Does Israel Serve America's Interests?
In the course of an interesting back and forth between Matthew Yglesias and Jonathan Zasloff (starting here, then here, and here), Zasloff writes:
I would take the position that it is important enough for the United States to support liberal democratic Zionism even if it hurts us in other aspects of foreign policy, and they would argue that throwing Israel over the side might be regrettable, but it would be worth it. We could even have an honest debate about whether Israel's existence supports concrete, non-ideological American interests.
Leaving aside the loaded formulation, Zasloff is certainly raising the right question. But this begs another - what is the proper level of support? Right now, Israel is the largest recipient of U.S. foreign aid, with the fewest restrictions on its use. Do the "concrete, non-ideological" interests served by our relationship (to say nothing of the costs, which Zasloff himself alludes to) justify such unprecedented generosity? Does Israel's strategic importance to the U.S. trump that of, say, India?
One serious, sustained attempt to construct an argument that America's patronage of Israel serves her non-ideological interests is Martin Kramer's. The short version: it helps us sustain a "Pax Americana" over the Middle East.
Of course, if you don't think sustaining a "Pax Americana" over the Middle East is the proper use of American power, this is rather thin beer.
