« Previous |
1 - 10 of 41
|
Next »
Number of results to display per page
Search Results
2. An International Peace Conference in the Aftermath of the Israel-Hamas War
- Author:
- Arie Kacowicz
- Publication Date:
- 01-2024
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Mitvim: The Israeli Institute for Regional Foreign Policies
- Abstract:
- The ongoing war between Israel and Hamas in the Gaza Strip might evolve in the next few weeks into its ‘third stage’, following the aerial bombardment and the massive ground operation undertaken by the IDF into a low-intensity warfare and the establishment of buffer zones with or without a limited Israeli military presence in the enclave. The way the war is being prosecuted will determine the range of political options in its aftermath. Despite the reluctance of the current Israeli government to engage in any substantial long-term political discussion about the “day after” in terms of any significant blueprints or scenarios, it is imperative to draw a coherent road map regarding the feasible diplomatic options for the immediate and long-term perspectives regarding Israel’s exit from Gaza in the aftermath of the war, including the political resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Taking into consideration the lack of political willingness and/or ability of both Israeli and Palestinian leaderships to advance peace after the war, the dire situation in the Gaza Strip, and the international and domestic political repercussions for several key actors (including the United States, Egypt, and Jordan), this paper examines the possible role and functions that an International Peace Conference (IPC) might fulfil in granting domestic and international legitimacy and the drawing of a coherent road map leading to de-escalation, stabilization, demilitarization, reconstruction, and governance of the Gaza Strip in the immediate term. Moreover, any IPC should also address the larger political issue regarding the ultimate diplomatic resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the form of the fulfillment of UNGA Resolution 181 (1947) and the creation of a demilitarized Palestinian State in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, following UNSC Resolutions 242 (1967), 338 (1973),1515 (2003), 1850 (2008), and 2334 (2016). The policy paper draws on historical precedents from other conflicts, as well as reflecting on examples and experiences from the Arab-Israeli conflict, first and foremost the relevant and successful example of the Madrid Conference of October 1991. The major insight to be drawn is that an IPC is a necessary but not sufficient political diplomatic ingredient in the road map leading to the reconstruction of the Gaza Strip in the aftermath of the war in the immediate term, as well as to peace negotiations towards the peaceful resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict and the establishment of a demilitarized Palestinian State alongside Israel.
- Topic:
- Negotiation, Peace, Hamas, Armed Conflict, October 7, and 2023 Gaza War
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and Gaza
3. Palestinian Elections: A Vital Step Toward a Stable Political Settlement
- Author:
- Ephraim Lavie
- Publication Date:
- 01-2024
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Mitvim: The Israeli Institute for Regional Foreign Policies
- Abstract:
- A political settlement to resolve the conflict with the Palestinians once Hamas is weakened, and after an intermediate stage in which a reconstituted Palestinian Authority is established with the promise of a real political horizon, is a vital Israeli interest. Achieving this goal requires the election of a pragmatic Palestinian leadership that is deemed legitimate by the Palestinian public and is therefore able to realize the vision of a viable Palestinian state and a stable political settlement that provides security for Israel. In order to prevent the election of extremists opposed to a political settlement, legitimate restrictions must be placed on the individuals and groups running for the post of president and for membership in the legislative council. These limitations will be based on the three conditions that the Quartet countries laid out for Hamas after its victory in the 2006 elections: abandoning the path of terrorism, recognizing Israel, and affirming the previous agreements it signed with the PLO. The elections must take place in the context of an advanced political process offering hope to the Palestinian people in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and increasing their support for a settlement approach. To that end, Israel will have to declare its commitment to a political process designed to result in a two-state solution, and adopt confidence-building measures that demonstrate its intent to reach a political settlement, including a halt of construction in the settlements. At the same time, the international community, led by the United States and the European Union, will have to guarantee their recognition of a Palestinian state. The United States will also help train the Palestinian Authority’s security apparatuses, contribute to the development of its economy, and promote reforms in government institutions. Israel and the international community must lay the groundwork for orderly, internationally supervised elections in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip that will ensure the election of a suitable national leadership for the Palestinian people. Having won the trust of the people, such a leadership will enjoy legitimacy and be able to promote a stable settlement with Israel. It will also contribute, over time, to strengthening the moderate elements in society and weakening extremist, religious, and nationalist opposition elements.
