Search

Begin New Search Topic Conflict Political Geography Israel

271. Con Artists of Tehran

Author:
Uzi Rubin
Publication Date:
11-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
A recently disclosed ruling by Iran’s supreme leader caps the range of Iran’s missiles at 2,000 kilometers, a distance that threatens Israel, Saudi Arabia and Egypt but doesn’t threaten Western Europe. Practically speaking, this ruling is neither new nor truthful. Europe has a good reason to be concerned.
Topic:
Defense Policy, Military Strategy, Conflict, and Missile Defense
Political Geography:
Iran, Middle East, Israel, and Saudi Arabia

272. A Marshall Plan for Gaza is a Bad Idea

Author:
Efraim Inbar
Publication Date:
11-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
Prof. Efraim Inbar argues that Israel should adhere to its longstanding approach of using sticks and carrots in the Palestinian arena.
Topic:
Military Strategy, Territorial Disputes, Conflict, and Settlements
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and Gaza

273. Confronting the Con Artists of Iran

Author:
David M. Weinberg
Publication Date:
11-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
No duplicitous decrees by supreme or smiling ayatollahs should deflect our attention from Tehran’s dangerous moves.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Military Strategy, Hegemony, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Iran, Middle East, Israel, North America, and United States of America

274. 70 Years to the UN vote on Partition: Looking back, looking ahead

Author:
Emmanuel Navon
Publication Date:
11-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
The 70th anniversary of the UN resolution on the partition of British Palestine is an opportunity to debunk a myth about this resolution, and to rethink Israel’s policy toward the United Nations. The General Assembly (GA) vote on 29 November 1947 was a recommendation and not a binding decision (like all GA resolutions). It became moot the moment it was rejected by the Arab League. The Security Council did not act to implement the GA resolution, even though it knew that the Arab League opposed the resolution and that it was preparing for war. Israel would not have become independent had the Jews not built a society and an economy for decades, and had they not won the war imposed on them by the Arab League. In 1947, Israel got lucky at the UN: Stalin wanted to end Britain’s presence in Palestine (to him, any British and Western retreat was a victory); Truman was determined to override the State Department (“Dealing with them was as rough as a cob” he said); and France was eager to give Britain a taste of its own medicine (the French blamed the British for the independence of Syria and Lebanon in 1944). There were very few independent Arab and Muslim states back then (Africa, the Middle-East, and Southeast Asia were mostly under European colonial rule). Decolonization and the Cold War changed this configuration to Israel’s disadvantage. The number of Arab and Muslim states rocketed, and the Soviet Union successfully recruited them to fight “imperialism” (Soviet foreign policy became openly pro-Arab in 1953, and Egypt became a Soviet ally in 1955). After the 1973 Yom Kippur War, the Arab world used not only the oil blackmail but also its “automatic majority” at the UN to isolate Israel. This diplomatic warfare culminated in the November 1975 GA resolution that condemned Zionism as a form of racism. Despite the end of the Cold War and peace agreements between Israel, Egypt, and Jordan, the political hijacking of the UN never abated. The 2001 UN Conference against Racism in Durban turned into an anti-Israel festival, and the replacement of the Human Rights Commission by the Human Rights Council (HRC) in 2006 only made things worse for Israel (and for human rights). Special UN agencies such as UNESCO are still manipulated by the Palestinians and the Arab states to gang-up against Israel. Yet Israel is not helpless, and there are ways of taming the hijacking of the UN.
Topic:
International Cooperation, United Nations, Territorial Disputes, Conflict, and Decolonization
Political Geography:
Middle East and Israel

275. For how long will the peace treaty with Egypt be robust?

Author:
Efraim Inbar
Publication Date:
01-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
Everything must be done by Jerusalem to preserve the peace treaty with Egypt, but Israel should still prepare itself for worst-case scenarios.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, Conflict, and Peace
Political Geography:
Africa, Middle East, Israel, and Egypt

276. Countdown to a Conflict

Author:
Yaakov Amidror
Publication Date:
12-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
The increasing rocket fire from Gaza at Israel reflects a tragic reality in which neither Israel nor the Palestinians want a confrontation, but both sides may be helpless to stop it. Meanwhile, the Islamic world will not really support the Palestinians.
Topic:
Defense Policy, Military Strategy, Conflict, and Missile Defense
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and Gaza

277. In Middle East, Pence must address realities of Iranian encroachment

Author:
Efraim Inbar
Publication Date:
12-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
If the United States wants to disengage from the Middle East it should do so with a bang. The address for such a forceful demonstration is clear: the Iranian nuclear program.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Nuclear Power, Leadership, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Iran, Middle East, Israel, North America, and United States of America

