It would help to start with some data, no matter how schematic. This is
from https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/is.html and is
reasonably accurate.
ISRAEL:
PRODUCTION---------------------------------------------------------
Israel has a technologically advanced market economy with substantial
government participation. It depends on imports of crude oil, grains, raw
materials, and military equipment. Despite limited natural resources, Israel
has intensively developed its agricultural and industrial sectors over the
past 20 years. Israel imports substantial quantities of grain, but is
largely self-sufficient in other agricultural products. Cut diamonds,
high-technology equipment, and agricultural products (fruits and vegetables)
are the leading exports. Israel usually posts sizable current account
deficits, which are covered by large transfer payments from abroad and by
foreign loans. Roughly half of the government's external debt is owed to the
US, which is its major source of economic and military aid. The bitter
Israeli-Palestinian conflict; difficulties in the high-technology,
construction, and tourist sectors; and fiscal austerity in the face of
growing inflation led to small declines in GDP in 2001 and 2002. The economy
rebounded in 2003 and 2004, growing at a 4% rate each year, as the
government tightened fiscal policy and implemented structural reforms to
boost competition and efficiency in the markets. In 2005, rising consumer
confidence, tourism, and foreign direct investment - as well as higher
demand for Israeli exports - boosted GDP by 4.7%.
GDP - real growth rate: 5.2% (2005 est.)
GDP - per capita (PPP): $24,600 (2005 est.)
GDP - composition by sector: agriculture: 2.6%
industry: 31.7%
services: 65.7% (2003 est.)
Products agriculture: citrus, vegetables, cotton; beef, poultry, dairy
products
Products industry: high-technology projects (including aviation,
communications, computer-aided design and manufactures, medical electronics,
fiber optics), wood and paper products, potash and phosphates, food,
beverages, and tobacco, caustic soda, cement, construction, metals products,
chemical products, plastics, diamond cutting, textiles, footwear
exports value: $40.14 billion f.o.b. (2005 est.)
exports commodities: machinery and equipment, software, cut diamonds,
agricultural products, chemicals, textiles and apparel
export partners: US 36.7%, Belgium 7.5%, Hong Kong 4.2% (2005)
imports value:$43.19 billion f.o.b. (2005 est.)
imports commodities: raw materials, military equipment, investment goods,
rough diamonds, fuels, grain, consumer goods
imports partners: US 17.9%, Belgium 9%, Germany 6.5%, Switzerland 6%, UK
5.4%, China 4.2% (2005)
External debt: $75.55 billion (2005 est.)
Economic aid recipient: $662 million from US (2003 est.)
Public debt: 99.7% of GDP (2005 est.)
LABOUR:------------------------------------------------------------------
Labor force:2.42 million (2005 est.)
Labor force - by occupation: agriculture, forestry, and fishing 2.6%,
manufacturing 20.2%, construction 7.5%, commerce 12.8%, transport, storage,
and communications 6.2%, finance and business 13.1%, personal and other
services 6.4%, public services 31.2% (1996)
Unemployment rate: 9% (2005 est.)
Population below poverty line: 21% (2005)
Household income or consumption by percentage share: lowest 10%: 2.4%
highest 10%: 28.3% (1997)
Distribution of family income - Gini index: 34 (2005)
Regarding Israel's Arms Exports: The Israeli defense-industrial complex
that the United States helps to underwrite is becoming one of the world's
most competitive arms exporters. Israel will export an estimated $2 billion
in weaponry in 2000; the 48 entities who receive Israeli arms or defense
cooperation include Cambodia, Colombia, Eritrea, Ethiopia, the South Lebanon
Army (an Israeli-backed militia), and Russia (. Tel Aviv Flexes Military,
Commercial Muscles,. Barbara Opall-Rome, Defense News, January 17, 2000).
According to a Tel Aviv University study, India, China, Burma, and Zambia
are as Israeli customers despite the fact that the U.S. either embargoes or
severely restricts its own arms sales to those countries. The UN reportedly
had to ask Israel to stop supplying warring countries Ethiopia and Eritrea
with arms, including an air surveillance system to Ethiopian Air Force and
two boats to the Eritrean Navy (. UN to Israel: Stop Supplying Arms to
Ethiopia,. Yosi Melman, Tel Aviv Ha. aretz, May 19, 2000).
from http://www.fas.org/asmp/profiles/israel.htm#Exports
______________________________________________
GAZA STRIP:
High population density, limited land access, and strict internal and
external controls have kept economic conditions in the Gaza Strip - the
smaller of the two areas under the Palestinian Authority (PA)- even more
degraded than in the West Bank. The beginning of the second intifadah in
September 2000 sparked an economic downturn, largely the result of Israeli
closure policies; these policies, which were imposed in response to security
interests in Israel, disrupted labor and commodity relationships with the
Gaza Strip. In 2001, and even more severely in 2003, Israeli military
measures in PA areas resulted in the destruction of much capital plant, the
disruption of administrative structure, and widespread business closures.
Including the West Bank, the UN estimates that more than 100,000
Palestinians out of the 125,000 who used to work in Israel or in joint
industrial zones have lost their jobs. Half the labor force is unemployed.
Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip in September 2005 offers some
medium-term opportunities for economic growth, especially given the removal
of restrictions on internal movement. In addition, recent agreements and
continuing negotiations on the administration of Gaza's border crossings
increase the prospects for trade.
WEST BANK:
The West Bank - the larger of the two areas under the Palestinian Authority
(PA)- has experienced a general decline in economic growth and a degradation
in economic conditions made worse since the second intifadah began in
September 2000. The downturn has been largely the result of the Israeli
closure policies - the imposition of border closures in response to security
incidents in Israel - which disrupted labor and commodity market
relationships. In 2001, and even more severely in 2002, Israeli military
measures in PA areas resulted in the destruction of much capital plant, the
disruption of administrative structure, and widespread business closures.
Including the Gaza Strip, the UN estimates that more than 100,000
Palestinians out of the 125,000 who used to work in Israeli settlements, or
in joint industrial zones, have lost their jobs. International aid of $2
billion to the West Bank and Gaza Strip in 2004 prevented the complete
collapse of the economy and allowed some reforms in the government's
financial operations. In 2005, high unemployment and limited trade
opportunities, due to continued closures both within the West Bank and
externally, stymied growth.
(If you so wish I can send you the details on the Gazan and West Bank
economies).
Hope this helps you towards a more concrete analysis of the material
conditions of the current situation.
Victor Friedlander-Rakocz
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Charles Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Forum for the discussion of theoretical issues raised by Karl Marx
andthe thinkers he inspired'" <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, July 28, 2006 22:33
Subject: [Marxism-Thaxis] Marxist analysis of US/Israel offensives
Is there a direct, economic determination that we can single out for
the Israeli aggression? Among other causes, there are such "material"
factors as Israeli demographics/lebensraum, which underlies its
expansionist dynamic. In fact that is its reason for being, its
justification. The whole peace agreement with the Palestinians,
creating a Gaza bantustan as a cover for enlarging, creating and
annexing settlements in the West Bank, is based on this logic.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but my impression is that while Israel
itself may have industries, it does not have an organic economic
basis. European Jewish settlers came in, seized Arab land, and used
it for other purposes than its vocation. They built a massive
military industry in line with the logic of a settler state and their
assigned role. Israel is based on a lopsided economy. Is Israel even
capable of producing its own domestic food consumption? I'd be
willing to wager that if it weren't for the infusion of massive
amounts of capital from outside, whether from the U.S. government or
"private" sources, the Israeli state would collapse and/or be forced
to democratize and secularize, especially since, first, much of its
productive labor is, in fact, Palestinian and second, it would be
forced to integrate with its neighbors.
But, in any case the logic of the Israeli state is lebensraum, and to
achieve this, it must have docile neighbors.
The second point, which I want to reiterate is that Israel has a
particular role in the international division of labor. The Zionist
movement traded with the British: an escape from oppression for
Jewish settlers in return for the role of gendarme.
Given the logic and the role of the Zionist state, it would be hard
to locate a single material (i.e., vulgar economic) cause for the
apparently irrational act of committing genocide against their
neighbors. But, there are levels and levels of determinations and
mediations. (I still maintain that E.P. Thompson was good on this
sort of thing). As I mentioned, Israel's role as praetorian guard
squares quite well with the Bush administration's plans for the
region, which DO have clear material bases, centering around the
control of petroleum resources.
However, a Marxist approach isn't distinguished by its insistence on
direct economic causality. That would be, as Lenin called it, "vulgar
economism." Wars have been waged by imperialism simply to open
potential markets. The imperialist ruling classes often wage war to
contain and reverse the class struggle and particularly its
nationalist expressions. Make no mistake about it, Hezbollah's
struggle against Israel, Iran's struggle against imperialism, Syria's
struggle against imperialism, the Iraqui resistance, all these
represent "pluses" on the balance sheet for the working class and
plebeian forces, more generally, not only in their own countries, but
around the world. And intransigent regimes and movements, such as
these, represent obstacles to the unabridged right of imperial
capital to do whatever it wants, a right explicitly affirmed by
Washington, and especially the current administration, on various
occasions.
If we look at the U.S. war against Sandinista Nicaragua, that
certainly didn't have a direct "economic basis." Sandinista Nicaragua
simply represented a roadblock to the neoliberal vision Washington
was imposing on the world and a tilt in the balance of class forces,
a bad example, as many have said. It certainly doesn't have any
strategic resources. And it may have seemed "irrational" for the
Reagan and Bush administrations to destabilize the region, spend
billions on a mercenary army, provide arms to an enemy state and
traffic in drugs all to destabilize a tiny Central American country,
particularly if one is looking for a direct material, economic
explanation. I could say ditto for the Vietnam war, although, of
course, later, Vietnam was found to have some petrol reserves. But,
from the point of view of the global system of capital, these wars
were/are hardly irrational. They were and are life-or-death, and as
such as eminently "materialist."
Is there a material explanation?
--
Michael F.
_______________________________________________
Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
[email protected]
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.4/402 - Release Date: 27/07/06
_______________________________________________
Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
[email protected]
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
