Israel is worried by US sequester

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

Steinitz: Israel is worried by US sequester

By NIV ELIS

AIPAC to lobby for full aid and Iron Dome funding; Finance Minister: I hope we will not be hurt by US economic difficulties.

Israel is concerned that the broad US budget cuts that went into effect Friday evening will affect the economy, Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz said at Sunday’s weekly cabinet meeting.

“The economic difficulties in the United States worry us.

I hope that we will not be hurt by them,” he said.

The across-the-board budget cuts, known as sequestration, are expected to have negative repercussions for the US economy as a whole, and could potentially cut military aid to Israel and defense cooperation on programs such as the Arrow and David’s Sling missile defense systems. The threat of such wide-ranging cuts was originally intended to force a fiscal agreement between Democrats and Republicans, but failed to produce results.

“The international environment is very tough and it is required of us to act responsibly and boldly and to work hard to maintain all of Israel’s economy and Israel’s citizens,” Steinitz said, adding a plug for parties to drop resistance to joining the government in ongoing coalition talks to ensure a “strong, stable Israel.”

The exact implications of the cuts affecting Israel remain unknown, because the specifics of how each agency will cut its budget have yet to be spelled out. Globes estimated that the total could be as high as $729 million for the year, though sources on Capitol Hill estimated that military aid cuts would be about $85 million; smaller than in the Globes worst-case scenario.

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), which opened its annual policy conference on Sunday, will take to Capitol Hill Tuesday for a morning of lobbying, including a push to provide Israel with its full $3.1 billion in military aid for 2013 and 2014, as well as $211m. in additional funding for the Iron Dome missile-defense system. AIPAC will also promote legislation designating Israel a “major strategic ally,” a new alliance status that may help it keep its aid.

The lobbying agenda did not reference funding for joint missile defense programs, which the Pentagon will consider when divvying up its budget cuts. The other two lobbying agenda items will be devoted to legislation on Iran, one in the House, and one in the Senate.

Some critics worried that attempts to exempt Israel from painful budget cuts while the rest of the US was forced to absorb them would cause a political backlash.

“Traditionally AIPAC has been very cautious about not seeming to take actions that suggested putting Israel’s interests over America’s,” AIPAC critic M.J. Rosenberg wrote in the Huffington Post Friday.

“Demanding that Israel be exempt from cuts that virtually every American will feel seems so counterproductive as to almost be suicidal for the lobbying powerhouse.”

But Natan B. Sachs, a fellow at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at Brookings, says the chances for political backlash are limited.

“It’s certainly a danger.

There’s always a question of overreach, and the latest scuffle on [Defense Secretary Chuck] Hagel, which AIPAC didn’t participate in directly but right-wing Jewish groups did, shows that,” says Sachs.

Hagel was confirmed after a drawn-out political battle which included, among other things, pointed questions over his support for Israel.

However, the fact that Israel is a popular issue mitigates the chances of a backlash. “It’s very easy for members of congress to support Israel, not just because AIPAC is a powerful lobby, which it is, but because it’s a popular issue,” says Sachs. “The current administration and the Hill have been very forthcoming for Israel on security issues.”

Political outrage may be most acute among the rank and file of the Democratic Party, which is still riled from perceived Israeli support for Republicans in the last election, says Sachs.

Ambassador to the US Michael Oren tried to strike a balanced chord over the weekend, telling Globes, “Israel understands the difficult budget challenges the Americans are dealing with. We are prepared to bear our share of the burden, while trying to protect critical projects for Israel’s security and integrity, including Iron Dome.”

Asked if there was concern over negative political reactions, an AIPAC official doubled down, saying, “During a period of mounting threats to American interests in the region and to our critical ally, Israel, this is no time to reduce critical assistance which would only result in greater and graver costs.”

J Street, a left-leaning Israel advocacy group, also refused to specifically address the politics of the issue. “We oppose the sequester which will damage the US economy and potentially hurt national security and vital programs and also cause hardship to many vulnerable people,” a spokesman for the group said. “We are calling on lawmakers to reach a deal that that averts these negative consequences including any negative effects on Israel.”

Yet, keeping Israeli aid off the chopping block may also not be as difficult as expected.

