Search

Begin New Search Topic Diplomacy Political Geography Israel

51. The Parliamentary Elections in Lebanon: Hezbollah’s Victory within the Political Status Quo

Author:
Eldad Shavit
Publication Date:
05-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institute for National Security Studies (INSS)
Abstract:
In the May 6, 2018 elections in Lebanon, the Shia bloc led by Hezbollah succeeded in increasing its power in the parliament at the expense of Prime Minister Saad al-Hariri’s party. Nevertheless, due to the country’s electoral system, the political status quo achieved in December 2016 will likely be maintained. The process of forming the government will once again reignite the power battle between Hezbollah and Iran on the one hand and al-Hariri and his supporters in Saudi Arabia and in the international community, mainly France and the United States, on the other hand. The election results will encourage Hezbollah to continue to consolidate its power and its ability to wield influence in the Lebanese political arena. The drive to promote this objective may also act as a restraining factor in the organization’s conduct vis-à-vis Israel. Therefore, at the present time, Hezbollah will presumably opt to continue to use Syria as its preferred theater for action against Israel.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Military Strategy, Elections, and Hezbollah
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and Lebanon

52. Israel and China Take a Leap Forward—but to Where?

Author:
Arthur Herman
Publication Date:
11-2018
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Hudson Institute
Abstract:
There is certainly no denying that, in terms of trade and investment alone, the burgeoning economic partnership between Israel and China has at least the potential of transforming not only Israel itself but also Israel’s position vis-à-vis the rest of the Middle East—and most notably vis-à-vis Iran, which happens to be Beijing’s other key partner in the region. Inevitably, it could also have an impact on Israel’s relations with the United States. But is this a marriage made in heaven? Or is it something else? Weighing the answer to that question involves probing beneath the two countries’ currently successful dynamic of trade and commercial transactions to their respective geopolitical agendas. When it comes to Israel, the acknowledged junior partner, it also requires examining whether and how the relationship with China could become a dependency. Such a change might please Beijing, but it would impose on Israeli national security a new kind of vulnerability, one very different from the challenges it has faced successfully in the past.
Topic:
Diplomacy, National Security, Bilateral Relations, Partnerships, Geopolitics, and Economy
Political Geography:
China, Middle East, Israel, and Asia

53. The Domestic Dimension of Israeli Public Diplomacy

Author:
Jitka Panek Jurkova
Publication Date:
01-2018
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Polish Political Science Yearbook
Institution:
Polish Political Science Association (PPSA)
Abstract:
The paper adds to the body of recent scholarly literature that emphasizes the role of domestic publics in public diplomacy – a field until recently examined with only minor attention to the domestic realm. It suggests conducting analysis of the domestic dimension of public diplomacy on three levels: individual, organizational, and national. By doing so, we are able to understand in a complex manner the environment from which public diplomacy practice grows, and thus also its specific dynamics. Applying this model of analysis to the case of Israel, the paper describes major domestic factors shaping Israeli public diplomacy: the culture of individual engagement (individual level), the clash of organizational ethea of institutions responsible for public diplomacy (organizational level), and the intertwining of public diplomacy and nation building (national level). The analysis also allows us to bet- ter grasp the dilemma faced by Israeli public diplomacy between efficiency and democratic character.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Nationalism, Culture, Public Policy, State Building, and Participation
Political Geography:
Middle East and Israel

