Quote:
|
Depends what you mean by "control" I think. What I would say is that it would be very very difficult for someone who was not pro-Israel to get elected in the US (at least nationally). The Anti Defamation League would be all over them smearing them as anti-semitic, holocaust deniers etc. But that isn't really that different from other lobbying groups, apart from the emotional response that these sorts of things produce in the people who vote.
Israel on the other hand is very reliant on the US. It would still be well off economically in comparison with it's neighbours, but nothing like the most developed country in the region, which it is currently, without the astronomical amounts of aid it's had over decades. Militarilly the US is the elephant in the room with regard to Israels enemies. You can't attack Israel or the US will get involved.
So in answer neither. But the US has the controlling mechanisms in place if it ever wants to use them.
|
Largely agree, except perhaps wrt the depth of US support and willingness to get involved. That's a question of degree I think, and not as easy to predict post Iraq. Also I'm not sure the history of the US's involvement with Israel necessarily bears out the idea that it would offer unqualified support for, say, an expansionist programme backed by force. In 1967, for example, I believe many US strategists saw Arab-Israeli conflict as part of a larger cold war narrative and subordinate to it; there was therefore some pressure to inhibit Israeli expansion.
The one question I would ask is why you think Israel would be well off in comparison to its neighbours without US support. I can't really see a clear reason for this given the disparaties in natural resources.