- Topic:
- Elections, Political stability, Negotiation, Peace, Palestinian Authority, and Israeli–Palestinian Conflict
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Israel, Palestine, Gaza, and West Bank
4. Deal or No Deal: The Road to a Cease-fire in Gaza and on the Lebanon-Israel Border
- Author:
- Gerald Feierstein and Randa Slim
- Publication Date:
- 03-2024
- Content Type:
- Video
- Institution:
- Middle East Institute (MEI)
- Abstract:
- The Middle East Institute hosted an on-the-record briefing on current Israel-Hamas cease-fire negotiations and likely outcomes in the coming days and weeks.
- Topic:
- Negotiation, Hamas, Ceasefire, and Armed Conflict
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and Gaza
5. Recipe for Success: Israeli and Lebanese Analytical Perspectives on the Maritime Delimitation Negotiations
- Author:
- The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
- Publication Date:
- 03-2023
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
- Abstract:
- The Israel-Lebanon maritime boundary agreement is not a direct agreement between the two countries, but rather two separate agreements with the United States. It is unique: the first such agreement reached between countries with no diplomatic relations, the first between adjacent states in the Eastern Mediterranean, and the first in the region to be resolved through indirect negotiations facilitated by a mediator. A confluence of domestic and geopolitical events contributed to the signing of the agreement, including elections in Israel, the deterioration of Lebanon’s economy and the country’s descent into political crisis, and the consequences of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine for the global energy market. Effective mediation between parties was more important than the degree of trust the parties had in the mediator or the mediator’s relative neutrality on the issue. The United States was not an unbiased mediator, but because of its own incentives to deliver an agreement and its leverage over both parties it was the only possible one. International oil and gas companies influenced the negotiations, but did not directly participate in them. Due to their vested interest in securing their existing or prospective investments, they used public communications and discrete engagements with the Israeli and Lebanese governments to encourage a deal. This agreement could serve as a model for other maritime disputes by demonstrating at least two things. Firstly, solutions can be achieved when parties delink their maritime negotiations from the core issues in their bilateral relationship. Secondly, if two sides are committed to reaching an agreement, the international law of the sea is sufficiently flexible for them to find a solution, even when one party is a signatory of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and the other is not.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, Maritime, and Negotiation
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Israel, and Lebanon
6. Biden’s Middle East Balancing Act: Iran’s Nuclear Program and Saudi-Israeli Ties
- Author:
- Leon Hadar
- Publication Date:
- 08-2023
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Foreign Policy Research Institute (FPRI)
- Abstract:
- This summer, the Biden administration decided to negotiate a temporary deal with Iran involving the release of American prisoners held by the Islamic Republic in exchange for the release of some of the funds that were held by the United States as part of the economic sanctions on Tehran. The White House expects that this package deal will open the road to talks with Iran on its nuclear program. The outline of a deal would include a pause in the accumulation of enriched uranium and an Iranian pledge not to produce weapons-grade fissile material, in exchange for the removal of US economic sanctions. But any diplomatic deal between Washington and Tehran raises fears among two of America’s allies in the region, Saudi Arabia and Israel, that regard Iran as an existential threat. From that perspective, a US-led process of normalizing the relations between Riyadh and Jerusalem could help contain Iran and reinforce the American pledge to strengthen the alliance with Saudi Arabia and Israel.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Sanctions, Negotiation, and Joe Biden
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and United States of America
7. Oslo at 30: Personal Perspectives from Washington Institute Scholars: A Compendium
- Author:
- Dennis Ross, David Makovsky, Neomi Neumann, Ghaith al-Omari, and Mohammed S. Dajani
- Publication Date:
- 09-2023
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- On the thirtieth anniversary of the landmark Oslo I Accord, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy has published a remarkable compendium that includes essays by officials who played significant roles in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process from the deal’s signing in September 1993 through the present. The volume includes personal perspectives from former diplomats, analysis of public opinion among Israelis and Palestinians, and policy recommendations for U.S. officials. The writers conclude that while the prospects for peace appear dim at the moment, wise policymaking may yet fulfill the promise of the Oslo Accords.
