Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Israel Publication Year within 25 Years

191. R2P Monitor, Issue 41, 15 September 2018

Author:
Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Publication Date:
09-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Abstract:
R2P Monitor is a bimonthly bulletin applying the Responsibility to Protect lens to populations at risk of mass atrocities around the world. Issue 41 looks at developments in Afghanistan, Myanmar (Burma), Syria, Yemen, Cameroon, Burundi, Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Nicaragua, Nigeria and South Sudan.
Topic:
Human Rights, International Community, Responsibility to Protect (R2P), and Atrocities
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, Israel, Yemen, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Palestine, Nicaragua, Syria, Nigeria, Burundi, Myanmar, South Sudan, Cameroon, and Central African Republic

192. R2P Monitor, Issue 40, 15 July 2018

Author:
Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Publication Date:
07-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Abstract:
R2P Monitor is a bimonthly bulletin applying the Responsibility to Protect lens to populations at risk of mass atrocities around the world. Issue 40 looks at developments in Afghanistan, Central African Republic, Myanmar (Burma), Syria, Yemen, Democratic Republic of the Congo, South Sudan, Burundi, Cameroon, Iraq, Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories and Nigeria.
Topic:
Human Rights, International Law, Responsibility to Protect (R2P), and Atrocities
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, Iraq, Israel, Yemen, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Palestine, Syria, Nigeria, Burundi, Myanmar, South Sudan, Cameroon, and Central African Republic

193. R2P Monitor, Issue 39, 15 May 2018

Author:
Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Publication Date:
05-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Abstract:
R2P Monitor is a bimonthly bulletin applying the Responsibility to Protect lens to populations at risk of mass atrocities around the world. Issue 39 looks at developments in Afghanistan, Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Myanmar (Burma), Syria, Yemen, South Sudan, Burundi, Iraq and Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories.
Topic:
Human Rights, International Law, Responsibility to Protect (R2P), and Atrocities
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, Iraq, Israel, Yemen, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Palestine, Syria, Burundi, Myanmar, South Sudan, and Central African Republic

194. The Witness as Object: Video Testimony in Memorial Museums

Author:
Steffi De Jong
Publication Date:
01-2018
Content Type:
Book
Institution:
Berghahn Books
Abstract:
In recent years, historical witnessing has emerged as a category of "museum object." Audiovisual recordings of interviews with individuals remembering events of historical importance are now integral to the collections and research activities of museums. They have also become important components in narrative and exhibition design strategies. With a focus on Holocaust museums, this study scrutinizes for the first time the new global phenomenon of the "musealization" of the witness to history, exploring the processes, prerequisites, and consequences of the transformation of video testimonies into exhibits.
Topic:
Mass Media, Media, Holocaust, and Museums
Political Geography:
United States, United Kingdom, Israel, and Global Focus

195. Are Iran’s ballistic missiles designed to be nuclear capable?

Author:
Michael Elleman and Mark T. Fitzpatrick
Publication Date:
02-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
International Institute for Strategic Studies
Abstract:
Iran has the largest and most diverse ballistic-missile arsenal in the Middle East – could these systems one day be used to launch nuclear weapons? In a new report, IISS analysts Michael Elleman and Mark Fitzpatrick offer a detailed assessment of the design intentions behind each missile within Iran’s inventory. The result is a clear picture as to which platforms the United States and its allies should seek to remove, and which ones can be discounted. The common claim that Iran’s missile development must be stopped altogether because these systems could deliver nuclear weapons in the future rests on broad generalisations. While there is reason for concern, priority attention should be given to those missiles that might realistically be used for such a purpose, if Iran were to go down a perilous nuclear path. The international standard – but not treaty – for determining the inherent nuclear capability of missiles is the threshold developed in 1987 by the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), which seeks to forestall exports of missile systems able to deliver a 500kg payload a distance of 300km or more. Eight of Iran’s 13 current ballistic missile systems – the largest and most diverse arsenal in the Middle East – exceed this threshold and are thus deemed to be nuclear capable. The other five, all within the Fateh-110 family of missiles, are certainly lethal, especially when shipped to Hizbullah for use against Israel, but they are clearly not intended for nuclear use. Because capability does not equal intent, the MTCR guidelines should be just the first step in an assessment of Iran’s intentions for its missiles. When the United Nations Security Council drafted a new resolution in July 2015 to accompany the Iran nuclear agreement finalised that month, an element of intent was added to previous sanctions resolution language that prohibited launches of Iranian missiles that were ‘capable of delivering nuclear weapons’. The 2015 resolution calls upon Iran not to engage in activity concerning missiles ‘designed to be’ capable of delivering nuclear weapons. What it means ‘to be designed’ is undefined. Judging intent is partly subjective, but technical clues and intelligence information can guide analysis. The soundest approach is to disaggregate Iran’s various missile systems, and to assess design intentions on the basis of the technical capabilities and lineage of the different missiles.
Topic:
Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Nuclear Weapons, and Military Strategy
Political Geography:
United States, Europe, Iran, Middle East, Israel, and North America

