Obama-Netanyahu tensions: Not as bad as 5 other US-Israel low points

Will US-Israel relations fray over Iran? Not likely – they've seen worse. 

4. 1991-92: Delay of US aid over Israeli settlements

Nati Harnick/AP/File
Former Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir is seen in this May 1991 file photo in Jerusalem.

Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, an émigré from Poland whose parents had died in the Holocaust, was intent on bringing as many new immigrants to Israel as possible. When the Ethiopian government collapsed in 1991, he had 14,000 Ethiopian Jews airlifted to Israel. And he convinced the US to stop accepting Soviet Jews as refugees, funneling more than 1 million Soviet Jews to Israel instead.

But all of this cost money. During the end of President George H.W. Bush’s term, Mr. Shamir sought loan guarantees of $10 billion from the US to help cover the resettlement costs, which included building new homes and roads, finding jobs, and providing services for the new immigrants. (The mechanism was akin to co-signing a mortgage, in which a wealthier party with better credit can help a party with more modest funds to secure lower interest rates.)

The Bush administration was concerned, however, that the funding would be used to build new settlements that could jeopardize peacemaking between Israelis and Palestinians.

In the end, Shamir – a staunch believer that the West Bank and Gaza rightfully belonged to the Jews – never accepted Bush’s terms to freeze settlement expansion in exchange for the loan guarantees. But in 1992, when Yitzhak Rabin replaced him, Bush agreed to the full $10 billion in loan guarantees in exchange for only limited curtailment of settlement building – perhaps because he viewed Rabin’s centrist government as more supportive of America’s peacemaking efforts in the region. 

The following year, Rabin signed the 1993 Oslo Accords with Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat.

4 of 5

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.