P. 1
Samson Blinded

Samson Blinded

|Views: 145|Likes:
Publicado porAdamhman

More info:

Published by: Adamhman on Apr 29, 2008
Direitos Autorais:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

10/06/2012

pdf

text

original

Israel, possibly the fourth strongest military power in the world,52

is
wasting her military potential and paying for it without using it. It could,

51

The Arab view is inconsistent with the facts. The U.S. first provided major aid to
Israel in the closing days of the 1973 war to counter the massive Soviet aid to
Egypt. The effect was largely psychological, since aircraft and tank reserves proved
almost sufficient. Israel won her other wars without critical assistance of foreign
powers.

52

The second place is better justified. The ramshackle Russian army lacks fighting
capability, unless resorting to nuclear option which is unlikely: even without

Samson Blinded: A Machiavellian Perspective on the Middle East Conflict

71

however, be put to profitable use. Israel could establish herself as a regional
empire undergirded by military might. She can seize territory from the
Arabs (and perhaps others) or convert it into tribute-paying protectorates,
prohibited from arming or mobilizing. Hordes of fellahin, though armed,
would be powerless against an Israel with secure borders.
Colonialism, suppression, and repression would impose a huge
burden on Israeli morale. Using force for material gain does not set well on
the modern conscience. To justify themselves, Israelis would treat their
subjects as inferiors, as they do Palestinians now. But colonialism exists in
other forms; it must be investigated and either accepted with full knowledge
of the moral consequences or rejected with full understanding of the
economic losses. Since the protection racket varies by degree, Israel may
shrink from the extreme of direct colonialism for the milder option of
protecting the existing regimes against their neighbors—for a fee.
The natural resources of failed African states are attractive. Israel
need only occupy resource-rich areas, fence them off, and exploit them. The
citizens there receive no benefits from their resources, which are plundered
by corrupt politicians or tribal strongmen. To save face, Israel might use a
part of the proceeds for humanitarian purposes among the local population
that would be better off under such an arrangement than they are now. The
West tries to suppress the black market of diamonds, ostensibly to suffocate
the guerrillas financially—nicely protecting De Beers’ monopoly. Israeli
occupation, by this logic, would extinguish many tribal wars.
Israel might play the balance of power game, supporting or
protecting weak Arab states against the stronger, as when she defused the
Syrian-Jordanian conflict. Israel replicates the peculiar position of Britain
vis à vis Europe: strong enough to influence any process yet not
immediately part of it. Israel might play that role in Africa, whose countries
bear her no prejudice. Latin America and Asia are also attractive, but Israel
should placate local powers, the United States, and China, by assuring them
that such involvement is mercenary without political ambitions.
Protecting small to mid-size nations would pay Israel and win her a
place in the international arena. Because an army relies on the threat it
poses and so does not have to jump into actual conflict, the job would not
be unduly risky. The Israeli Defense Force, further, could hire infantry

American military reprisal, economic boycott would ruin Russian economy hinging
on oil and gas exports. Chinese forces are not tried in any major confrontation, and
fared badly against Vietnamese. Chinese crude infantry power is of limited value.
Chinese-made sophisticated weapons are as unreliable as Soviet. Many bad planes
are worthless against few great ones Israel possesses. Technological advantage of
the American and Israeli armies over those of other countries is overwhelming.
I.D.F. enjoys the same kind of advantage new high-tech factories have over the
larger old ones: new is better than modernized. Financial restraints made I.D.F.
relatively lean, much more cost-effective than mammoth U.S. Army burdened with
Stealth bombers, aircraft carriers, and the like.

72

elsewhere and fight not for Jewish nationalism but for profit. Foreign
mercenaries joining a strong I.D.F. would not despise Jews, since anti-
Semitism is provoked by Jewish weakness. Mercenaries are suited for
moderate conflicts, even preferable to distance principals from their allies’
cruelty. Democratic, relatively open Israel cannot play the balance of power
game, supporting regimes regardless of moral merits; mercenaries can do
this job.

Legalizing private armies would bring armies of “military
consultants” to Israel. The country has plenty of room for camps in the
Negev, and the resulting competitive edge in warmongering would promote
Israeli exports of military equipment.

You're Reading a Free Preview

Descarregar
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->