196. Future Challenges for Israel’s Iron Dome Rocket Defenses

Author:
Ari Kattan
Publication Date:
02-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for International and Security Studies at Maryland (CISSM)
Abstract:
After Hezbollah fired thousands of rockets at northern Israel during the 2006 Israel-Hezbollah War, the Israeli government began a crash program to find a technological solution to the rocket threat. The result was Iron Dome, which shot down its first rocket on April 7, 2011, and saw large-scale combat during wars in 2012 and 2014. The system has been hailed in Israel and worldwide as a success, with the Israeli military claiming a 90 percent interception rate. Some American defense commentators have even touted Iron Dome as evidence in favor of ballistic missile defense. However, serious questions remain about Iron Dome’s true technical efficacy, both in terms of its past performance and how it is likely to perform in the future under different conditions. Because so much about Iron Dome is classified, information provided by the Israeli military cannot be independently verified. Analyses performed by outside experts—both those questioning Iron Dome’s efficacy and those defending the Israeli government’s claims—are inconclusive. Assuming for the sake of argument that Iron Dome did, in fact, perform as advertised during its previous engagements, it is far from certain that it will be as successful in future engagements, where the volume of rocket fire will be higher and the rockets more accurate. This paper argues that Israel may have already reached “peak Iron Dome,” and the system’s military and political benefits will decrease in future wars until another technological breakthrough is made on rocket defense. This is not to say that Iron Dome was not worth the cost and should not have been procured. But expectations about Iron Dome from the Israeli military, Israeli civilians, and interested parties abroad should be tempered. If they are not, Iron Dome’s decreased success rate in future wars may pose political problems for Israel domestically and give Israel’s adversaries a decisive propaganda victory.
Topic:
Violent Extremism, Missile Defense, Hezbollah, Propaganda, and Anti-Semitism
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, and Palestine

197. The JDP’s Changing Discursive Strategies towards Israel: Rhetoric vs. Reality

Author:
Gencer Özcan
Publication Date:
06-2018
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Uluslararasi Iliskiler
Institution:
International Relations Council of Turkey (UİK-IRCT)
Abstract:
Justice and Development Party [JDP] governments’ policies towards Israel were informed by the priorities that the party’s power strategies entailed. In a stark contrast to the friendly policies in its first term in power, the JDP began to employ different discursive strategies based on an anti-Israeli rhetoric since 2009. Geared to bolster the party’s prestige at home and abroad, the new rhetoric seemed to have addressed to the changing priorities of the party leadership. However, the new strategies led to the emergence of a widening gap between the anti-Israeli rhetoric and subtle efforts that the JDP paid to maintain its relations with Israel. Revisiting the last 15 years, the article tries to answer the question as to how Turkey’s relations with Israel were adjusted to meet necessities of miscellaneous power strategies that the JDP leadership pursued.
Topic:
International Relations, Politics, Arab Spring, and Political Parties
Political Geography:
Turkey, Middle East, and Israel

198. The Tunnel Tension: Potential Trajectories of Escalation Between Israel and Hezbollah

Author:
FARAS
Publication Date:
12-2018
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARAS)
Abstract:
As Israel’s Operation Northern Shield continues, with the aim of dismantling the tunnels discovered on the Lebanese border, the Israeli policies mark a remarkable shift in confronting Hezbollah’s threats. The operation comes as part of a series of parallel measures, employing a tactic different from the military escalation scenario, which cannot be completely ruled out in the future with the aim of launching a preemptive strike. However, with no variables yet to enhance such scenario, the Tel Aviv tactic will focus on linking the party’s new threat and escalation with the latter, along with Iran, on the Syrian front, on the belief that the party's new approach stems from the interactions of the equation itself. On the other hand, Hezbollah has reacted in a similar way, based on calculations that do not lean toward engaging in mutual escalation, albeit threatening of military “surprises” as part of a defensive strategy. Among those “surprises” is deploying the new and unconventional techniques of its missile capabilities, which have been developed by its expertise on the Syrian ground and with the help of Iran. Apart from these expected messages, Hezbollah has, since the discovery of tunnels, questioned Tel Aviv's account of the issue. Hezbollah's various media platforms have focused on attributing the escalation to the Israeli internal developments, amid the crisis facing Netanyahu's government, after the withdrawal of former Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman from the government coalition.
Topic:
Defense Policy, Conflict, Borders, and Hezbollah
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, and Palestine

199. One City, Two Realities: Jerusalem Public Opinion Survey 2018

Author:
Dan Miodownik and Noam Brenner
Publication Date:
04-2018
Content Type:
Case Study
Institution:
Israel/Palestine Creative Regional Initiatives (IPCRI)
Abstract:
This public opinion survey covers different issues of life in Jerusalem of its Israeli and Palestinian residents. It surveys their expressions about local needs, who they view as their local leadership, their social attitudes and ways of communication. It also explores perceptions of violence, life satisfaction and also questions about the future of Jerusalem and municipal elections. ​ This survey is a part of a larger peacebuilding initiative in Jerusalem called “Building Visions for the Future of Jerusalem: A Bottom-Up Approach”. As such, the survey is one of a few ways to collect and give voice to the residents’ needs and perceptions regarding their life in Jerusalem. Its final objectives are to to better understand the foundations for cooperation between the two populations in this contested city, in order to assist in improving their well-being.
Topic:
Demographics, Territorial Disputes, Public Opinion, and Survey
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and Jerusalem

200. Israel's Qatari Dilemma

Author:
Yoel Guzansky and Kobi Michael
Publication Date:
03-2018
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Institute for National Security Studies (INSS)
Abstract:
Qatar’s support for Hamas and its investment in the Gaza Strip, though based more on pragmatism than on ideological identification, suit its foreign policy, which supports political Islam and aims to increase Doha’s influence in the Middle East.
Topic:
International Relations
Political Geography:
Israel