|
|
|
National Jewish Community
Relations Advisory Council Guide to Program Planning Of the Constituent Organizations |
| Israel and the Middle East |
|
U.S.-Israel Relations The U.S.-Israel strategic alliance remains important, particularly as Israel enters a period in which it will be taking new risks for peace. A greater emphasis on cooperative economic and technological initiatives is emerging as well as on mutual efforts to develop responses to shared educational, social and environmental problems. As the Administration and the Congress work toward overall reform of U.S. foreign aid, the organized Jewish community will be challenged to develop approaches to the foreign aid issue that are responsive to new Middle East and international realities as well as the heightened focus in the United States on domestic priorities. Changing Conditions The U.S.-Israel strategic alliance remains important, particularly as Israel enters a period in which it will be taking new risks for peace. A greater emphasis on cooperative economic and technological initiatives is emerging as well as on mutual efforts to develop responses to shared educational, social and environmental problems. As the Administration and the Congress work toward overall reform of U.S. foreign aid, the organized Jewish community will be challenged to develop approaches to the foreign aid issue that are responsive to new Middle East and international realities as well as the heightened focus in the United States on domestic priorities. Background Relations between the Rabin Government and the Clinton Administration have been characterized by close partnership based on mutual values as well as common strategic, political and economic interests. Tensions that have arisen have been resolved quickly and discreetly (see Joint Program Plan for 1992-93). The Clinton Administration has recognized that an Israel that feels confident in its relationship with the U.S., and that is perceived by Arab parties and others to enjoy solid American support, is more likely to take calculated risks for peace. "America's commitment to Israeli security and well-being will remain unshakable," said Secretary of State Warren Christopher following the Israel-PLO agreement in September 1993. "Only an Israel that is strong, confident and secure can make peace. Only an Israel that is certain of its strategic partnership with the United States can take the necessary risks," he said. President Clinton agreed to give Israel status equal to NATO members regarding defense technology transfers. He also authorized for export to the U.S. Israeli equipment and technology for the launching of civilian satellites. This represents the first time that Israel is permitted to compete for U.S. contracts in the field of civil space technologies. In. further recognition that clear demonstrations of United States support for Israel are essential to furthering the peace process, the Clinton Administration has committed to sustaining foreign aid to Israel at current levels of $3 billion in economic and military grants. This commitment stands, despite the growing pressures for Congress and the Administration to reevaluate the foreign aid program. Debate over the foreign aid program is coming to the fore again as a result of overarching domestic economic problems, which constitute the priority for the Clinton Administration, as well as increasing international obligations in Russia and other countries of the former Soviet Union, Somalia, Bosnia and at the United Nations. In this climate, it remains critically important to advocate the importance of foreign aid to U.S. national interests. Foreign aid currently accounts for less than one percent of the national budget. Frequently unmentioned in the discussions about foreign aid are the benefits the U.S. economy gains from such assistance. For example, Israel spends nearly all of the aid it receives on American products and services. (See section on Foreign Aid in World Jewry and International Human Rights.) In the aftermath of the cold war and with significant progress in the peace process heralding a potential new era in the Middle East, both the United States and Israel have begun to focus on cooperative efforts that highlight their shared values in addressing common domestic concerns relating to the economy, science, technology, education, social services and other areas. Clinton and Rabin created the U.S.-Israel Science and Technology Commission, chaired by Ron Brown and Michah Harish. The U.S-Israel foundations for Binational Industrial Research and Development (BIRD) and Binational Agricultural Research and Development (BARD) continue to provide funding for innovative cooperative enterprises. An innovative educational program for youth-at-risk, designed by the education division of the joint Distribution Committee in Israel, the Mifne project, is being marketed in the U.S. by the Federation Employment and Guidance Service (FEGS) of New York. The Memorandum of Understanding between Israel and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which has been administered by the Council of Jewish Federations, is one of a number of bilateral agreements between U.S. governmental agencies and Israeli counterparts that foster interaction, bringing to the United States the expertise of Israelis. In addition, there has been a dramatic growth in recent years in official state relationships with Israel, particularly in economic and agricultural cooperation. Some have explored other areas of interaction. The Governor of Wisconsin, for example, created in 1993 a commission on youth villages and is looking to Israel's residential programs as possible models for his state. These bilateral initiatives based upon shared values need to be expanded and encouraged for the mutual benefit of both American and Israeli societies.
The Jewish Community Relations Field Should
[NOTE: For additional strategic goals, see Joint Program Plan for 1993-94.] |
