US-Israel Arms Cooperation Growing

Middle East • Views: 2,454

The Forward has an interesting piece on a little noticed fact about the Obama administration’s support for Israel: U.S.-Israeli Arms Cooperation Quietly Growing.

WASHINGTON — Leaders in Washington and Jerusalem have publicly locked horns over the issue of West Bank settlements. And Israeli public opinion has largely viewed America’s new administration as unfriendly. But behind the scenes, strategic security relations between the two countries are flourishing.

Israeli officials have been singing the praises of President Obama for his willingness to address their defense concerns and for actions taken by his administration to bolster Israel’s qualitative military edge — an edge eroded, according to Israel, during the final year of the George W. Bush presidency.

Among the new initiatives taken by the administration, the Forward has learned, are adjustments in a massive arms deal the Bush administration made with Arab Gulf states in response to Israeli concerns. There have also been upgrades in U.S.-Israeli military cooperation on missile defense. And a deal is expected next year that will see one of the United States’ most advanced fighter jets go to Israel with some of America’s most sensitive new technology.

Amid the cacophony of U.S.-Israel clashes on the diplomatic front, public attention given to this intensified strategic cooperation has been scant. But in a rare public comment in October, Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren praised the Obama administration’s response to complaints about lost ground during the close of the Bush years as “warm and immediate.”

“We came to the Obama administration and said, ‘Listen, we have a problem here,’” Oren, told a gathering of the National Jewish Democratic Council. “The administration’s reaction was immediate: we are going to address this issue, we are going to make sure that we maintain your QME [qualitative military edge].”

(Hat tip: davesax.)

Jump to bottom

57 comments
1 freetoken  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 11:45:38am

When heads explode, what does it sound like?

2 McSpiff  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 11:50:29am

My god, it's amazing the lengths he'll go to, to keep his muslimness secret!!

///

3 Killgore Trout  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 11:51:50am
Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren praised the Obama administration’s response to complaints about lost ground during the close of the Bush years as “warm and immediate.”

I wonder what that's about. Maybe Bush was unhappy with the Gaza invasion.

4 _RememberTonyC  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 11:52:10am

good for the POTUS. when he does something positive, he should be given proper credit.

5 KronoGhazi  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 11:53:17am

How about just give him an upding?

6 Killgore Trout  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 11:53:46am
But Jerusalem’s concerns, well-informed Israeli sources say, were also stoked by a massive $20 billion arms deal that the United States signed with Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states during the Bush administration’s last year


Ah, Bush's close relationship with the oil ticks.

7 Sharmuta  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 11:53:49am

I applaud the Administration taking Israel's concerns seriously and addressing them. This is wonderful news, and helps alleviate a number of my concerns about maintaining our strong relationship with Israel.

8 Killgore Trout  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 11:54:49am

re: #6 Killgore Trout

Ah, Bush's close relationship with the oil ticks.

BTW Oil Ticks refers to the House of Saud (royal family)

9 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 11:55:15am

Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren praised the Obama administration’s response to complaints about lost ground during the close of the Bush years as “warm and immediate.”

How to get an immediate response from the Administration? Complain about Bush.

10 PhillyPretzel  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 11:57:09am

re: #9 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

Funny but true.

11 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 11:57:46am

re: #10 PhillyPretzel

Too bad the Generals didn't think of that.

12 Killgore Trout  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 11:58:08am
According to Steve Rosen, a former lobbyist for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee who is now a private consultant, the Obama administration, and especially the Pentagon, is now more open to supplying Israel with cutting-edge technology in an attempt to ensure Israel’s confidence and possibly steer Jerusalem away from the idea of attacking Iran. “In an effort to give Israel a larger margin of safety, the U.S. is releasing technology that under other circumstances would have been seen as more sensitive,” he said.

The United States and Israel have also recently launched a new consultative mechanism for discussing and addressing issues relating to Israel’s qualitative military edge. This new process, involving key officials from the Pentagon and State Department on the American side and Israel’s Foreign and Defense ministries, is currently being applied to several outstanding Israeli concerns. Israeli defense officials and pro-Israel activists characterize this as a significant development in strategic consultations between the two countries.

Interesting stuff. Read the whole thing.

13 Locker  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 11:59:20am

While I might not agree with this or that particular issue with regard to Israel I do believe we should try to help keep our friends safe. Seems like a good thing to me.

14 Sharmuta  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 11:59:36am

re: #6 Killgore Trout

If you read the whole thing, the Israelis didn't complain at first because this is about Iran. It might not be sinister on the part of the Bush administration. Iran IS a threat.

15 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 12:01:15pm

re: #12 Killgore Trout

Interesting stuff. Read the whole thing.

Looks smart as hell.

16 Killgore Trout  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 12:01:18pm

re: #14 Sharmuta

It seems the Israelis originally agreed but the arms deals with Gulf states started to go too far.