- Topic:
- Negotiation, Peace, Oslo Accords, and Israeli–Palestinian Conflict
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Israel, and Palestine
8. The Israel-Hamas war and the role of Qatar and Egypt
- Author:
- Brian Katulis, Mirette F. Mabrouk, and Rachel Dooley
- Publication Date:
- 11-2023
- Content Type:
- Video
- Institution:
- Middle East Institute (MEI)
- Abstract:
- The Middle East Institute hosted an on-the-record press briefing to discuss the role of key regional partners Qatar and Egypt in the Israel-Hamas conflict, from the question of hostage negotiations being led by Doha to the evacuation of U.S. citizens and the wounded to Egypt. Recorded Tuesday, November 7, 2023.
- Topic:
- Negotiation, Hamas, Regional Politics, Hostage Crisis, and October 7
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Israel, Palestine, Gaza, Egypt, and Qatar
9. One step forward, one step back: International discourse on advancing Israeli-Palestinian peacemaking
- Author:
- Lior Lehrs
- Publication Date:
- 01-2022
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Mitvim: The Israeli Institute for Regional Foreign Policies
- Abstract:
- The Israeli-Palestinian peace process has been locked in a stalemate since the 2014 collapse of the US mediation initiative led by then-Secretary of State John Kerry. The relations between the parties have been all but severed and characterized by a series of crises and tensions that peaked over Israel’s 2020 West Bank annexation plan. While the Israeli-Arab normalization agreements removed the annexation idea from the agenda, this did not change the Israeli-Palestinian situation. Developments in recent months in the Israeli-Palestinian arena pose challenges and risks but also new opportunities and possibilities. Special attention should be paid to the impact of the May 2021 escalation, the deep crisis in the Palestinian Authority (PA), and the establishment of a new government in Israel. This paper maps the international discourse on advancing Israeli-Palestinian peace under the current conditions, and constitutes a follow-up to the paper we published in April 2021. It is based on a series of dialogues held by Mitvim Institute experts in August and September 2021 with European, American and Palestinian diplomats and experts, as well as UN officials, and also on a series of discussions among a team of Israeli experts formed by Mitvim.[1] The paper offers an analysis of the positions and perceptions of international actors regarding the effects of the latest developments on the Israeli-Palestinian arena, and their insights and conclusions about the feasible and desired measures that could be undertaken to advance Israeli-Palestinian peace.
- Topic:
- Territorial Disputes, Negotiation, Peace, Annexation, and Dialogue
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Israel, and Palestine
10. Difficulties in the Negotiations with Iran: Implications for Israel
- Author:
- Eldad Shavit and Sima Shine
- Publication Date:
- 09-2022
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Institute for National Security Studies (INSS)
- Abstract:
- The negotiations between the United States and Iran on renewing the nuclear agreement have run into serious difficulties following the opposition by the United States and the European partners to Iran's demand that the IAEA close the open files on the Iranian nuclear program before the implementation of the agreement (120 days after signing). At the same time, Iran continues to accelerate the program, including the enrichment of uranium using cascades of advanced centrifuges. Three scenarios are possible: a resolution of the crisis and achievement of an agreement; continued stagnation, i.e., lowintensity talks; or the collapse of the negotiations. The worst scenario for Israel is a continuation of the current situation, in which Iran could in a short time accumulate enough fissile material for weapons-grade enrichment for several nuclear facilities, while the temptation of a nuclear breakout increases. Thus, Israel should immediately formulate a new strategy regarding Iran. The government should conduct a discreet dialogue with the US administration and focus on proposals that seek to advance Israel’s military and strategic needs, including consolidating covert and effective cooperation with the countries of the region under the auspices of the United States.
- Topic:
- Security, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Negotiation, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, and Israel