- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/21382196
By JULIA FRANKEL
Updated 6:38 AM EDT, October 14, 2024[unbelievable - of course Biden and Harris will go along with no complaint]
I think that’s some wishful thinking. An actual embargo of non-military trade with an American ally after an attack would be very unpopular with moderate American voters. Additionally, there are other trading partners in the world.
If you’re just talking about non-military aid, that’s not a very large sum of money to lose. Few million here and there.
https://www.foreignassistance.gov/cd/israel/
Pretty sure Egypt is a net food importer too, not an exporter.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/9/5/egypt-reliant-on-imports-buys-more-russian-wheat
I’d clarify that most of my statement was specific to a military embargo - the rest of my statement was just emphasizing how much more Isreal had to lose if they managed to piss off America to that point… I also think it’s unlikely that America would ever embargo Isreal.
I mentioned Egypt not because they’re a direct food exporter but because they control the Sueze Canal and nearly all Isreali food import is coming through there - a restriction of Isreali bound ships through the canal would literally kill the country - domestic food production and European imports (now that Ukraine is off the table) is absolutely insufficient.
You’d have to close both the Suez and the Strait of Gibraltar, otherwise you’re just raising the price. Also, embargos are “I won’t trade with you.” They usually don’t involve blockades or closing of sea lanes. An embargo is a passive action, you’re just stopping doing something. An actual halting of neutral merchants passing through your waters is an active measure, you’re taking an action that harms both the target and cuts into the profits of the merchants that would otherwise be making money. It’s a bolder action overall.
But yea, theoretically possible.