17 davesax  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 12:02:53pm

re: #3 Killgore Trout

Killgore:

It explains it full article. I don't think it came from any animosity towards Israel. The article claims that the U.S. sold high tech arms to the arabs to address their concerns about Iran, which kind of makes sense. Probably more of a timing thing than anything.

I think this is great news, but I think it's important to note the following:

1. The Forward, and the writer, Nathan Gutmann, are unabashadly left. Most likely, someone in the administration fed this to publication in an effort to bolster Obama's standing in the Jewish community and Israel.

2. Iran is still racing towards a nuclear weapon, and if this article is true - that these enhanced military ties are part of a pro quo to keep Israel from attacking Iran - than this whole thing is still a mixed bag. Will Obama let Iran go nuclear (I don't think he will, but he still hasn't given clear rhetoric that he wont')? The answer to that question, ultimately, will determine his legacy in regard to Israel.

18 KingKenrod  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 12:03:34pm

The article hints that this may be an attempt to buy the Israelis out of attacking Iran. I don't think I buy that.

19 Sharmuta  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 12:04:26pm

re: #16 Killgore Trout

It seems the Israelis originally agreed but the arms deals with Gulf states started to go too far.

Yeah- kind of a pickle. The other states should be able to protect themselves against Iran, but making sure Israel can protect itself is important too. I'm glad we're making sure they can maintain their strength.

Now- if we could just get the palestinian authority to agree to some accountability, we'd really be making some progress.

20 Killgore Trout  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 12:07:51pm

re: #17 davesax


1. The Forward, and the writer, Nathan Gutmann, are unabashadly left. Most likely, someone in the administration fed this to publication in an effort to bolster Obama's standing in the Jewish community and Israel.


I think you have a point there but Jews are already solid Dem voters. this article may be meant to appeal to them but I also think it's an appeal to people like us here at LGF who are supportive of Israel but alienated from what the American right has turned into.

21 Sharmuta  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 12:08:41pm

Something else to consider about our arms deal with the gulf states- if they didn't buy it from us, they would have gotten weapons elsewhere. They're not going to sit back and let Iran attack them without defending themselves- they're just not. This way, the US knows what these countries are armed with, and can make sure Israel is maintaining its edge.

Just a thought.

22 Girth  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 12:16:18pm

re: #21 Sharmuta

Something else to consider about our arms deal with the gulf states- if they didn't buy it from us, they would have gotten weapons elsewhere. They're not going to sit back and let Iran attack them without defending themselves- they're just not. This way, the US knows what these countries are armed with, and can make sure Israel is maintaining its edge.

Just a thought.

Interesting theory. I've long thought that Obama is a much cooler character than people give him credit for on foreign policy. I think he's a poker player drawing out a slow play. I just hope I'm right.

23 [deleted]  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 12:22:29pm
24 Sharmuta  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 12:24:17pm

re: #22 Girth

Well- the article makes it look the the Bush deal with primarily about protecting the region from Iran, which I think both the Israelis and Arabs agree is a regional threat. I think we were looking to protect the region from Iran, get the arab money instead of it going to Europe or Asia, and the added benefit is we have the knowledge of their weaponry.

Really- it's in the global economy's best interest to not have Iran attacking its neighbors' oil fields. It's in Israel's best interest to maintain their ability to defend themselves, and I'm glad our President is seeing to it that they will have it, as I'm glad our last President helped the region protect against threats too.

25 albusteve  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 12:30:26pm

re: #24 Sharmuta

and where it all leads to appears to be solely up to Iran....there does not seem to be any diplomatic leverage against them...that part disturbs me...in reality Israel and the Saudis have to be armed...it is the last hope against Iranian threats....just the reality of it, unless the US gets into it....of course the simple solution is just to bomb the shit out of Irans facilities and hope for a major setback

26 Blueheron  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 12:30:52pm

re: #7 Sharmuta

I applaud the Administration taking Israel's concerns seriously and addressing them. This is wonderful news, and helps alleviate a number of my concerns about maintaining our strong relationship with Israel.


Absolutely. A well armed Israel is a possible deterrent to Iran and her loony mullahs intentions.

27 Blueheron  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 12:31:37pm

re: #9 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren praised the Obama administration’s response to complaints about lost ground during the close of the Bush years as “warm and immediate.”

How to get an immediate response from the Administration? Complain about Bush.


Up ding for that :))

28 austin_blue  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 12:33:35pm

re: #26 Blueheron

Absolutely. A well armed Israel is a possible deterrent to Iran and her loony mullahs intentions.

Speaking of which, one of the not so loony Mullahs died last night:

[Link: www.cnn.com...]

29 bj  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 12:34:05pm

Don't believe anything about this admin being on good terms with Israel in any area. Israel has been sold down the river.

