By Tsvi Bisk. This is an Exclusive Four part series on Information and Hasbara:what to do and what not to do. Tsvi Bisk is an Educator, Lecturer, Futurist and Author.
Solution I – Positive Hasbara
A revamped Jewish Hasbara campaign should have two aspects: negative and positive. Negative Hasbara would be aimed at de-legitimizing Arab/Muslim and certain NGO and media positions vis-à-vis Israel, Zionism and the Jews. Positive Hasbara would be based on Israel’s achievements. Tactics should reflect the new media reality and include websites, Google ads, email chain letters and articles, specialty magazines, blogs, exposé books etc. Some readers of this posting will claim that all of this already exists. The problem is that, like this posting, it exists on outlets catering to Jewish and philo-Jewish media consumers – we are all preaching to the converted. How to infiltrate non-Jewish and non philo-Jewish media outlets is the question that must be addressed. But the fight is even more substantive.
For example, how would a Jewish/Israeli strategy of allying with environmental and alternative energy groups to weaken oil power (à la Chaim Weizmann) pay Hasbara dividends? Not only would be on the side of the angels but less Persian Gulf oil money being contributed to universities and dozens of spurious Middle East Studies Programs (dedicated to turning out anti-Israel partisans rather than objective scholars) would greatly enfeeble them. Moreover, less oil money would limit the dissemination of anti-Semitic and anti-Israel literature as well as negative public relations. The oil states would have to sell off substantial foreign investments in order to finance the daily activities of their countries. Their influence over the international investment community and media would be lessened. The beginning of their integration into the global economy and the kind of leadership and international partnerships this would require would also serve to moderate their position. It would be harder for them to explain and more difficult for western apologists to excuse their blatant anti-Semitism.
The relative power of international oil companies (which have been indirect partners in Arab PR and lobbying) will continue to decline. The relative power of international high tech companies with a significant Israeli presence will continue to grow in both absolute and relative influence. Israel’s own high tech powerhouse and its developments in information technology, alternative energy, materials science, medical technology, bio-tech and nano-tech making image enhancing headlines will continue to be a backbone of positive Hasbara. The Israel 21c E-newsletter is an outstanding example of what should be done, and expanded upon.
Another substantive step would be to announce that we no longer need American aid. This would be a Hasbara coup of the first order because it would enable us to demonstrate the nature of American aid and compare it to the direct and indirect aid provided to the Arabs – ESPECIALLY the aid the USA gives to the oil rich Gulf countries. This is especially important because of the extreme misinformation about the extent of American aid as well as the Arab & anti-Israel delusion that America can pressure Israel by withholding aid. Walt and Mearsheimer in The Israel Lobby beat this issue to death as one ‘demonstration’ of how the Jews dominate American policy-making to the detriment of America’s vital interests. They see this aid as especially wicked, given Israel’s current high standard of living.
The very act of declaring we no longer need this aid would give Israel and American Jewry the opportunity to set the record straight. Today all aid is military, with over 80% given as credits to buy materiel from America’s military industries. The Israeli Ministry of Defense maintains a delegation of about 400 buyers in the United States to take advantage of this. This part of the aid is in effect an indirect subsidy to American industry and is responsible for employing about 40,000 American workers (a fact that will be widely advertised when we forgo the aid). The rest of the money is discretionary but only to a degree.
Much of this discretionary aid is dedicated to R&D in various projects of interest to the American military, but which can be conducted with greater efficiency in Israel with less cost to the American taxpayer. The development of the Arrow missile is such a project. Many Israeli enhancements of American military systems are shared freely with the Pentagon. All in all, if one uses value for money as a measure, this is the cheapest aid America proffers. Still, I would argue that its Grand Strategic damage to Israel outweighs any economic or military benefit.
But can Israel afford the luxury of forgoing the aid? It might have to spend a billion or so out of its own budget to buy systems absolutely vital to its security but given Israel’s mature economy, this would not constitute an outrageous burden. Israel’s current GDP is approaching $230 billion a year and its budget is almost $100 billion a year. Israel receives about $3 billion in aid yearly or about 1.3% of the total of Israel’s economy and 3% of its budget. Forgoing this would be a burden but not impossible. We might have to temporarily increase our debt to GDP ratio, which currently stands at 78% (compared to America’s which is closing in on 100%), but given America’s current economic woes, this could also be seen as a moral imperative. As Israel’s economy and budget are projected to grow by over 3% in 2012, it would take just one year to make up for the loss of American aid.
