It is little wonder that Yitzhak Rabin in 1976 called settlements a “cancer” that threaten to create Israeli “apartheid.”īut it goes further than that. Settlements, as the Labor Party’s Gilad Kariv’s rightly observed, undermine the foundations of a Jewish and democratic state, and thus the Israeli government’s actions represent a rush toward a binational state. This is a pro-Israeli and pro-Zionist position.

Better to focus on those making the decisions, not the IDF conscript trying to deal with the situation his political masters created. Settlements, on the other hand, constitute a deliberate and considered strategy. Besides, it is one thing to criticize decisions made in the heat of IDF operations. Some proposals have concentrated on Israel Defense Forces (IDF) activity and alleged human rights violations, but those are the fruit of the poisoned tree - namely, the settlement enterprise itself. Settlement activity represents a unique opportunity to condition aid to Israel. Instead, it is being laughed at by Netanyahu’s government.

interest-bearing accounts, giving it an even greater total. Israel receives uniquely favorable terms that no other nation enjoys. For example, it receives its funds in lump sums and can place them in U.S. military aid than all other nations combined.īut it will hurt financially, and that is the whole point. Until the Russia-Ukraine War, Israel was receiving more U.S. Such a policy would pose no military or physical danger to Israel, because of the massive size of the Israel aid package. The message should be clear: An alliance is a two-way street. For every dollar that the government spends on new settlements, the U.S. A more robust response would be that if Israel has so much money to spend on settlements, then it obviously does not need American security assistance.

Greatest tank battles israel