On a list of the dozen largest Third World exporters of major weapons between 1977 and 1980, Brazil ranks first, Israel ranks second and South Africa ranks third. No Black African country even makes the list. Between 1977 and 1980, Israel exported $367 million in major arms, accounting for 29 percent of all Third World major arms exports. And its biggest customer was South Africa. (8) The weapons industry constitutes the largest sector of the Israeli economy. By one Wall Street Journal estimate, 25 percent of the Israeli workforce is employed in military-related production. (9)

No Black African nation approaches the level of Israeli support for the apartheid state. Granted, many African developing countries must conduct trade with South Africa in order to survive, particularly the nations close to the South African border. But when levels of military advisors and arms sales are considered, Israel occupies a unique position, for which it appropriately is criticized.

Finally, it should be noted that Black Africa's most repressive regimes also share close military ties to Israel. Four of the worst governments to be found anywhere are those of Malawi, the Ivory Coast, the Central African Republic and Zaire--all of which enjoy strong Israeli support. In the Ivory Coast, an estimated 80 percent of all property belongs to the family of the president and a few of his friends. Israeli help in building luxury hotels in the Ivory Coast has drawn criticism. (10)

The self-proclaimed "emperor" of the Central African Republic, Bokassa, had the strong support of Shuman Gonen, an Israeli general and respected member of Israel's Herut party. Gonen reportedly tried to build up international support for the "emperor," whose bloody regime was eventually toppled. In Malawi, Israelis reportedly may even be training government squads that practice torture. (11) And news stories about the recent visits of Israeli defense officials to Zaire to set up arms and training arrangements often did not mention that Zaire's dictator, General Mobutu, is considered by some to be one of the most ruthless (and most corrupt) heads of state.

FOR AMERICANS, there is a need now for a dialogue on the Israel-South Africa link. The connection highlights a broader Israeli practice of arming repressive regimes throughout Latin America and Africa. This practice is actually a question of American policy, for two reasons.

First, there is the fact that American aid to Israel exceeds the amount we give to any other countries. For 1983, U.S. aid to Israel will amount to well over $2 billion--the equivalent of $625 for every Israeli man, woman and child. And since private donations to Israel from organizations such as the United Jewish Appeal are tax-deductible, the American subsidy is even higher. (12)

Second, there is the matter of Israel's status as a de facto U.S. proxy, a status closely related to the billions provided in aid each year. Recall that in 1975, Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger '50 convinced Israel to support South Africa in its war on Angola--an act which the U.S. could not do itself without drawing domestic and international condemnation.

Much of the criticism Israel now encounters centers on its global role in providing arms and training to repressive regimes as a proxy of the United States. Consider the words of Israeli Deputy Prime Minister Ya'akov Meridor at a speech delivered in August 1981:

We're going to ask you, the US government, not to compete with us in arms. We're very strong in arms production, not like the United States, but for the Third World and even for Europe we are starting to be strong. We are going to say to them, the Americans, don't compete with us in Taiwan, don't compete with us in South Africa, don't compete with us in the Caribbean or in any other countries where you couldn't directly do it...I even use the expression. 'You sell the ammunition and equipment by proxy. Your proxy.' (13)

Israel's policy, in short, is to arrange arms sales to places where the U.S. could not sell weapons and escape criticism. Not surprisingly, Israel herself takes the heat for arming dictators throughout Africa and Latin America.

The U.N. attacks on Israeli tries to South Africa will undoubtedly worsen so long as Israel continues to sell weapons to countries such as South Africa which the U.S. supports but will not arm directly. The United States, for its part, sustains the Israeli arms industry with its military aid. And the American government certainly is not averse to using Israel as a conduit to South Africa.

In the end, the current arrangement works against the interest of Israel: Israel builds up its military power, but it also incurs the ever-increasing wrath of the world. While the U.S. is a powerful backer, the recent histories of Vietnam and Iran suggest that even all-out American support can sometimes prove insufficient. And Israel, as so many have noted, can only lose a war once.

When Israel pushes to become a strong junior partner in arming repressive U.S.-backed Third World dictatorships, it draws international condemnation. Economic ties with South Africa begin to look increasingly odious.

Israel and South Africa have become strongly linked in the eyes of much of the world. It need not be that way. Possible solutions do not offer themselves immediately. But it should be sufficient merely to know that South Africa is an international symbol of the racism and naked brutality which only the worst cynics could believe will endure forever. Should Israel not successfully separate herself from the apartheid state, it may in the long run risk sharing the fate of South Africa.

1. Esther Howard, "Israel: The Sorcerer's Apprentice," in Middle East Research and Information Projects Reports, Feb. 1983, p. 24.