Israel can live without American aid. But it must prepare to live without American resupply.

After I published “Keep Your $3.8 Billion and Choke on It,” a friend asked an irritatingly good question:

Could Israel actually be all right without the United States?

My first impulse was: Of course.

My second was to look into it more carefully.

The answer is that American aid has become a golden leash. It is valuable, and Israel would pay a serious price if it disappeared suddenly. But its value gives Washington leverage, while the dependencies built around it leave Israel strategically constrained.

Israel can afford to give up American financial aid. It cannot presently lose the entire American military relationship without accepting a serious reduction in its security. That dependence is a strategic liability and, speaking as an Israeli citizen, I think we should address it.

The money is replaceable

The United States currently provides Israel with $3.3 billion annually in Foreign Military Financing, plus $500 million for missile-defense programs.

Against Israel’s wartime-elevated defense spending, the combined $3.8 billion amounts to roughly 8 to 10%. In many prewar years, however, American assistance represented closer to 15 to 20% of Israel’s defense budget.

The denominator is important. The recent expansion of Israeli military spending makes the American contribution look smaller than it did under more normal conditions.

Still, Israel can afford to replace it. The annual package is equivalent to approximately 0.6% of Israeli GDP. Doing without it would require some combination of higher taxes, additional borrowing, spending cuts and a permanently larger domestic defense budget.

None would be painless. None would be remotely existential.

If Washington stopped giving Israel money but continued selling it weapons at market prices, Israel would remain militarily powerful. Ending the subsidy might eventually leave Israel stronger.

Americans could no longer claim that every Israeli bomb, missile or military operation was conducted on their dime. Washington would lose some ability to treat assistance as a claim on Israeli decision-making. Israel would assume unambiguous responsibility for its own policies, including both their achievements and their failures.

Ending the subsidy would also alter Israel’s procurement incentives. Most American military financing must be spent on American products. The arrangement therefore supports American defense manufacturers while encouraging Israel to organize important parts of its military around American supply chains.

The idea of ending the subsidy is no longer hypothetical.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has publicly said that he wants to taper American financial assistance to zero over the next decade. He has endorsed a congressional proposal to replace direct aid with Israeli-funded purchases of American weapons, describing the desired transition as one from “aid recipient to partner.”

That is the........

© The Times of Israel (Blogs)