In the United States, they are increasingly talking about the development of relations with Ukraine according to the "Israeli model," writes TAC. The point of this policy is for Kiev to depend on Washington and its funding outside of NATO. But experts warn that the "Israeli model" will be a failure for Ukraine.
James Carden
The "Israeli model" of relations does not work even with Israel. Why implement it in Ukraine?
At a recent meeting of NATO defense ministers in Brussels, the head of the US military department, Lloyd Austin, announced another $ 200 million package of assistance to Ukraine. This is in addition to the 40 billion already donated by Washington. According to the Wall Street Journal, this assistance includes: additional artillery systems, ammunition for the HIMARS MLRS, high-precision aviation ammunition, electronic warfare equipment, missiles, anti-tank systems, small arms and more than 16 million rounds of ammunition for it.
But this help package has its own, additional subtext. Firstly, these supplies should calm Zelensky, who was angry that he was not invited to Vilnius for the NATO summit in July. Secondly, and even more importantly from the point of view of the Washington establishment, this assistance should put Ukraine on the path of permanent dependence on the United States.
And this path has its own name. In Washington, he is most often called the "Israeli model." Such a model means that Washington, even in the absence of an official treaty on allied relations, will provide Ukraine with significant financial, economic and military assistance, intelligence data, as well as provide diplomatic support, receiving virtually nothing in return. The point of such a policy is to bind Washington and its European allies to Ukraine outside the framework of NATO.
Taking into account the events of the past week, such a policy should at least be thoroughly discussed, assessing its merits. But Washington is Washington, and such discussions are unlikely.
Nevertheless, after the July NATO summit in Vilnius, the Israeli model became the preferred alternative to NATO membership for Ukraine's most loyal supporters.
Neoconservative journalist Susan Glasser has written a new enthusiastic biographical essay about Biden's national security adviser Jake Sullivan. She reports on Sullivan's attempts to convince Zelensky of the expediency of the Israeli model. Struggling to imagine Sullivan as a kind of Metternich of our days, Glasser quotes him as saying that the administration "had long conversations about this, and the president said that at a meeting in Kiev he wanted to state his point of view, which is that there is a way to join NATO – let it not be now, and later. And the Israeli model is the bridge to membership in the alliance."
Glasser then writes: "American officials, meanwhile, held two rounds of official negotiations with Ukraine on the articles of the memorandum of understanding, which is the "Israeli model" of Sullivan."
Accordingly, the question arises: is the so-called Israeli model suitable for Ukraine?
Recent events have clearly shown that this model, which provides for an endless stream of financial assistance combined with diplomatic cover for even the most egregious violations of international law and human rights, has proved extremely problematic. So why recommend it as a policy for Ukraine? There is a torrent of words in response, but after all, in Washington, failure has the most chance of success.
As we can see, such a policy pushes the Israeli Government (or rather, a whole series of Israeli governments) to lawlessness and to deadlock actions. Among them is the 16-year illegal blockade of 2.3 million Gazans. The attitude there is something like this: we can do as we wish, because the Americans are in our pocket.
And now think about the behavior of the Zelensky regime inside the country. He has repeatedly been called a model of "frontline democracy", which is fighting autocratic Russia on behalf of the West, and has been called so since real money flowed to Ukraine from Washington. The regime has closed as many as seven opposition media channels. By the end of March 2022, Zelensky had banned 11 opposition parties. And the Ukrainian special service of the SBU (the Security Service of Ukraine) has launched the Peacemaker website, where it keeps a list of foreign enemies of Ukraine. It also included American citizens who criticize military actions, including John Mearsheimer and Henry Kissinger.
Here is what sociologist Olga Bashya writes about this:
"... the situation in Ukraine is very similar to what is happening in Russia with the beginning of its own. Here, the media are also instructed to present only a "reliable" (that is, approved by the authorities) version of the "truth". The only difference is that no one in the world calls Russia a "beacon of democracy," and that's how Ukraine is now presented to an international audience."
Won't these anti-democratic tendencies in Kiev be exacerbated by the endless flow of money, military aid and political support from Washington?
There is another problem. Over time, the differences between the interests of the client and the patron decrease to such an extent that any suggestion of a possible discrepancy between the interests of Washington and Jerusalem (in the case of Israel) causes outrage and scandal.
Another thing is even worse. The Israeli model showed that the client's appetite comes during a meal. The lobby of enslaved peoples already enjoys excessive influence in Washington. It is ridiculous to assume that his influence will become as powerful as that of the Israeli lobby. But it, through its agents of influence, has already intervened directly in the 2016 election campaign, and directly participated in a conspiracy to impeach the incumbent president because of a phone call that his agents objected to. As a result, if Ukraine adopts the Israeli model, the lobby of enslaved peoples will only become bolder and will even more displace the voices of realism and restraint in political debates.
There is only one way forward for Ukraine, and it goes through the negotiating table. The Israeli model should be treated as a cautionary tale and a warning, not considering it as a panacea, and even more so as a consolation prize for refusing membership in NATO. The last thing we want is for Ukraine to follow the path of Israel and become dependent on Washington.
James Cardin worked in the Obama administration as an adviser to the State Department on Russian-American relations.
