The geopolitical maneuvers of navigating Israel-US relations and arms dynamics - Opinion

• Published date: 07 April 2024
• Author: ILAN POMERANC
• Publication title: Jerusalem Post, The: Web Edition Articles (Israel)

At the start of the week, loudly echoing the conduct of the Obama administration, the United States abstained instead of vetoing a Russian-Chinese backed anti-Israel UN Security Council resolution. The abstention coming on the back of continuous and persistent US criticisms of how Israel is conducting the war

The UN resolution called for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza without any prerequisite for the release of Israeli hostages still held by the genocidal jihadist group. Hostages - men, women, and children - who have been abused, tortured, and raped for months now. Others have already been executed.

Then, at the end of the same week, The Washington Post reported that unnamed US officials had informed them of newly approved US arms transfers to Israel. These include heavy ordnance and the latest tranche of F-35 fighter jets. All items were approved for sale to Israel years ago, according to the report, and now given final procedural authorization for transfer. It was a move that came across as detached from the earlier UN vote and the US discontent with Israeli actions that the vote was meant to convey.

Which begs the question, why even leak such mundane procedural steps in the first place. Especially when almost simultaneously the US military's chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff put out a statement that could be interpreted as another attempt at publicizing the US's discontent with Israel. It indicated that the US has not been able to provide Israel with all the weapons types that it has requested.

Geopolitical dynamics

Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr. was quoted as saying, "Because they've asked for stuff that [we]... either don't have the capacity [for] or not willing to provide, not right now, in particular."

The "not right now" and "capacity" could be understood as a reference to acute shortages in the United States' own weapons stocks. Stocks drained by the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, as well as slowdowns in procurement and atrophied production with the winding down of those conflicts. More recently, the arming of Ukraine in its war with Russia has made the issue more acute.

The "not willing to provide" portion of the statement, most likely refers to certain weapons Israel adds to its requests, with the knowledge that the US is not willing to export/share those items. The purpose being that those items serve as a "high bar" to be negotiated down, which eases the approval of sale of other weapons.

So again, why the conflicting moves and statements by the...