30 austin_blue  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 12:34:35pm

re: #29 bj

Don't believe anything about this admin being on good terms with Israel in any area. Israel has been sold down the river.

Ummm...why?

31 Blueheron  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 12:37:22pm

re: #20 Killgore Trout

I think you have a point there but Jews are already solid Dem voters. this article may be meant to appeal to them but I also think it's an appeal to people like us here at LGF who are supportive of Israel but alienated from what the American right has turned into.

As an American right it makes me more comfortable with the Obama administration.

32 Girth  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 12:38:57pm

re: #24 Sharmuta

Really- it's in the global economy's best interest to not have Iran attacking its neighbors' oil fields.

Imagine how drastically different geopolitics would be if our energy needs weren't met by fossil fuels. If we developed and sold to the rest of the world clean, renewable energy, we would ensure a new American century, and the Arab world would be forced to deal with its problems, because the kings and dictators wouldn't have their cash cow and no one outside of it would give much of a hoot about keeping them propped up so that the oil keeps flowing anymore.

This is a big reason why I question the motives of those behind AGW denial. There's a lot of people with a lot of money in oil and defense that I'm sure would be more than happy to maintain the status quo.

33 Bob Levin  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 12:54:25pm

On the very face of this it is good news. That much is undeniable. The most important phrase in the article is QME--which is dependent upon what the other nations in the region do.

Iran's nuclear success comes from their basic strategy of spreading out the areas of research and development and their decision to do important work deep underground. This means that the simple phrase, "attack Iran" isn't such a simple solution since it may not accomplish anything. There is also the fact that any kind of Stop Iran strategy has to be based on gathered intelligence, which the West hasn't been gathering. It's not something you can just do in a week. It takes years and years, really decades to establish a fine flow of intel.

It appears, not just from this, that President Obama is starting to pay attention to the realities of the region, rather than seeing US arrogance as the main diplomatic bug in the system. The difficulties stem from inherent structural and psychological problems inherent in totalitarian governments, a medieval psychology, and access to the most modern (destructive) technology.

A more accurate indicator that President Obama understands the realpolitik is when he realizes that the overall peace in the region and world has comparatively little relationship to the situations in Gaza and the West Bank.

34 bratwurst  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 12:54:32pm

re: #30 austin_blue

Ummm...why?

What do you expect with a stealth Muslim as POTUS?

/

35 sattv4u2  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 12:54:36pm

Thank you again, President Obama

36 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 12:56:46pm

re: #3 Killgore Trout

I wonder what that's about. Maybe Bush was unhappy with the Gaza invasion.

Bush was unhappy that oil prices were skyrocketing and was trying to get the Saudis to increase production.

37 austin_blue  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 12:57:14pm

re: #34 bratwurst

What do you expect with a stealth Muslim as POTUS?

/

Hey, Bratwurst!

Schalke's on a roll, aren't they?

38 bratwurst  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 1:00:14pm

re: #37 austin_blue

Hey, Bratwurst!

Schalke's on a roll, aren't they?

If you had told me they would go into the break a point out of first place back in September, I would have assumed you were crazy. I fear surging Bayern is going to end up ruling the roost, but a Champions League spot (and the big money wiping out a decent chunk of the club's massive debt) is within the realm of reason.

39 Ojoe  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 1:08:34pm

Watch out crazy mullahs, watch out.

40 djughurknot  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 1:13:32pm

re: #5 BigPapa

How about just give him an upding?

I think that's Michelle's job, bud.

41 Racer X  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 1:17:55pm

Sshhhhhh!

Don't let the cat out of the bag.

42 jordash1212  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 1:38:42pm

This has not changed since the Meir-Nixon agreement. When it comes to the military, the US and Israel are old friends. The rule remains that Israel must comply to the terms on which they buy the weapons, so razing Gaza with American missiles is out of the question.

On another note, this is further proof Obama is a realist. His rhetoric and symbolic politics stretch to the extent of public negotiations for peace in the region. That means requesting Israel freeze settlements, which Netanyahu did at great political risk to himself. But in the end, Obama knows that he needs to keep a few big chips at the table when it comes to the Middle East's oil and terror. I think next year Israel is scheduled to receive some 2.5bill USD in aid from the US, and a majority of that is military tech and weaponry.

43 doubter4444  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 1:42:59pm

re: #3 Killgore Trout

I wonder what that's about. Maybe Bush was unhappy with the Gaza invasion.

I think it was a full plate thing, and exiting the stage, it just was not addressed, which is why it was so easy for the new admin to shore it up.

44 Stuart Leviton  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 1:51:47pm

re: #28 austin_blue

Speaking of which, one of the not so loony Mullahs died last night:

[Link: www.cnn.com...]

