Israel's attempted drone sale to China highlights concerns that a more independent Israel is determined to make its own mark on the world — questioning U.S authority more frequently in order to establish its own autonomous relations with other countries.

Israel is a strong U.S. ally in the war against terror; a long-time friend and a confidant on issues pertaining to Middle East peace and security. That unique relationship, however, has been challenged recently by the attempted sale by Israel of sophisticated unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) or Harpy Killer drones to China. This has led some analysts to speculate that the depth and strength of the Israel-U.S. bilateral relationship is now in question — with a reformulation almost inevitable.

Recent comments by Yuval Steinitz, chairman of the Israeli Parliament’s foreign affairs and defense committee, highlighted the tension between the two countries, “There is a crisis. It has been going on for about a year, and to my great regret, even Sharon’s [Israel’s Prime Minister] visit to Washington didn’t resolve this crisis.”

For some in the Bush Administration and the Pentagon, the attempted sale of sophisticated technology by Israel is further evidence that closer supervision of arms sales to foreign allies is long overdue and necessary. “We have our concerns about the sale and transfer of defense equipment and technology to China known to Israel,” Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman told reporters in June.

Primary U.S. concerns surround the capability of Harpy Killer drones to destroy radar stations and anti-aircraft batteries similar to those used by Taiwan to defend against Chinese missiles and aircraft. Complicating the proposed sale, Israel claimed the drones were merely “refurbished,” but initial U.S. intelligence supports claims that the drones did in fact incorporate new technology.

Adding to U.S. frustration was the recent indictment and arrest of Pentagon analyst Lawrence Franklin, who worked on the Pentagon’s Iran desk, for allegedly supplying classified national defense information to a pro-Israel lobby group. Moreover, the most substantial visit by a Chinese official to Israel in several years, Chinese State Councilor Tang Jiaxuan’s visit in December, has raised concerns in Washington of a closer Sino-Israel bilateral relationship.

But beyond concerns related to the re-transfer of sophisticated technology, increased spying and visits by high-level Chinese officials, the attempted drone sale highlights concerns that a more independent Israel is determined to make its own mark on the world — questioning U.S authority more frequently in order to establish its own autonomous relations with other countries.

This desire for independence was verified in June when U.S. officials requested that Israel remove four senior defense officials over the attempted sale including Amos Yaron, director-general of the Defense Ministry, and Yehiei Horev, head of the security branch at the ministry. On his way from Paris en route to Brussels, Yuval Steinitz called the demand “illegitimate” and “humiliating.” In the past, this type of comment from a top Israeli official would have elicited a stern rebuke from Tel Aviv and a swift retraction — not so today.

History of Conflict over Arms Sales

Although mutually supportive in many ways, the U.S.-Israel bilateral relationship has been marked by intense periodic controversies, with violations of the U.S. Arms Export Control Act (AECA) and the Foreign Assistance Act being noted by U.S. officials. The most troubling aspect of these violations has been the apparent intermingling of protected U.S. technology with Israeli exports to foreign countries such as China and India.

In the mid-1980’s, the U.S. State Department Inspector General raised concerns regarding Israel’s re-transfer of U.S. military hardware and technology without permission. The U.S. Attorney Generals Office cited, “a systematic and growing pattern of unauthorized transfers by the recipient [Israel] dating back to about 1983.”

In 1999, the U.S. government pressured Israel to cancel a proposed sale of radar equipment to China by Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI). If delivered, the radar equipment would have allowed the China to view up to 60 aerial targets in all directions over a radius of 250 miles. A subsequent story by the Washington Post in April 2000 noted that U.S. officials were disturbed by the fact that the system was closely related to the U.S. AWACS, or airborne warning and control system. Israel was eventually forced to pay Beijing $350 million in compensation for the failed arms deal.
 
In response to concerns regarding the sale of advanced technologies, the U.S. imposed sanctions on Israel’s defense industry in early 2005, cutting off financial and technical assistance for a number of weapons systems, including the F-35 aircraft, the Arrow 2 anti-ballistic missile and the Tactical High Energy Laser Project. Moreover, deliveries of night-vision equipment to Israel were indefinitely suspended.

Evolving Israeli Independence

Israel’s leadership is genuinely disturbed by what it perceives as a Washington double standard., whereby the U.S. imposes sanctions on Israel for arms sales to China, but does very little to stop other countries such as France, Germany and Russia from selling arms and nuclear materials to countries like Iran.

Making matters worse, the Israeli daily Ma’ariv reported in June that the U.S. asked the Israeli government to seek its approval on any arms sales to India and Singapore. This, in reaction to Israel’s failed deal with China.

Sensing that his country’s bargaining position was evaporating, Yuval Steinitz immediately dismissed the demand, saying Israel should take into consideration U.S. sensitivities on arms sales to China, but not India and Singapore.  "The attempt by the U.S. to impose supervision on Israeli exports to India and Singapore is designed to bolster the competitiveness of U.S. companies against Israeli companies."  Israeli Export and International Cooperation Institute chairman and Manufacturers Association president Shraga Brosh concurred, “Israel cannot agree to this,” he stated.

But what does Israel hope to gain by seeking greater independence on issues related to arms sales?

Surely, proving one’s independence is admirable — a characteristic of a confident and mature country. But in the current arms case, Israeli independence could mean isolation from its staunchest ally — the U.S. In addition, China is a known weapons proliferator, securing advanced technology and then re-selling it on the open market. Who can say with certainty that China would not sell the Harpy Killer drones to an anti-Israel state such as Syria or Iran? This is something Israel must consider.

Conclusion

Hope remains high that that an agreeable solution to the current stalemate between Israel and the U.S. will soon be reached — but it will take work by both sides. In a positive first step toward reconciliation, Israel has pledged to report to the U.S. military and dual use sales to China.

An agreement termed the “Declaration of Understanding on Technology Exports” will likely be signed next month by both countries. The proposed agreement will declare that the U.S. and Israel are strategic partners who will consider each other’s concerns about the transfer of military technology to third countries. The agreement will also stipulate that the U.S. cannot ban arms sales on commercial grounds. The final agreement is expected to be signed by Israel Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz during a trip to Washington next month.

Israel and the U.S. must quickly move beyond this crisis — their bilateral relationship is much too important. Yuval Steinitz indicated that it was important for a mechanism to be created that would ensure that both the U.S. and Israel gave consideration to each other's concerns, “With China, Israel must continue to cooperate, but it must also continue to show sensitivity to the fears and needs of the Americans.”

Unfounded allegations by some in the media that the Bush administration is purposely trying to erode the strategic alliance between Israel and the U.S. by stopping the sale of drones to China are misguided and ill-timed. Critics of U.S. policy must realize that the current arms debate lies well beyond the borders of the Middle East and is global in nature.

A well-armed and technologically advanced China has the potential to become a much greater threat to Middle East peace and stability than Egypt or Syria. In addition, Israel must recognize that many in Washington view the attempted drone sale as a direct assault on the existing arms embargo against China that the U.S. has worked so diligently to enforce, maintain and strengthen.

At the same time, requests by the Israeli government calling for the U.S. to consider its own security interests before making arms sales to countries like Egypt and Saudi Arabia, both of which have harbored hostile intentions toward the Jewish state, are entirely legitimate and should be taken seriously by Washington.

In June, Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom met with U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and noted his regret that the drone sales could have damaged the interests of the U.S. With so much at stake, both Israel and the U.S. must make certain that disagreements become less confrontational in the future.