“The sequester came into effect, but it may not last forever,” Sachs notes. “If you look at the way agencies are adapting, they’re taking short-term measures to weather the storm until Congress comes through with a new package, which may include cuts, but won’t be as blunt an instrument as the sequester.”

How long that will take remains to be seen.

http://www.jpost.com/Business/BusinessFeatures/Article.aspx?id=305154

From the comments:

"So, if you had a bad week, why should I suffer ?!" -- Nachum, Fiddler on the Roof

[^_^ 5,021]

Cut their aid as much as possible without touching the funding for Iron Dome. That worked very well in the recent "hostilities" and is technology that needs to be fine tuned further so it can be used in other vulnerable American protectorates as well.

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

[quote name=' timestamp='1362862573' post='6034440]

Cut their aid as much as possible without touching the funding for Iron Dome. That worked very well in the recent "hostilities" and is technology that needs to be fine tuned further so it can be used in other vulnerable American protectorates as well.

Not everyone is quite so enamored of Iron Dome...

Writing in Haaretz (Hebrew), military affairs columnist Reuven Pedatzur quotes three technical specialists who severely downgrade the effectiveness of Iron Dome.

The experts are Theodore Postol (whose findings are summarized in English here), Dr. Mordechai Shefer, and an unnamed scientist who worked for Iron Dome’s manufacturer, Raytheon, till recently. After examining hundreds of videos of Iron Dome launchings during the military campaign, they came to the conclusion that the anti-missile weapon may’ve shot down 5% of its targets. They define a definite kill as a missile hitting the nose of the rocket, where the weapons payload is. The IDF’s claims of success, they explain, result from confusion about the explosion that often occurred as the missile approached its target. In the vast majority of cases, the explosion was that of the missile self-destructing when it detected it would not strike the Palestinian rocket.

Postol also evaluated the success rate of Patriot missiles during the Gulf War and found that they didn’t hit any of their targets.

The experts also note a wide discrepancy between the number of damage claims by Israeli civilians (3,200) and the number of rockets the IDF concedes struck built-areas (58). Even the Israeli police reported 109 incidents in which they investigated damage from Palestinian rockets, which is double the number that the IDF claims.

If we keep in mind that Palestinian rockets are slow-moving, extremely primitive weapons and note the failure of Iron Dome at hitting them, missile experts have noted the anti-missile system would have much greater difficulty hitting more sophisticated rockets fired from missile launchers (such as what Hezbollah might mount).

Before Israel and the U.S. rush into a billion-dollar spending spree for this whiz-bang system, it’s best that sober-minded people examine its real capabilities. The price of Iron Dome is mind-boggling. Israel wants 13 more batteries with each costing $50-million. That’s close to $600-million. Missile experts have estimated that during an intense military attack Israel might spend $380-million a DAY on defensive operations. While I’m all in favor of protecting Israeli lives, is it worth a sum in the billions to shoot down 5% of the enemy rockets that it targets?

The hype and fraudulent claims around Iron Dome are characteristic of the entire Israeli national security system. It makes extravagant claims either about the danger posed by an enemy (Iran) or about the success of a weapons system. Many of which turn out to be based on little more than wishful thinking. Israel bases much of its strategic military thinking on what it wants to happen, rather than what will or may happen. Which is how it gets into trouble when it actually has to fight a war or military campaign.

http://www.richardsilverstein.com/2013/03/08/iron-dome-system-failed-miserably/

[Karee 4,190]

Pretty sad when the "model" of the middle east is worried about their welfare payments being interrupted.

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

Here's how the Iron Dome set-up/scam works:

The US gives Israel hundreds of millions of dollars specifically for Iron Dome (this is in addition to the $3.1 billion in annual military aid that it's already giving to Israel.) So far, Iron Dome has cost US taxpayers $268 million, and it'll cost them another $680 million (as already agreed) over the next 3 years. So that's almost $950 million, which is supposed to pay for a total of 8 more Iron Dome batteries in addition to the two that Israel initially developed.

Remember that due to the deficit, this is money that the US has to borrow (and pay interest on) in order to give it to Israel.

