Colonialism Lite

The sometimes odd behavior of foreign governments vis-à-vis the United States, occasionally describable by that memorable phrase “at your feet or at your throat,” may be due to colonialism lite: indirect influence purchased by massive doses of foreign and military aid. Of late this has been most clearly visible in Afghanistan and in Pakistan. That behavior is a little more one-sided in the case of Israel. It is mostly at our throat—because it has its own constituency within our political structure. Herewith some data for 2009 on military aid. It totaled $11 billion that year, 24.5 percent of total foreign assistance, that year, worth $45 billion.

Fifty-one countries received military aid, and the top ten show that we cover the globe. Conspicuous by absence in the longer list is China, surprising that Russia is present. India, based on population the second largest collective in the world, barely makes the list, but does so, receiving $1 million in 2009. The data come from the 2012 (and last) Statistical Abstract of the United States, Table 1299.

The logic of colonialism lite is that military funding is virtually irresistible for collectives—even when they don’t resonate at all with the American Way (or what it has come to mean). This produces in their societies contradictory impulses that lack coherence—and our attempts at buying power create the same problems at home.

Danse Macabre

The New York Times this morning breathlessly tells me that another Mideast Peace Plan is in the offing. More. Evidently President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu are racing to be the first to unveil one—evidently because he who’s first wins, the other loses. Obama (of course) will make a well-framed speech. Netanyahu will address the U.S. Congress. Horse race, conflict, Israel, Peace Plan, edge of chair, stay tuned. Danse Macabre.

Now if the madness were merely in the media, it wouldn’t matter much. If a genuine peace plan were actually in the offing and the parties were genuinely serious concerning the actual plan, and its outcome, rather than serious about other things, I’d fault the media for failure to dig deeper and failing to tell the public something of substance. But here the situation is so clear and evident, has repeated so often, is rooted so firmly in relative power relationships, yet another repetition of the Danse Macabre is not worth noting at all.

Netanyahu must do something to keep the money flowing. In 2009 Israel received $5.38 billion in economic and military aid and in grants and credits—second to no one else except Iraq and Afghanistan—countries we are actually running or trying to. In 2009 Israel’s grants and credits were $1.992 billion, down from $2.955 billion in 2008. Its economic/military grants are also down, from $2.508 billion in 2007 to $2.425 billion in 2008; no economic/military aid data were available for 2009 from my source here. This means that our 2008 largesse was worth 2.6 percent of Israel’s GDP in 2010. So much for Netanyahu’s motives. As for his intentions actually to cede land to the Palestinians, to “tear down that wall,” to echo a former President, or to stop building on Palestinian lands—those intentions are non-existent. Therefore it must be about the money—and, as we know, paper and talk are cheap. You can tear up the paper later and un-say the words in Hebrew.

Now as for our President, he appears to suffer from the delusion that speeches are action. And now that—a mere two years and four months into his first term—the news are all about an election still 19 months in the future, it is high time for Obama to do something about his legacy. Every president must decorate his legacy with a bit of glass-diamond called Mideast Peace Plan, and Obama will deludedly believe that to make a good speech is to act. So let not a Netanyahu steal a march. Out with the brilliant ideas, stunningly delivered.

Danse Macabre. I wish I could sit this one out.