Largest Beneficiary of US Military Aid. Dispelling the Myth that that is Israel

Annual  US military aid:
Aid in form of funding: Israel:US$3.1 billion
Aid in form of cost of stationing US troops (does not include air and sea
patrols or joint ground, air, and maritime exercises with host countries)
Japan: US$27 billion
Germany: US$21 billion
South Korea: US$15 billion
Italy: US$6 billion

Many American detractors of Israel begin by citing that Israel receives

the lion’s share of US military aid. The very suggestion conjures the demon

of an all-powerful Israel lobby that has turned the US Congress into its

pawn. But these figures, while reflecting official direct

US military aid, are almost meaningless in comparison to the real costs and

benefits of US military aid – above all, American boots on the ground. In

reality, Israel receives only a small fraction of American military aid, and

most of that was spent in the US to the benefit of the American economy.

Countless articles discrediting Israel (as well as many other

better-intentioned articles) ask how it is that a country as small as Israel

receives the bulk of US military aid. Israel receives 55%, or $US3.1 billion

per year, followed by Egypt, which receives 23%. This largesse comes at the

expense, so it is claimed, of other equal or more important allies, such as

Germany, Japan, and South Korea. The complaint conjures the specter of an

all-powerful Israel lobby that has turned the US Congress into its pawn.

The response to the charge is simple: Israel is not even a major beneficiary

of American military aid. The numerical figure reflects official direct US

military aid, but is almost meaningless compared to the real costs and

benefits of US military aid – which include, above all, American boots on

the ground in the host states.

There are 150,500 American troops stationed in seventy countries around the

globe. This costs the American taxpayer an annual $US85-100 billion,

according to David Vine, a professor at American University and author of a

book on the subject. In other words, 800-1,000 American soldiers stationed

abroad represent US$565-665 million of aid to the country in which they are

located.

Once the real costs are calculated, the largest aid recipient is revealed to

be Japan, where 48,828 US military personnel are stationed. This translates

into a US military aid package of over US$27 billion (calculated according

to Vine’s lower estimation). Germany, with 37,704 US troops on its soil,

receives aid equivalent to around US$21 billion; South Korea, with 27,553 US

troops, receives over US$15 billion; and Italy receives at least US$6

billion.

If Vine’s estimate is correct, Japan’s US military aid package is nine times

larger than that of Israel, Germany’s is seven times larger, and Italy’s is

twice as large. The multipliers are even greater for Egypt. Even the

Lilliputian Gulf states, Kuwait and Bahrain, whose American bases are home

to over 5,000 US military personnel apiece, receive military aid almost

equal to what Israel receives.

Yet even these figures grossly underestimate the total costs of US aid to

its allies. The cost of maintaining troops abroad does not reflect the

considerable expense, deeply buried in classified US military expenditure

figures, of numerous US air and sea patrols. Nor does it reflect the high

cost of joint ground, air, and maritime exercises with host countries

(events only grudgingly acknowledged on NATO’s official site).

US air and naval forces constantly patrol the Northern, Baltic, and China

Seas to protect American allies in Europe and in the Pacific – at American

expense. Glimpses of the scale of these operations are afforded by incidents

like the shadowing of a Russian ship in the Baltics, near run-ins between

Chinese Coast Guard ships and US Navy ships dispatched to challenge Chinese

claims in the South China Sea, and near collisions between US Air Force

planes and their Chinese counterparts in the same area.

In striking contrast, no US plane has ever flown to protect Israel’s

airspace. No US Navy ship patrols to protect Israel’s coast. And most

importantly, no US military personnel are put at risk to ensure Israel’s

safety.

In Japan, South Korea, Germany, Kuwait, Qatar, the Baltic states, Poland,

and elsewhere, US troops are a vulnerable trip-wire. It is hoped that their

presence will deter attack, but there is never any assurance that an attack

will not take place. Should such an attack occur, it will no doubt cost

American lives.

This cannot happen in Israel, which defends its own turf with its own

troops. There is no danger that in Israel, the US might find itself

embroiled in wars like those it waged in Iraq and Afghanistan at a cost of

US$4 trillion, according to Linda J. Bilmes, a public policy professor and

Harvard University researcher.

Japan’s presence at the top of the list of US military aid recipients is

both understandable and debatable. It is understandable because Japan is

critical to US national security in terms of maintaining freedom of the seas

and containing a rising China. It is debatable because Japan is a rich

country that ought to pay for the US troops stationed within it – or in lieu

of that, to significantly strengthen its own army. At present, the Japanese

army numbers close to 250,000, but it is facing the rapidly expanding

military power of its main adversary, China. A similar case can be made with

regard to Germany, both in terms of its wealth and its contribution towards

meeting the Russian threat.

What is incomprehensible is not why Israel receives so much US military aid,

but why Japan has received nine times more aid than Israel does. This is a

curious proportion given the relative power Israel possesses in the Middle

East and its potential to advance vital US security interests in times of

crisis, compared to the force maintained by Japan relative to China.

Ever since the Turkish parliament’s decision in March 2003 not to join the

US-led coalition, and the Turkish government’s refusal to allow movement of

American troops across its borders, Israel has been America’s sole ally

between Cyprus and India with a strategic air force and (albeit small) rapid

force deployment capabilities to counter major threats to vital US

interests.

It takes little imagination to envision these potential threats. Iran might

decide to occupy Bahrain, which has a Shiite majority seriously at odds with

the ruling Sunni monarchy. It might take over the United Arab Emirates,

which plays a major role in the air offensive against the Houthis, Iran’s

proxies in the war in Yemen. There might be a combined Syrian and Iraqi bid

to destabilize Sunni Jordan, in the event that both states subdue their

Sunni rebels. Any of these moves would threaten vital energy supplies to the

US and its allies. Only Israel can be depended upon completely to provide

bases and utilities for a US response and to participate in the effort if

needed.

The politicians, pundits, and IR scholars who attack Israel and the Israeli

lobby for extracting the lion’s share of US military aid from a gullible

Congress know full well that this is not true. Israel receives a small

fraction of the real outlays of military aid the US indirectly gives its

allies and other countries. These experts also know that 74% of military aid

to Israel was spent on American arms, equipment, and services. Under the

recently signed Memorandum of Understanding, that figure will be changed to

100%. The experts simply cite the wrong figures.

The US is now led by a businessman president who knows his dollars and

cents. He has been adamant about the need to curb free-riding by the large

recipients of real US aid. He will, one hopes, appreciate the security

bargain the US has with Israel – a country that not only shares many common

values with the US, but can make a meaningful contribution to American vital

interests with no trip-wires attached.