The maker of Iron Dome is an Israeli company called "Rafael Advanced Defense Systems Ltd.," a for-profit company which happens to be wholly owned and operated by the Israeli government.

Not surprisingly, Rafael Advanced Defense Systems is already making money on this arrangement - in 2010, it reported $170 million in profits; in 2011, $111 million.

However, even though the US taxpayer was forced to foot the bill as well as pay interest on this Iron Dome "gift" because the money was borrowed, a Congressional report notes "the United States has no rights to the technology involved.” Yep, that's right - if the US wanted Iron Dome (which it doesn't) we'd have to pay extra for the technology that we already paid for and are still paying for.

Such a deal !

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

Seems that AIPAC's intense lobbying and strategic application of pressure on key officials may have "paid off"... according to Israel's financial newspaper Globes:

US reduces Israel aid cut

The US military aid cut to Israel for fiscal year 2013 will be reduced by 5% to $155 million, instead of the 8% cut initially planned.

US military aid to Israel for fiscal year 2013 will be reduced by 5%, instead of the 8% initially planned, amounting to $155 million, rather than $250 million, out of $3.1 billion.

Minister of Finance Yuval Steinitz was notified of the decision today by "reliable sources" in Washington, as his aides put it. Top Ministry of Finance officials told "Globes" that the reduction was not dramatic, and that even after the cut, US military aid this year will be larger than in 2012.

The reduction in US military aid to Israel is part of the $85 billion sequester in the federal budget, after the federal deficit reached $16 trillion. The automatic sequester came into effect on March 1. AIPAC led a lobbying campaign among Members of Congress to head off the cut to military aid to Israel.

When President Barack Obama signed the sequester directive, it was not clear how it would affect aid to Israel, and some Israeli sources feared it could reach $750 million. Despite the smaller reduction, it will still affect revenue of Israeli companies, mostly defense contractors which produce products for US-funded programs, and companies which provide goods and service to US defense companies, which could see reduced orders because of the sequester.

Minister of Defense Ehud Barak met new US Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel a few days ago in Washington. Hagel sent an encouraging message to Israel, saying that the sequester would not affect funding for antimissile programs. Former Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta approved $678 million in funding for the development of these systems.

http://www.globes.co.il/serveen/globes/docview.asp?did=1000828164

So, from an 8% cut in aid to Israel down to just a 3% cut. Meanwhile, the US will be chopping 7.9% from its own defense budget.

[Danno 1,228]

Pretty sad when the "model" of the middle east is worried about their welfare payments being interrupted.

Even in a trailer park someone has the nicest house.

The person to blame is the "giver" not the one cashing the checks.

(same with any welfare program)

[Karee 4,190]

Even in a trailer park someone has the nicest house.

The person to blame is the "giver" not the one cashing the checks.

(same with any welfare program)

No argument there. Just don't run around the trailer park telling everyone your the richest guy in the trailer park, and then b!tch when your welfare check doesn't show up.

[james&olya 1,121]

Here's how the Iron Dome set-up/scam works:

The US gives Israel hundreds of millions of dollars specifically for Iron Dome (this is in addition to the $3.1 billion in annual military aid that it's already giving to Israel.) So far, Iron Dome has cost US taxpayers $268 million, and it'll cost them another $680 million (as already agreed) over the next 3 years. So that's almost $950 million, which is supposed to pay for a total of 8 more Iron Dome batteries in addition to the two that Israel initially developed.

Remember that due to the deficit, this is money that the US has to borrow (and pay interest on) in order to give it to Israel.

The maker of Iron Dome is an Israeli company called "Rafael Advanced Defense Systems Ltd.," a for-profit company which happens to be wholly owned and operated by the Israeli government.

Not surprisingly, Rafael Advanced Defense Systems is already making money on this arrangement - in 2010, it reported $170 million in profits; in 2011, $111 million.

However, even though the US taxpayer was forced to foot the bill as well as pay interest on this Iron Dome "gift" because the money was borrowed, a Congressional report notes "the United States has no rights to the technology involved.” Yep, that's right - if the US wanted Iron Dome (which it doesn't) we'd have to pay extra for the technology that we already paid for and are still paying for.

Such a deal !

I would call the whole thing a "crock of $hit"!