This step would also enable us to compare the indirect aid that the United States provides to the oil rich Arab Gulf States. The US military has spent about $50 billion a year policing the Persian Gulf since the First Gulf War in 1991 in order to guarantee the security and survival of the Arab Gulf States. This is independent of the expense of the current war in Iraq. In other words, the United States has given over one trillion dollars in military aid to Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, The United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Bahrain over the past 20 years. Since this is embedded within the American military budget it is not perceived as aid. Declaring we no longer need aid would be an opportune time for Israel’s new Hasbara campaign ‘to point this out’ to American and world opinion.
It would also be an opportune time for the organized Jewish community and its allies in the non-Jewish community to advocate for a serious effort to wean the United States off of oil. We could point out that the actual cost to the American economy (when internalizing this and other costs) of gas at the pump is over $10 a gallon. We could point out that half of America’s trade deficit is the cost of importing oil – greater than that of Chinese imports – and that this represents over one million lost jobs. If the United States had reduced all of the above costs, it probably could have avoided its current economic crises.
Walt and Mearsheimer dwell on the fact that the United States has provided Israel with about 140 billion dollars in aid over the past 60 years. This is a reasonable estimate. European critics often refer to this aid to demonstrate that Israel could not exist except as an economic colony of the United States – thus implying the illegitimacy of the very existence of Israel. But consider what Israel has done with this aid (and why it needed it): absorbing millions of destitute immigrants and building a vigorous economy while having to maintain a heavy defense burden. Compare to to the aid the EU has given to Ireland and Greece over the past two years because of the irresponsibility and incompetence of these two countries neither of which had to face such challenges.
Ireland received about $60 billion from the EU between 1973 (when it joined) and 2008. It received another $112 billion in 2010 to bail out its banks and an additional $50 billion in 2011 to stimulate its construction industry. This is a total of $222 billion over 40 years for a country of 4.5 million with almost no defense budget and miniscule immigration. It is more aid than Israel received from the US, German reparations and Jewish contributions combined. What Greece will eventually cost the EU is anybody’s guess – the most recent package is about $160 billion but the eventual total cost will most likely be much more. Highlighting these facts will go a long way to deflecting mendacious European criticism of US support of Israel, as well as disabuse the Arab (Muslim) delusion that Israel would disappear without American aid.
In short the positive Grand Strategic Hasbara benefits of relinquishing American aid are so great that it seems an obvious path to take.
Of course peace with the Palestinians would be the ultimate positive Hasbara. Unfortunately I do not believe this is a realistic ambition at this time. I have become convinced that the only peace acceptable to the Palestinians would be a Roman Peace – i.e. no Israel. History matters! And history shows us that the Palestinians turned down Ehud Barak’s initiative in 2000 – 95% of the territories plus East Jerusalem as the capital (which at the time over 60% of Israel’s Jewish population supported) and Ehud Olmert’s offer in 2005, which was even more generous (and also included East Jerusalem). One would have to be a fool or a Jewish self-hater (or simply an intellectual) to blame Israel for the failure to achieve peace.
With the Israeli Left, I am vigorously against the settlement project as an existential danger to the Zionist project but agree with the Israeli Right that the settlements are not the issue. If the Palestinians had accepted Barak’s offer there would be half the settlers there are now. And when Bibi suspended settlement activity for 10 months, this did not bring the Palestinians to the table. The issue is Israel’s existence, not settlements – which is a convenient Palestinian excuse.
My skepticism about peace notwithstanding, I believe a robust involvement in ‘the peace process’ would do wonders for Israel’s PR. I differentiate between peace and the peace process. We must constantly convey the message that we are not the obstructionists; that we will participate in any initiative that is reasonable. We must constantly strive to demonstrate that the root cause of instability in the Middle East is not the Israel/Palestine issue. Participating in discussions with the Palestinians – as well as cooperating with them on a myriad of issues (which is the present on-the-ground reality) – is beneficial to Israel by reducing both security tension and external pressure.
Part Four Focuses on Negative Hasbara
For link to : PART I
For link to Part II
Tsvi Bisk is also the author of “The Optimistic Jew”