Montazeri -- a key figure in Iran's Islamic Revolution 30 years ago -- was perhaps the most prominent cleric who publicly criticized the presidential elections last June that returned hard-liner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to the presidency.

Interesting esp including the above paragraph. Thanks!

45 sagehen  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 1:52:57pm

re: #28 austin_blue

Speaking of which, one of the not so loony Mullahs died last night:

[Link: www.cnn.com...]


Are we certain it was natural causes?

46 Bagua  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 2:02:53pm

re: #36 LudwigVanQuixote

Bush was unhappy that oil prices were skyrocketing and was trying to get the Saudis to increase production.

Correct.

47 Vicious Babushka  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 2:03:10pm

re: #20 Killgore Trout

I think you have a point there but Jews are already solid Dem voters. this article may be meant to appeal to them but I also think it's an appeal to people like us here at LGF who are supportive of Israel but alienated from what the American right has turned into.

"Fuck the Jews, they'll vote for us anyway."

Seriously Killgore, you have a record of assuming groupthink to the Jews.

48 jayzee  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 2:09:03pm

The F35 has always been on the table, the issue was what the US would allow Israel to do: [Link: www.haaretz.com...]

As far as easing support for the Saudis and providing the Israelis more weapons-EXCELLENT. The real issue though, and this held true for Bush as well-will the US allow Israel to take whatever defensive actions it deems necessary in regards to Gaza, Lebanon and Iran? So far, the Obama administration has been no better than Bush re Iran.

49 Stuart Leviton  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 2:11:14pm

A heartening article. Thanks. Indeed I am grateful for the Obama administration to hear and help Israel.

I wonder how political scientists would place the article within context of all that is going on in the region - including things such as Hizboallah's violation of UN resolution 1701, and Turkey's internal and regional political shift, and so forth.

Anyway, kudos to Obama.

50 Bagua  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 2:12:32pm

Charles,

Thank you for posting this article, it offers some fascinating insight.

51 jayzee  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 2:37:41pm

re: #36 LudwigVanQuixote

Bush was unhappy that oil prices were skyrocketing and was trying to get the Saudis to increase production.

So now, would we expect oil prices to rise? I actually do. As we pull out of the recession, oil will increase and I think that various carbon taxes will elevate oil (as well) masking some of the real cost increases, making it less of a political hot potato for this president than it was for Bush.

52 jayzee  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 2:42:45pm

re: #32 Girth

or could it be that our money is the only thing keeping them in line to the degree they are? If the Arab world wasn't connected to us via oil money, are we really sure they would become less of a problem?

53 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 3:37:16pm

re: #18 KingKenrod

The article hints that this may be an attempt to buy the Israelis out of attacking Iran. I don't think I buy that.

Maybe not tit for tat, but the more secure the Israelis feel about our support, the more likely they are to keep us in the loop as they size up their options with Iran.

54 bj  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 4:53:16pm

re: #30 austin_blue

Ummm...why?

US track record ... inept admin currently ... lack of valid foreign policy ... denial of the situation on the ground ... shmoozing Arab nations for Israel's good????

One tiny example: The PA and hamas charter's need changing. Arab countries need to openly recognize Israel. That would be a plausible start with written proof of "hope 'n change".

55 Bob Levin  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 11:42:59pm

re: #51 jayzee

Not necessarily--there is an oil glut, I believe, in the US. Second, because of the downturn in the economy, demand isn't nearly as high as it was when a gallon was approaching 4 bucks (in this region of the US). Third--does anyone remember that the economy began to drop off the table when gas prices cut into folks ability to make their mortgage payments? It seemed that way to me--but the very interrelated world economy came full circle recently with the financial troubles in Dubai. So, OPEC is now playing their cards very slowly.

Not to mention the fact that AGW is forcing research and innovation in energy usage.

56 Bob Levin  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 11:46:30pm

I mean I knew people who were paying the equivalent of a mortgage payment at the gas pump. In this region of the country.

57 Bob Levin  Sun, Dec 20, 2009 11:58:18pm

re: #54 bj

It gets back to Iran. As long as they're paying the bills, supplying arms, beating their chest, and generally keeping the West backing up--nothing is going to change.

I am curious why there hasn't been a gasoline blockade thus far. If the West waits for Iran to actually successfully test a nuclear weapon, that blockade would then be a case of closing the barn after the cows ran away.

It appears as though Iran is outsmarting the West at every turn. Thatis what is causing the unrest in the region, not Israel's attempts to protect its citizens.


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
Once Praised, the Settlement to Help Sickened BP Oil Spill Workers Leaves Most With Nearly Nothing When a deadly explosion destroyed BP’s Deepwater Horizon drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico, 134 million gallons of crude erupted into the sea over the next three months — and tens of thousands of ordinary people were hired ...
Cheechako
1 hour ago
Views: 33 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ...
Cheechako
3 days ago
Views: 154 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1