54. Vienna meeting on Nuclear Energy and Proliferation Risks

Author:
Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs
Publication Date:
05-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs
Abstract:
There was general agreement that the JCPOA was a very positive solution to a complex issue, providing a constructive and peaceful way forward for the Middle East in particular, and the non-proliferation regime in general. The deal contained in the JCPOA is working as intended. Iran has been determined by the IAEA on multiple [6] occasions to be in full compliance with its obligations, and now has the most comprehensive safeguards and verification regime in history. World powers have followed through with some sanctions relief thereby aiding the Iranian economy. Furthermore, there have been other positive dimensions, including an effective joint commission process, greater transparency among parties, as well as communications and interactions taking place in a more positive atmosphere. At the same time, it was recognized that the deal is unstable: although the terms of the JCPOA were ring-fenced from the wider geopolitical environment of the Middle East, political manoeuvring can threaten its continued implementation. The spill-over of non-nuclear issues, often labelled under “Iranian behaviour”, should not be allowed to derail the process. It was noted in a positive sense that all the main candidates in the Iranian Presidential campaign have signalled their desire to continue with the JCPOA. However, several participants felt that some of Iran’s regional policies could undermine this, risking a negative reaction from the US and other states. Some argued that given Iran’s disputed compliance history with IAEA safeguards agreements (which even two years later remains heated) and, in general, the uneasy relations in the past between Iran and IAEA, it is important that Iran continue to strictly comply to the letter of the JCPOA. The US domestic context provides perhaps the greatest potential risk to the sustainability of the JCPOA. It was noted that President Trump may not, after all, ‘tear up’ the deal. The possibility was raised that, because many in his national security team were seen as hostile to Iran, any minor safeguards violation may be seized upon to terminate the deal. Such a hard-line approach could isolate the US from a global consensus and weaken its hand in other relevant matters. There is further danger that Congress could act alone in enacting a bill (of which many are on the table) that would be in contravention of the JCPOA. This possibility was considered unrealistic by some participants. Some details of Security Council resolution 2231 were seen as problematic in a number of ways: the explicit provisions on ballistic missiles were viewed as an unnecessarily punitive measure unrelated to the main goals of the JCPOA; equally, some of the inquiry and resolution mechanisms were seen by some as unbalanced. The JCPOA should in any case be understood as a temporary solution. Even though continuing to implement it effectively would build more confidence, ultimately trust between Iran and some Western states will likely never be high. However, the deal does hold the potential for transformative progress in Iran-US relations, pending further steps to de-escalate and normalize relations. Many of Iran’s neighbours worry that the remaining latent nuclear capacity has only delayed the possibility of a nuclear-armed Iran down the road; at the same time, many regional states are also pursuing nuclear fuel cycle programs. The JCPOA should also offer the international community an opportunity to consider how to extend some measures indefinitely and extend them to other countries. Regional stability and non-proliferation could be enhanced by extending some of the JPCOA provisions to the Middle East and beyond it. As such, Pugwash should make efforts to convene and organize meetings to explore far-reaching initiatives that are in the spirit of the agreement; for example: initiatives to discuss ‘internationalizing’ the nuclear fuel cycle; forward-looking regional agreements, such as a threshold of uranium enrichment, a ban on plutonium reprocessing, or limits on stockpiles of LEU; innovative safeguards measures, such as advanced monitoring technology, enhanced access to centrifuge production facilities, or explicitly set times for snap inspections; further multilateral scientific and technical cooperation, such as the SESAME project.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Military Strategy, Nuclear Power, and Nonproliferation
Political Geography:
United States, Iran, Middle East, and Israel

55. The Middle East and the Maghreb in the Czech Foreign Policy

Author:
Marek Čejka, Jan Daniel, and Michaela Lubin
Publication Date:
12-2017
Content Type:
Book
Institution:
Institute of International Relations Prague
Abstract:
In 2017 the Czech foreign policy toward the Middle East and the Maghreb did not witness significant shifts and followed the wider goals established in the previous years. It continued to be oriented on the stabilisation of the states affected by the wars in Syria, Iraq and Libya, limiting the number of refugee arrivals to Europe, strengthening the business co-operations with promising regional partners and enhancing the co-operation and strategic partnership with Israel. Accordingly, economic diplomacy, security assistance and humanitarian relief remained the dominant modes of engagement with most of the countries in the region. Similarly to the previous years, the Czech policy mostly reactively followed the common EU positions, while being proactive regarding the issues concerning Israel and, to a lesser extent, also Syria, Jordan, Iraq and Libya. The Czech policy for the Middle East did not strongly enter the domestic public debate. The only exceptions were the conflicting positions on the issue of the Czech embassy’s relocation to Jerusalem and the role of the ambassador in Syria.
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Economics, Migration, and Refugees
Political Geography:
Iraq, Middle East, Israel, Libya, Syria, Jordan, Czech Republic, and Maghreb

56. Russian Foreign Policy in the Middle East: New Challenge for Western Interests?

Author:
Nikolay Kozhanov
Publication Date:
03-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Transatlantic Relations
Abstract:
This paper is part of CTR's Working Paper Series: "Russia and the West: Reality Check." The current level of Russian presence in the Middle East is unprecedented for the region since the fall of the Soviet Union. Records of diplomatic and political contacts show increased exchange of multilevel delegations between Russia and the main regional countries. After 2012, Moscow has attempted to cultivate deeper involvement in regional issues and to establish contacts with forces in the Middle East which it considers as legitimate. Moreover, on September 30, 2015, Russia launched air strikes against Syrian groupings fighting against the regime of Bashar al-Assad. Before that time, Russia had tried to avoid any fully-fledged involvement in the military conflicts in the region. It was also the first time when it adopted an American military strategy by putting the main accent on the use of air power instead of ground forces. Under these circumstances, the turmoil in the Middle East, which poses a political and security challenge to the EU and United States, makes it crucial to know whether Russia could be a reliable partner in helping the West to stabilize the region or whether, on the contrary, Moscow will play the role of a troublemaker.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Military Strategy, Military Intervention, and Syrian War
Political Geography:
Russia, Iran, Middle East, Israel, Libya, Palestine, Syria, Egypt, United States of America, European Union, and Gulf Cooperation Council

