home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- <o>#clip
- <des>
-
- Too generous U.S. financial aid to Israel may be damaging
- that nation's economy by discouraging needed reform to
- "dinosaur socialist institutions." (Pipes Commentary 10/92)
-
- <doctype>article
- <author>Pipes, Daniel
- <author>Peretz, Martin
- <title>Bush, Clinton & the Jews: A Debate
- <serial>Commentary
- <date>October 1992
- <vol>94
- <num>4
- <pages>15-19
-
- <excerpt>
- <loc>p16c2g7-p17c1g2
-
- <quote>
-
- [Daniel Pipes:]
-
- The [Bush] administration can hardly be accused of
- penny-pinching with respect to Israel, or of adding
- unreasonable conditions. Every year, it unconditionally
- supported $3 billion in aid to Israel, much the highest
- per-capita aid to any country. In 1991 it also backed a
- $400-million supplement for housing and $650 million in cash
- for damages suffered during the Gulf War.
-
- All this said, doing <it>without</it> the loan guarantee
- probably would have served Israel's long-term interests. To
- absorb immigrants, the country needs growth, not aid. Yet by
- permitting Israeli politicians to defer the hard decisions,
- American handouts permit Israel's dinosaur socialist
- institutions to limp along. The prospect of no loan
- guarantee compelled the Israeli government to get serious
- about economic reforms, privatization in particular.
- Conversely, its granting may have unfortunate consequences.
- For example, those major corporations on the block for
- privatization--the telephone exchange, the state chemical
- manufacturer, the state shipping line--may now remain under
- government control.
-
- Israelis themselves, in a development with far-reaching
- implications, increasingly doubt the value of aid. Just a
- year ago this view was restricted to a small band of
- believers in the free market; now it echoes from all parts
- of the political spectrum. For example, David Boaz, a former
- state budget director, has openly aired his fears that the
- loan guarantee might foster an "easy money" atmosphere which
- could result in an expansion of government funding and
- subsidies. The economics editor of the daily paper,
- <it>Yediot Achronot</it>, has worried that it might turn
- into "a kind of opium"; feeling $10 billion richer, the
- government could allow difficult reforms to go
- unimplemented. An economic correspondent for another daily,
- <it>Ha'aretz</it>, has suggested that "now that we have [the
- funds], I don't think we should use them. It will cause more
- harm than good to the Israeli economy."
-
- </o>
-