Overview:
As the Palestinian uprising
enters its fourth month, the climate in the Middle East is markedly
altered from that of only last July. Palestinians and Israelis remain in
open conflict, despite heightened efforts to slow violent exchanges as a
stepping stone to a resumption of negotiations.
With the change in climate,
Israel's defense budget has also undergone revision. While the 2001 budget
was to include a decrease in military expenditures in line with last
year's belt-tightening, recent events have had the Israeli military
clamoring for a boost in spending. With dire predictions of war with Syria
and considering the situation in the Occupied Territories, the defense
establishment has wrangled another NIS 3 billion ($732 million) from the
prime minister's office. In so doing, Israel has momentarily reversed a
downward trend in defense expenditures and caused some Israelis to wonder
if their defense officials are taking them for a ride.
Selling the Product of War:
This year was to be a great one from the point of view of the Israeli
government, according to Gidion Eshet, economic correspondent at the
Israeli daily Yediot Aharonot. There were to be few expenses in southern
Lebanon considering the redeployment of the Israeli army from the area
last summer. Moreover, predictions were for an agreement with the
Palestinians, which would not only allow for less spending in the Occupied
Territories, but would bring in a windfall in foreign aid to implement the
expected accords. More money could then be spent on education, which in
the 2000 budget was allotted NIS 26.9 billion ($6.6 billion). By
comparison, in August the Israeli Finance Ministry said that military
spending for this year would be NIS 37.5 billion ($8.9 billion). The
defense budget was slated to increase, but at a lower rate than the Gross
Domestic Product (GDP), in affect a decrease of NIS 750 million ($182.9
million).
The defense establishment
quickly began railing against the scheduled decline. As early as August 6
(a month and a half before the outbreak of the intifada), defense
officials asked for an additional NIS 1 billion ($244 million) to prepare
for coming clashes with Palestinians. Speaking to the Knesset Foreign
Relations and Defense Committee on September 5, Israel Defense Force (IDF)
Chief of Staff Shaul Mofaz said that "less budget means less defense.
We need to study the implications of cuts in the [defense] budget and
present them to the government." The hardest hit program would be
long term rearmament, although the size of standing forces, artillery
ammunition stocks, and reserve activities would all be affected.
Despite the dire predictions,
Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak rejected calls for an increase in the
defense budget. The army quickly said that defense contracts doled out
that year would have to be canceled. Over 17,000 jobs were in danger. On
September 10, Haaretz correspondent Amir Oren wrote that projects for
developing and procuring long range strategic weapons against a potential
Iranian or Iraqi threat would have to be slashed.
On September 28, Likud leader
Ariel Sharon made his infamous visit to the Haram al-Sharif mosque
compound in Jerusalem with at least 1,000 guards. The next day,
Palestinian protests against the visit were met with heavy Israeli force.
After the tunnel incident of 1996, the Israeli army had incorporated
snipers into each army unit. The day after Sharon's visit, targeted
Israeli gunfire killed seven Palestinians, thus sparking the ongoing
intifada.
With an uprising on its hands,
the defense establishment's calls for a budget increase escalated. In
early November, intelligence officials delivered an assessment to the
cabinet that ministers described as "frightening." Syrian
support of Hezbollah could lead to conflict on that front, Iran was
agitating behind the scenes, and Iraq had moved forces to the Jordanian
border. The core of the discussion, according to Yediot Aharonot, was an
attempt to convince the finance minister to increase the defense budget by
an additional NIS 750 million ($182.9 million).
An Industry Fighting to
Grow:
Discussions over the amount of
money Israel spends on defense are not new. Currently, Israel spends a
ratio of nearly 9 percent its GDP on defense. By comparison, the United
States spends only 3.2 percent, Canada 1.1 percent, and England 2.8
percent. This high percentage does not include the hidden budgetary items
of the Israeli intelligence branches, as well as unbudgeted revenue from
the sale of second hand arms to foreign countries. Critics say Israel is
spending far too much money on defense at a time when Israel's army is
unrivaled in the region, facing no nuclear threat.
There are still those who
argue that Israel's declining defense budget is a sign of woeful
unpreparedness. At least half of the current line item defense budget is
spent on salaries, benefits, and pensions, at the same time that the real
cost of buying arms has dramatically increased, writes Martin Sherman for
the Center for Policy Research.
The topic of disagreement,
however, does not see a lot of Israeli press. That is probably due to the
dramatic decline in the defense budget since the 1980s. In 1984, for
example, Israel was spending over 24 percent of its GDP on defense. Eshet
says that the general decline in expenditures is why debates over how much
the military spends today receive very little attention from most
Israelis. The recent addition of NIS 3 billion ($731.7 million) is barely
a drop in the bucket in a total budget of more than NIS 240 billion ($58.5
billion).
The U.S. Role:
There is no way to avoid the
U.S. involvement in this discussion. Currently, the United States gives
Israel $3 billion annually in line item foreign aid. Since 1998, however,
the United States has altered the shape of that money in light of Israel's
strong economy. Instead of giving $1.8 billion in military aid and $1.2
billion in civilian cash payments, the amount of defense aid has slowly
increased in lieu of the cash payments. In 2001, for example, Israel will
receive $2 billion in military aid.
Recently, Israeli
correspondent Steve Rodan reported in Jane's Defense Weekly that the
Clinton administration told Israel that it would not grant $450 million in
special military aid if Israel continued to downgrade its own military
budget. The source was an Israeli defense official. Even though the
Israeli defense budget has gone up, however, it appears that the promise
of $450 million is on hold.
A Piece of the Pie:
These things matter most to
those in the minority fighting for a piece of the state pie. Not long ago,
Barak published a plan to dole out NIS 4 billion ($975.6 million) over
four years to Palestinian communities in Israel. After the participation
of Palestinians citizens in the start of the uprising in which 13 of them
were killed, Palestinians in Israel are angry. The Israeli government is
trying to patch over these open wounds. But Eshet notes that NIS 4 billion
over four years is not a lot of money, and Palestinians in Israel may feel
that they are in competition with the defense establishment for any extra
allotments.
It is not surprising that
Palestinian Member of Knesset Azmi Bishara believes that the defense
establishment has been making noises of war in order to inflate its
budget. "It is irresponsible and cynical," he said. "They
could not convince the finance ministry to give more of the budget to the
army, so they are raising the issue of war by leaking to the media the
possibilities of a war with Syria."
Bishara linked Israel's
threats against Syria with the defense push for more money. "Syria is
not interested in war at all," he said, and Israel's vocal threats
and assessments of belligerency could be "a self-fulfilling
prophecy."
Palestinians are not the only
ones asking questions-particularly when Mofaz was heard complaining that
he did not have enough bulletproof vests for the soldiers deployed in the
West Bank and Gaza Strip. "The chief of staff wasn't required to
explain how it came about that despite the vast resources provided by the
state to the army, the [IDF] lacks the equipment it needs to deal with the
conflict in the territories," wrote Reuven Pedatzur in Haaretz.
"As the army officers see it, these are precipitous times for
lobbying, for pressuring politicians to hand out more money. Their
calculation is right on the mark."
Charmaine
Seitz is Managing Editor of
The
Palestine Report
Source:
by courtesy & © 2001 Charmaine Seitz &
Center for Policy Analysis on Palestine
by the same author: