More than once in recent years, it has appeared that Israel’s foreign and defense policy has centered around one thing: the attempt to hunt down weapons beyond the country’s borders. Just show it an arms deal in the region and Israel will foil it. It’s not that Israel is a pacifist country seeking to rid the world of arms. On the contrary, Israel hasn’t stopped arming; only it is allowed to do so.

This policy is led by Benjamin Netanyahu. His tenure as prime minister has been peak arms-hunting season. Of course, preventing the enemy from acquiring weapons is a legitimate goal. But when this becomes the main goal while Israel arms crazily and makes weapons its main export, the policy becomes disturbing and hypocritical. It prompts tough questions about Israel’s view of its role in the region − and about its right to run the arms policies of its neighbors.

Of course, it all starts with Israel’s messianic campaign to foil Iran’s ability to obtain nuclear weapons, even though it wouldn’t occur to Israel to propose that in return the entire Middle East be made a nuclear-free zone. And the regional policeman of course doesn’t stop there. Any arms deal in the area prompts an immediate Israeli response, sometimes through heavy pressure, sometimes militarily through an air strike. Arms for Hamas in Gaza are bombed in Sudan and intercepted at sea. Arms for Hezbollah in Lebanon are bombed in Syria. So be it.

But even arms deals between the United States and its strategic ally Saudi Arabia, a country that has never confronted Israel militarily, is immediately met with a lobbying campaign to scuttle it. The same is the case regarding Egypt, with which Israel has a peace treaty.

Such pressure campaigns work sometimes, and when they fail, Israel makes do with an extortionary compromise in which it receives more weapons in return. Even regarding the Palestinian state that official policy states should be established, Israel demands that it be demilitarized. Only Israel can be armed.

And Israel liberally sets red lines over chemical weapons, of course, and weapons that alter the military “balance.” This means weapons that could impair Israel’s unchallenged military superiority. Israel refuses to understand that other regimes want weapons, and not all weapons are aimed at Israel.

The most recent alarm was sounded regarding arms for Syria. Major power Russia seeks to arm Bashar Assad’s ruthless regime with antiaircraft missiles − defensive weapons by every measure − and Israel screams to the high heavens. It does so not to benefit the Syrian civilians it sees slaughtered in the civil war there. That’s the last thing that interests Israel, which is only concerned that this military hardware could be transferred to Hezbollah, depriving Israel of its ability to fly over Lebanon as it sees fit. It has been doing that for years in brazen violation of Lebanese sovereignty.

And Netanyahu, who didn’t fly anywhere in response to revisions to the Arab League’s peace plan, of course flew to Russia on Tuesday for an urgent meeting with President Vladimir Putin to hammer home his doctrine on weapons acquisitions. He explained what Russia is allowed to do and what it isn’t. And what about the West’s arming of the Syrian rebels? Such arms could slip into dangerous hands. But Israel is keeping quiet; the previous chief of staff of the Israel Defense Forces, Gabi Ashkenazi, has even called for arming the rebels.

Frankly, there’s a measure of chutzpah, hypocrisy and arrogance here. If Israel had pursued peace along with its policy of hunting down weapons in the region, maybe there would be no room for criticism. If Israel weren’t the world’s fourth largest arms supplier and a similar recipient of weaponry, one could live with its disarmament policy. But when heading off weapons supplies becomes the only aim, it prompts a burning question: By what right?