The Ultimate Act of Antisemitism

Since 1945, there has been a consensus that the Holocaust was the ultimate act of antisemitism. However, recently, it may have to be reassessed as to what constitutes the “Ultimate Act.” If successful, history may find that the disarming of Israel while fighting a constant war on seven fronts since Oct. 7, 2023, may turn out to be the Ultimate Act. Despite that many Democrats are pushing this effort forward with complicity from Jewish members of Congress.

I was recently confronted with this issue when a long-time friend (a staunch Democrat and supporter of Israel) sent me a column from Foreign Affairs by Raphael BenLevi, “America Should Be Israel’s Partner, Not Its Patron.” In response to the column he stated, “It’s time for the U.S. to stop subsidizing (directly paying for) arms for Israel. Israel can pay for them by themselves (if they follow U.S. law when using them).”

For a long time, I have written and espoused that Israel should gradually reduce the amount of money received to subsidize their government whether for military or nonmilitary purposes. My argument has been that Israel is one of the most advanced societies in the world with an extremely high per capita income (in the top 20). It is also one of the few countries that has arms sales to the United States. It is one of our very strongest allies who never asks our military to shoulder the burden they are doing themselves. Discontinuing the payments would alleviate one of the arguments made by the antisemites about our government subsidizing Jews.

What concerns me is the caveat “as long as they follow U.S. law when using them.”  What does that really mean? We make sales of armaments to over 100 countries throughout the world. We sell 42% of all international armaments. People have objected to armament sales to certain countries (Saudi Arabia or Turkey, for example), but they have not spoken of the sales exactly in that manner.

When countries buy armaments through the Foreign Military Sales program, they sign a Letter of Offer and Acceptance (LOA). The buyer must use the weapons for the stated purposes, which is typically for internal security or self-defense. Nor can they resell the weapons without U.S. approval.

There are agencies of the Departments of Defense and State that enforce the agreements.

The countries restricted from buying U.S. weapons are the likely suspects: Cuba, Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, Syria and Venezuela. Others may have partial restrictions and/or be under U.N. embargo. The antisemites are looking to add Israel to that list.

If there are sales agreements, we can wonder if there are agreements when there are grants. The answer is yes, there are, and those rules are tighter than when they are sold to a country. Since Israel is being provided some of these weapons through American-funded programs, they are already under stricter scrutiny than they would be if they paid for them.

Why is Israel being questioned when they are already spending massive sums on their own defense? Before the massacre of 0ct 7, 2023, they were spending 5.4% of their budget on defense. That number has grown to between 17-20% of their budget since that date. That is between $37-46 billion per year.

Not only are they paying their fair share, but the Israelis are also providing unique benefits. They have adapted American F-35 fighter planes in significant ways that have enhanced operations. The U.S. is adopting many of these enhancements and treating Israeli usage as a “live-fire laboratory” that is allowing the manufacturers to improve operational status for America’s F-35.

With 100 countries in the world buying or obtaining U.S. military armaments, does anyone really believe they are all being used for righteous purposes? Both India and Pakistan are using U.S. goods in their perpetual border dispute. Obviously, neither are using them for defensive purposes. No one is talking about those countries using them in compliance with U. S. law.

Which leads to the question, Why now question the legality of usage? Because it is about Israel and the Jews. This is another way to attack Israel and put them under a unique microscope. Then, when asked why the activists are requiring this proviso, they will fall back on the fact that they are simply asking Israel to comply with the same rules as everyone else. But they will not be following the same rules because every act that Israel takes will be scrutinized while the acts of others will be ignored.

There are currently two pieces of legislation (in addition to joint resolutions) that are aimed toward stripping Israel of American military arms. Every military action Israel takes is under interpretation for legality. That is despite them battling a multi-front attack.

Without U.S. arms and support, Israel’s defensive capabilities will be significantly limited and open to attacks that would make Oct. 7 look like a minor skirmish. A defenseless Israel is the ultimate goal of this unique treatment by their enemies in America. While for the most part the Germans hid their mass slaughtering of Jews, this would be out in the open with aid from useful idiots.

That is why it would be the ultimate act of antisemitism.

Bruce L. Bialosky is a former member of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Council.