation with anti-Israel rhetoric displays how Arab propaganda has invaded and occupied people's minds.

According to every definition of "occupation" in customary international law, Israel has never "occupied" the WB and Gaza.

Since WW2, no other territorial dispute, including those where captured land was actually under a sovereign's rule, has been described an "occupation" including Kashmir, Nagorno-Karabakh, Western Sahara, Zubarah, Northern Cyprus, Kurile Islands, Abu Musa and others.

Clearly, there are populations that will reject your claims that they aren't under any foreign Muslim control.

The term "occupation" is employed for political purposes with no regard for its legal meaning, having created a context to justify violence and terrorism, denying Israeli claims to the dispute and attempting to leave no room for territorial compromise.

John A   October 26th, 2010 10:03 am ET

Miriam your argument is non logical BS. You claim after the Ottoman empire fell, the land they held belonged to no one.

Really not a clever argument.

The Arabs joined the British in World War I to help liberate themselves from Ottoman rule. Ottomans occupied their land.

Directly after the land was liberated from the Ottomans, there was no Israel but there were Arab lands.

Directly before the Ottoman invasion, there was no Israel, but there was Arabic land.

Your claim that the land belonged to no one after the Ottomans, is simply BS. Millions of people lived in that region before Israel was invented.

PS The Muslims joined the British to defeat the Germans and Turks in World War I. Meanwhile Jewish bankers in America funded both the Germans and the British. The supposed Jewish "race" did not band together to fight with the allies. It simply scratched its butt and tried to profit from the war.

Israel remains a fraud and your only defense of Israel is based on non factual religious stories invented in your synagogs, with a good dose of lies thrown in.

miriam   October 26th, 2010 2:51 pm ET

John A,

After the fall of the Ottomans, most of their empire was mandated to the British and the French who subsequently invented the states of Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and Iraq at the same time as re-establishing the Jewish state. None of those Arab states would have come into existance were it not for the League of Nations resolution mandating the re-establishment of Israel.

The land claimed by Jews is more legitimate than the lands claimed by Arabs.

During WW1, Jews fought for the Ottomans, Germans and the British, loyal citizens to whichever nation they were part of, something learned through hundreds of years of living in the diaspora having been exiled and expelled from their homeland.

The Arabs supported Britain in the hope of establishing ONE independent Arab state on all the liberated Ottoman lands. However, their competing visions and fights for domination weakened their grandiose plans.

It is not clear where on this blog I have stated that after the Ottomans fell, the land belonged to nobody. As I have explained, it was mandated to Britain and France. It's one thing revising history, another inventing my comments.

Filipe   October 26th, 2010 9:54 pm ET

Jon A,

YOU might not think that the claim of Ottoman control and possesion of Israel is not clever argument..... But the fact is, the legal community of the world recognizes land titles of the region from the period when the land was under Ottoman rule.... not before. So those who can prove ownership of any land with documents from the period of Ottoman rule are considered valid..... and any transfers subsequent to the period of Ottoman rule..... British Mandate also considered valid.

Any Arab or Bedouin saquatters who parked their a$$es on vacant land without having purchased it....are nothing more than squatters!

No different than you squatting on Native American land.

John A   October 28th, 2010 2:51 pm ET

Ohh Filipe now I understand, Hitler had to be defeated so the British could continue telling the world who was entitled to what.

Obviously the problem was not Hitler being a fascist, its just he was the wrong type of fascist.

Now I understand. The only law that counts is the one forced by a British or American gun. If the same rules are applied in reverse they are a wicked threat to mankind. But when Britain and America make up such rules and favor Israel, then its all okay.

Thanks for clearing up everything Filipe.

And your right the native Americans should learn from the Israelis. They should burn down American homes, start terror organizations and reclaim their land. After all the native Americans can prove they owned the land only 150 years ago. The Jews cant prove they ever owned anything 3000 years ago.

And if the EU sent American Indians jet fighters and tanks with 3 billion annual aid, to fight for the liberation of their land.....Then dumb arse America would know how dumb they have been to support the fraud of Israel.

Smith in Oregon   October 29th, 2010 12:16 am ET

With a so-called friend like Israel who needs a enemy like Iran!

Cost to American taxpayers in support of the Apartheid state of Israel.

Stauffer is a Washington, D.C.-based engineer and economist who writes and teaches about the economics of energy and the Middle East. Stauffer has taught at Harvard University and Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service. Stauffer's findings were first presented at an October 2002 conference sponsored by the U.S. Army College and the University of Maine.

Stauffer's analysis is "an estimate of the total cost to the U.S. alone of instability and conflict in the region – which emanates from the core Israeli-Palestinian conflict."

"Total identifiable costs come to almost $3 trillion," Stauffer says. "About 60 percent, well over half, of those costs – about $1.7 trillion – arose from the U.S. defense of Israel, where most of that amount has been incurred since 1973."

"Support for Israel comes to $1.8 trillion, including special trade advantages, preferential contracts, or aid buried in other accounts. In addition to the financial outlay, U.S. aid to Israel costs some 275,000 American jobs each year." The trade-aid imbalance alone with Israel of between $6-10 billion costs about 125,000 American jobs every year, Stauffer says.

The largest single element in the costs has been the series of oil-supply crises that have accompanied the Israeli-Arab wars and the construction of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.

To date these have cost the U.S. $1.5 trillion (2002 dollars), excluding the additional costs incurred since 2001 Stauffer wrote.

Urge Local, State and Federal Lawmakers to totally cut off funding to Israel, divest in Israel's business's and use those funds to help dozens of States now teetering on the brink of bankruptcy in America.

miriam   October 30th, 2010 7:44 pm ET

Smith, aka Christopher,

Thomas Stauffer died 5 years ago and as the author states, his comments were made over 7 years ago, at the start of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq which have resulted in aid to Israel looking like peanuts compared to that which goes to Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq and other non-democratic countries in the ME, especially those fighting extremism and terrorism.

Stauffer's figures were greatly overstated, telling only half the story. He inflated costs and ignored discounts and the many benefits to the US.

Eg, he included the aid to Egypt and Jordan as costs accountable to Israel, since they receive money for making peace with the Jewish state. He assumed that Israel would not pay back any loans, which, of course, was presumptive and mistaken. He also blamed on Israel, losses to the US due to the Arab oil embargo and added in the private donations of individuals to Israel which, by cynically meddling in the individual's right to spend his money how he wishes, he assumed should have remained in the US.

His calculations were deceptive and dishonest, irrelevent to today with the gradual reduction of US aid to Israel and the changed realities in the world.

Too bad your copy and paste is even more discredited by the fact that it was written by a well known anti-US/Israel conspiracist.

John A   November 3rd, 2010 7:46 pm ET

Don't worry Smith, Miriam has copied all the dribble she has ever posted and assumes we all do

aka aka aka aha aha aha

miriam   November 11th, 2010 2:54 pm ET

John A,

Projecting your laughter as well as your lies?

subscribe RSS Icon
About this blog

This blog has now been archived and commenting has been switched off. Visit the Inside the Middle East site for news, views and video from across the region.

Read more about CNN's special reports policy