New Saudi F-35s can be first step to normalization, but Israel must be cautious - opinion

So is it time for full-blown panic? Is Israel’s “qualitative military advantage” about to disappear? Is the end near? Or is this an opportunity to bring Israeli policy into the present and future?

A proper Israeli leadership could leverage this into a new strategic alignment that would protect the Jewish state much better than its testy alliance with the US, where Israel is forced to do pretty much whatever President Donald Trump wants.

The obvious one is the military front. As in the past, Israel can see to it that the Saudis do not receive the most advanced version of the newest warplane. Israel already has a step up there; its F-35s have locally produced avionics and accessories that even the Americans don’t have. And the planes are even built with remote “kill switches” that can disable them remotely from the United States if they are misused.

Less obvious, but bolder and more important, is the diplomatic front.

Up to now, it’s been a given that Saudi Arabia is an enemy of Israel. Because of President Trump’s embrace of Mohammed bin Salman, MBS, the de facto ruler of Saudi Arabia, Israel can serve its best interests by switching sides.

The key concept here is “interests.” Successful alliances are built primarily on common interests, not friendship, trust, human rights, or any of the other touchy-feely elements many people emphasize. Just look at Israel and Egypt.

Their peace treaty has held up for nearly five decades because of shared interests, many of them security-related, and has been kept far from the public eye. The anti-Israel screeds in Egyptian media and occasional harsh pronouncements from the Cairo government pale into insignificance when you realize that the peace treaty has held firm through several wars involving Israel and Arabs, including the current one.

Israel and Saudi Arabia already share key interests. The most prominent is the need to confront and contain Iran. MBS doesn’t have to like gefilte fish, and Israelis don’t have to eat hummus in Riyadh, for that interest to be the foundation of an alliance.

There are potentially others. MBS wants to modernize his nation and bring it into the world of high-tech. That’s Israel’s wheelhouse. Likewise, water desalination and any number of other scientific areas.

For Israel, turning Saudi Arabia into an ally would have clear benefits. Israel would become part of a regional alliance of moderates aligned against Islamist extremists like Iran. Joint projects in many fields could feature Israeli expertise and Saudi financial backing. Such projects could spread around the region and beyond, creating goodwill for all involved, at a time when Israel is at a record low when it comes to goodwill in the world. The possibilities are practically endless.

Here’s the hard truth: Basing foreign policy on human rights leads to failure, both of the policy and in human rights. Nothing good comes of boycotting offending nations. The best way to influence a society is from the inside. Here’s the best example: Thousands of Palestinians have seen up close how Israel’s democracy and open society function, and despite bombastic statements and belligerent acts to the contrary, that’s what many want for themselves.

Of course, there are risks. For example, what if Saudi Arabia is taken over by violent extremists and then cancels all its agreements with Israel? What happens with all those dangerous F-35 warplanes? That requires contingency planning on the part of Israeli policymakers, but it’s actually not that different from the current situation.

And what price would Israel have to pay for an alliance with Saudi Arabia? It would have to join the regional lip service theater about the “two-state solution” with the Palestinians. Saudi Arabia is so publicly committed to it that it can’t just back out. So Israel would have to join in, with the full knowledge that its key neighbors, Jordan and Egypt, strongly oppose the creation of an extremist Islamist entity on their borders just as much as Israel does.

It is not only Egypt and Jordan that are opposed to a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza; so are the Palestinians. Time and again, they’ve turned down Israeli offers of just such a state. Their education system has produced generations of Palestinians who reject the existence of Israel. They insist on a one-state solution, theirs.

The Saudis get that. So they would make do with a commitment from Israel to negotiate with the Palestinians over a just solution to their conflict, and then they’d move on to more important issues, like Iran. They wouldn’t say so in public, of course, but as in the case of Egypt, public statements matter little.

And what if one day the coalition of moderate Arab states decides to impose a settlement on Israel and the Palestinians, draw a border, and enforce the terms of its agreement on both sides? It would mean Israel withdraws from parts of the West Bank and takes down some settlements, including some that have been there for decades, but previous Israeli governments have offered just that, and chances are, when the overall political, military, and economic benefits are weighed against the costs, most Israelis would go along with it.

Or Israel can continue its policy of the last decades, opposing expansion of the Abraham Accords of peace with smaller Arab nations to include Saudi Arabia, opposing endless and pointless talks with the Palestinians, insisting on control of all of the West Bank, and going it alone against an increasingly hostile world. That’s the real danger.

The correct choice is obvious: adopt a cautious shift toward Saudi Arabia and peace.