57. Diplomatic Experience That Never Fades

Author:
A. Yakovna
Publication Date:
02-2016
Content Type:
Book
Institution:
East-West Center
Abstract:
Success multiplied by intuition is behind many discoveries. This fully applies to British historian Prof. Gabriel Gorodetsky* who has written numerous scholarly works including The Precarious Truce: Anglo-Soviet Relations, 1924-1927, Stafford Cripps’ Mission to Moscow, 1940-1942, etc. Prof. Gorodetsky came across the diaries of Ivan Maisky,** Soviet Ambassador to London while preparing official Soviet-Israeli documents for publication and was immediately interested. Before him few historians had paid attention to this unique historical document. in fact, Stalin never encouraged officials to keep diaries; this explains why they are few and far between in soviet archives.
Topic:
Communism, Diplomacy, and History
Political Geography:
Israel and Soviet Union

58. Strengthening the Palestinian Economy to Keep a Two-State Solution Viable

Author:
Hardin Lang and Rudy deLeon
Publication Date:
04-2016
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for American Progress - CAP
Abstract:
It has been more than two decades since the signing of the first Oslo Accord, which set into motion a process that was designed to achieve a lasting peace based on a two-state solution. Subsequent rounds of diplomacy have failed to realize that vision. Growing numbers of Israelis and Palestinians have begun to question the “land for peace” bargain. Yet the strategic logic of a two-state solution, with an independent state of Palestine alongside the state of Israel, remains strong. Without two states—both viable, thriving, secure, and free—Israel faces a difficult dilemma in reconciling its identity as a Jewish state with its tradition of democracy. The stalled peace negotiations have left Palestinians looking for other options to achieve greater control over their own affairs. Former Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayyad has called for a long-term nation-building project independent of negotiations with Israel to set the foundations for an eventual Palestinian state. But various crises continue to chip away at the legitimacy of the Palestinian Authority, or PA. Plans for a Palestinian political transition also remain opaque. As one observer in the West Bank town of Ramallah put it, “There is no longer a story that Palestinians can tell themselves about how our lives get better.” In recent years, some Palestinians have shifted their rhetoric toward the pursuit of full economic and political rights as part of a so-called one-state solution. For his part, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has sought to increase international pressure on Israel to force recognition of Palestinian statehood. This strategy hinges on a campaign to leverage international boycotts, divestment, and sanctions—or BDS—against Israel. But some BDS leaders have conflated opposition to Israeli policy in the West Bank with a challenge to the “legitimacy of the concept of Israel as a democratic and Jewish State”—a stance at direct odds with the objective of a two-state solution. The next U.S. president will enter office facing an unresolved Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The new administration will need to take steps to sustain a two-state solution until a resumption of talks becomes politically feasible. As the Center for American Progress has previously argued, the window on a two-state solution is rapidly closing. Key security, institutional, and economic challenges must be addressed to keep that window open. This report looks at the set of economic challenges that must be tackled in order to maintain a viable Palestinian polity capable of anchoring a future Palestinian state.
Topic:
Security, Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, and State Building
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and Jerusalem

59. Policy Recommendations for Israel-Turkey Reconciliation

Author:
GPoT Center and Mitvim
Publication Date:
07-2016
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Global Political Trends Center
Abstract:
Engaged in a series of policy dialogues since 2012, Mitvim – the Israeli Institute for Regional Foreign Policies and the Global Political Trends (GPoT) Center believe that after the signing of the Israel-Turkey agreement and the restoration of full diplomatic relations, both countries should consider the following policy recommendations in order to ensure successful reconciliation.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Treaties and Agreements, Bilateral Relations, and Reconciliation
Political Geography:
Turkey, Middle East, Palestine, and Israel

60. Turkish-Israeli Relations: Crises and Cooperation

Author:
Oğuz Çelikkol
Publication Date:
11-2016
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Global Political Trends Center
Abstract:
Several factors have always played an important role in Turkish-Israeli relaons since the two countries established diplomac relaons in 1949. First of all, both countries have been in the Western camp and have a special relaonship with the United States. Turkey's recognion of the importance of the Jewish lobby in US polics and Turkey's contacts with this powerful lobby predated its diplomac contacts with the State of Israel. When Turkey faced the expansionist threat of the Soviet Union just aer the Second World War and wished to establish close military es with the United States, it also iniated contacts with the American Jewish lobby, and recognized the newly established State of Israel. Although Turkey voted against the Palesne paron plan of the United Naons and the division of Palesnian territories into Arab and Jewish states in 1947, it became the first regional power to recognize the Israeli State, just a few weeks before the Turkish foreign minister's first official visit to Washington in 1949. Turkey joined the US-led North Atlanc Treaty Organizaon (NATO) in 1952 and formed special diplomac and military es with the US during the 1950s.
Topic:
Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Bilateral Relations, History, and Crisis Management
Political Geography:
Turkey, Middle East, Israel, and Palestine