Israeli Tea Party aims destroy the peace process.

It’s hard to kill something that’s already dead, but the formation of an Israeli Tea Party will have one predictable effect: give Benjamin Netanyahu yet another reason to disregard Washington’s desperate appeals for concessions.

Haaretz reports:

Likud activists who oppose the settlement freeze have set up a protest movement against the peace process and the continued construction moratorium in the West Bank. The group is modeled after the far-right conservative Tea Party movement in the United States.

The Israeli group will hold a rally Sunday at the Zionist Organization of America House in Tel Aviv, under the banner “Saying No to Obama,” where they plan to protest Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s policy and the American pressure on Israel to renew the settlement construction freeze.

Likud activists said yesterday that their Tea Party will be the opening shot in their efforts to stop the peace process entirely.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Facebooktwittermail

6 thoughts on “Israeli Tea Party aims destroy the peace process.”

  1. Christopher Hoare

    That’s fine … the peace talks are only phony anyway. This will place less blame on the Arab side when the so-called legitimacy of Mahmoud Abbas runs out in a few weeks. There is no Palestinian figure with the credibility to participate in negotiations without either recognizing the results of the last Palestinian Authority elections or else running some new ones. This is the last thing the Americans and Israelis want to see, because their propaganda mills would run out of steam trying to negate the existence of yet another democratic result.

  2. Norman

    Will be interesting to witness whether they can pull it off in Israel? The hand writing seems to be on the wall in the Middle East, but, considering that Israeli leadership seems blinded by the hatred they’ve nurtured since they reclaimed Palestine, with the Wests backing, can this be the last gasps for what could have been a powerhouse in the Middle East for all? Stay tuned, we won’t have to wait too long.

  4. scott

    Now if only they were also against US gov’t spending (in foreign Aid) I might be able to back them. Sorry to be so callous, but if Israel were doing what it do without US support, it would be far lower on my radar screen. Just as Tibet really has little to do with me.

  5. Ronnie Ben-Aron

    Scott, The notion that the United States gives money to Israel is tantamount to saying that China gives money to the United States. The US borrows money from China and then we incur debt to China. Similarly the Americans extend credit to Israel and Israel pays it back. In her 62 years of existence, Israel has never defaulted on a loan. You would like to see the USA stop extending credit. Those on the Israeli right would like to see Israel get out from economic dependence on the US. Furthermore, the key to Israeli economic growth is expansion of settlements in land that is much less expensive so Israel’s economy would be less reliant on the US if Netanyahu would end the building moratorium. This is why many in the Republican Party reject a two-state solution that Israel’s government has accepted. If this is in fact your only problem then you are in sync with the Israeli Tea Party.

  6. Paul Woodward

    Ronnie Ben-Aron comments: “The notion that the United States gives money to Israel is tantamount to saying that China gives money to the United States. The US borrows money from China and then we incur debt to China. Similarly the Americans extend credit to Israel and Israel pays it back.” I see from your I-P address that you in Staten Island so I’m assuming you are the same Ronnie Ben-Aron who in 2008 was barred from association with any FINRA member in any capacity. The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority exists to protect America’s investors by making sure the securities industry operates fairly and honestly. If you are not in a position to advise individual Americans how to invest their money perhaps you should likewise refrain from commenting on how the US government is dispersing American tax dollars through foreign aid. Your suggestion that Israel is merely the recipient of credit is either foolishly ignorant or purposefully deceitful.

    “US Foreign Aid to Israel”, a report prepared by the Congressional Research Service, September 16, 2010, states:

    Israel is the largest cumulative recipient of U.S. foreign assistance since World War II. From 1976-2004, Israel was the largest annual recipient of U.S. foreign assistance, having since been supplanted by Iraq. Since 1985, the United States has provided nearly $3 billion in grants annually to Israel.

    Almost all U.S. bilateral aid to Israel is in the form of military assistance. In the past, Israel also had received significant economic assistance. Strong congressional support for Israel has resulted in Israel’s receiving benefits not available to other countries. For example, Israel can use some U.S. military assistance both for research and development in the United States and for military purchases from Israeli manufacturers. In addition, all U.S. foreign assistance earmarked for Israel
    is delivered in the first 30 days of the fiscal year. Most other recipients normally receive aid in installments. Congress also appropriates funds for joint U.S.-Israeli missile defense programs.

    In August 2007, the Bush Administration announced that it would increase U.S. military assistance to Israel by $6 billion over the next decade. The agreement calls for incremental annual increases in Foreign Military Financing (FMF) to Israel, reaching $3 billion a year by FY2011.

    For FY2011, the Obama Administration requested $3 billion in FMF to Israel. According to the State Department’s FY2011 budget justification for Foreign Operations, “U.S. assistance will help ensure that Israel maintains its qualitative military edge over potential threats, and prevent a shift in the security balance of the region. U.S. assistance is also aimed at ensuring for Israel the security it requires to make concessions necessary for comprehensive regional peace.”

    After years of negotiation, the United States and Israel announced in August 2010 that Israel will purchase 20 F-35s at a cost of $2.75 billion, which will be paid for entirely with FMF grants. The first planes are scheduled to be delivered in 2015, though the deal is still pending final approval by the Israeli cabinet.

    Note that everything referred to above is in the form of grants — not credit or loan guarantees. That means money earned by American taxpayers, paid to the US government and then handed over to the Israeli government never to be repaid.

Comments are closed.