278. Uncertain allies: the Jerusalem announcement amid shifting regional priorities

Author:
Andrew McIndoe
Publication Date:
01-2017
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Harvard Journal of Middle Eastern Politics and Policy
Institution:
The John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University
Abstract:
On 6 December the Trump administration made an unprecedented decision to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. The announcement, which both recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and conveyed President Trump’s intention to relocate the United States’ embassy to the Holy City, is a move shrouded in obscure motivations. Was it a manifestation of the strongly pro-Israel orientation of the new government? Was it merely the fulfilment of a campaign promise, a sop to the president’s evangelical and pro-Israel support base? Or was it truly designed, as the President maintained, to reenergize a peace process that has been stuck in the mud for years?
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Peace Studies, Trump, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, Jerusalem, and United States of America

279. Water as a basic human right within the Israeli-Palestinian con ict

Author:
Erika Weinthal
Publication Date:
10-2017
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
American Diplomacy
Institution:
American Diplomacy
Abstract:
In the Middle East, water often crosses political borders; because water is a shared resource, its effective management demands cooperation among different users. In the absence of cooperation, conflict is likely. Indeed, conflict and cooperation over shared water has defined Israeli-Palestinian relations since 1967 when Israel gained full control over the Eastern and recharge zone of the western Mountain aquifer, as well as the southern Coastal aquifer. These resources, combined with water from the Sea of Galilee have provided about 60% of Israel’s water consumption. With the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip in 1967, Israel placed restrictions on the drilling of new wells for the Palestinian population in the West Bank, and instead chose to supply water to Palestinian households through its national water company, Mekorot. The signing of the 1993 Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements (Oslo I) and the 1995 Interim Agreement on the West Bank and Gaza Strip (Oslo II) between Israel and the Palestinian Liberation Organization offered an historic opportunity to move from conflict to cooperation over shared water resources. Unlike many other peace agreements, water was codified in the Oslo Accords, as it was understood that water sharing was of critical importance for human security, economic development, and regional cooperation. Specifically, the Oslo Accords called for the creation of a Joint Water Committee (JWC) during an interim period before the final status negotiations, comprised of equal number of members from Israel and the Palestinian Authority, whose functions would include the coordinated management of water resources and water and sewage systems in the West Bank. Oslo II, Article 40 on water and sewage recognized Palestinian water rights in the West Bank and the need to develop additional water supply. Oslo II also detailed specific water quantities to be allocated to the Palestinian population, mostly from the eastern Mountain aquifer in the West Bank.
Topic:
Development, Human Rights, Natural Resources, Water, Conflict, Negotiation, and Sanitation
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and West Bank

280. The EU and Israel – Partnership and the weight of history

Author:
Toby Vogel
Publication Date:
09-2017
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS)
Abstract:
Fifty years ago, a fierce war between Israel and its neighbours changed the map of the Middle East and transformed Israeli politics and its relations with the wider world. The effects of that Six-Day War are still being felt today. They created an enduring cycle of Israeli occupation, Palestinian resistance, terror, and Israeli repression. The Arab defeat of 1967 also led to the formation of a Palestinian national movement, at the time embodied by the Palestine Liberation Organization. The most immediate outcome of the war was Israel’s occupation of the Sinai Peninsula, the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights, all condemned in UN Security Council Resolution 242 of November 1967. Israel later handed Sinai back to Egypt and withdrew from Gaza and some of the West Bank, but still maintains an iron grip on both territories, which have also witnessed accelerated settlement construction under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Israel has not only flouted countless UN Security Council resolutions, it has also committed widespread human rights violations and war crimes, notably during the war in Gaza in August 2014. David Ben-Gurion, the country’s founding prime minister, said a few months after the Six-Day War: "If I have to choose between a small Israel, without territories, but with peace, and a greater Israel without peace, I prefer a small Israel." In pursuing a hardline course, Israel’s leadership dismissed Ben-Gurion’s views as out-of-touch sentimentality. Ben-Gurion’s position was not an expression of human kindness: he was seeking to preserve Israel as a Jewish homeland, which would be impossible with a large share of Arabs on its territory. But he also understood that the permanent occupation of Gaza and the West Bank would undermine Israel’s security and its democratic institutions
Topic:
History, European Union, Partnerships, Leadership, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Europe, Middle East, Israel, and Palestine