Search

Begin New Search Topic Negotiation Political Geography Israel

31. The Forgotten Peace at Twenty-Five: How to Protect and Strengthen Israel-Jordan Ties

Author:
Ghaith al-Omari and Ben Fishman
Publication Date:
10-2019
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:
On the twenty-fifth anniversary of the peace treaty, both parties and the United States have strategic interests in upholding and reinforcing the relationship. The optimism that characterized the signing of the Israel-Jordan peace treaty a quarter-century ago has long since dissipated. Today, the peace rests on a strong security foundation but lacks popular support, particularly on the Jordanian side. Nevertheless, there remain important opportunities for strengthening Israel-Jordan relations and preserving that pillar of America’s steadily eroding security architecture in the Middle East. It is critical for Washington to prioritize Jordan on its agenda. This includes urging the still-to-be-formed Israeli government to take responsible action on two fronts: keeping Amman’s interests in mind when formulating policy toward the West Bank, and implementing long-delayed initiatives that would help Jordan’s struggling economy.
Topic:
Security, Treaties and Agreements, Bilateral Relations, Territorial Disputes, Negotiation, and Peace
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, Jerusalem, Jordan, and United States of America

32. Some New Suggestions for Solving the Israeli–Palestinians Disputes

Author:
Gideon Biger
Publication Date:
01-2018
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Polish Political Science Yearbook
Institution:
Polish Political Science Association (PPSA)
Abstract:
Many suggestions have been presented for solving the Israeli – Palestinian dis- pute. As for now, none of those suggestions, presented during more than thirty years of ne- gotiations, have been accepted by both sides. As for this, some new ideas have to be entered the arena. Here some new, “out of the box”, geographical proposals are presented, based on actual events and geographical realities which exist in other areas. These proposals could be seen as un-human or politically wrong suggestions but as all other proposals were rejected, the decision makers of both sides, as well as the leaders of the world, can use the presented suggestion as a base for future negotiations.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Territorial Disputes, Conflict, and Negotiation
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, and Palestine

33. Palestine and the Arab–Israeli Conflict: 100 Years of Regional Relevance and International Failure

Author:
Karim Makdisi
Publication Date:
12-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Istituto Affari Internazionali
Abstract:
This paper asserts that the Arab–Israeli conflict, and in particular the question of Palestine, has been the major issue of regional concern across the Middle East for over a century. It claims that the failure to resolve the question of Palestine will continue to impact on the region’s stability and its geopolitical dynamics and to shape popular opinion while limiting Arab leaders’ options. It first situates the Arab–Israeli conflict as a core regional issue in historical context – which is crucial for understanding where we are today – before critically reviewing the Oslo “peace process” and its failure to deliver a just and sustainable peace within the framework of a “two-state solution”. It suggests that this failure has resulted in the ramping up of lingering regional problems (e.g. southern Lebanon, the Golan Heights, refugees and in Palestine itself) and the rise of new challenges and frameworks (e.g. the Resistance Axis and the BDS movement). It concludes that the time has come for the international community – including the European Union, which has contributed to the failure of the two-state solution – to consider alternative paradigms and actions.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Refugees, Syrian War, Negotiation, and Peace
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, Lebanon, and Syria

34. Two States or One? Reappraising the Israeli-Palestinian Impasse

Author:
Edward P. Djerejian, Marwan Muasher, Nathan Brown, Samih Al-Abid, Tariq Dana, Dahlia Scheindlin, Gilead Sher, and Khalil Shikaki
Publication Date:
09-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
The Israeli and Palestinian communities are growing ever closer physically while remaining separated politically. Any solution must adequately address the needs of both sides. This report attempts to look at actualities and trends with a fresh and analytical eye. At first glance, the two halves of this report contain two very different views of a resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict: one presents the case for a two-state solution, the other suggests that it is time to look at the idea of a single state with all its variations. But the two halves do not differ on the facts of the current situation. Nor do they differ much on the trajectory. The same facts can be used to support two different conclusions: Do we need new ideas or new determination and political will behind previous ones? The two chapters also highlight an important political reality: any solution must adequately address the needs of both sides. Imposed solutions will not work. The section authored by the Baker Institute does not deny that a one-state reality is emerging and the two-state solution is in trouble, but it argues that the two-state solution should not be abandoned as it provides the most coherent framework for a democratic Israeli state living in peace and security next to an independent and sovereign Palestinian state. Carnegie’s section recognizes that a one-state reality is emerging, whether desirable or not, and calls for scrutinizing solutions that take this reality into account instead of wishing it away. At a time when ideas to solve the conflict are being speculated about without much context, this report attempts to objectively analyze and present the two major options for a negotiated peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians and to explain the consequences of both for the parties involved and the international community. It is our hope that it will serve as not only a reminder of past efforts but also an incubator for future ones.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Treaties and Agreements, Territorial Disputes, Conflict, Negotiation, and Peace
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, and Palestine

35. 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

36. Harvard Journal of Middle Eastern Politics and Policy: Spring 2016

Author:
Kristin A. Wagner, Satgin Hamrah, Benjamen Franklen Gussen, Robert Mason, Robert Maguire, Adi Saleem Bharat, Lauren Fisher, Joseph Sadek, Dalia Ghanem-Yazbek, and Serhat S. Çubukçuoğlu
Publication Date:
01-2016
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:
Our Spring 2016 volume encapsulates the dangerous developments in MENA over the course of the past year. While the international community hoped for a resolution to the five-year Syrian Civil War, the conflict has further divided the region into a sectarian split, pitting Shia Iran and the Sunni gulf states on opposing sides. Additionally, Russia’s brief military intervention, finally winding down as of March 2016, has further destabilized the country and significantly increased the flow of refugees into the heartland of Europe. With the November 2015 Paris attacks, the threat of the so-called Islamic State (Daesh) to the west was finally realized, calling into question ongoing efforts to counter violent extremism, as well as to resolve the Syrian Civil War. Meanwhile, Turkey’s increasing two-front war against the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) and Daesh has resulted in a series of deadly terrorist attacks throughout the country, putting further pressure on Turkish leadership to both find a solution to the Kurdish question and stem the refugee flow transiting northward from Syria. It is through this lens that the Spring 2016 edition has been crafted. With conflict and instability abound, we present first an exclusive interview with Speaker of the Iraqi Parliament Salim al-Jabouri. On a more positive note, JMEPP also interviewed Tunisia’s Minister of Economic Infrastructure and Sustainable Development, Hedi Larbi, on Tunisia’s relative stability and success in its post-Jasmine Revolution transition. This year’s featured articles include Robert Mason’s assessment of the Saudi leadership and the perilous position it now finds itself in, both geopolitically and domestically; and Serhat S. Çubukçuoğlu’s eyes on Turkey’s natural gas ambitions as being linked to settling the Cypriot peace talks, as well as re-establishing partnerships with its regional neighbors in the eastern Mediterranean. Benjamen Franklen Gussen creates a new picture of a geographically reoriented Middle East, while Dylan MaGuire analyzes the no-fly zone option in Syria, with a look back to previous operations in Iraq and Libya. Focusing on gender, Dr. Dalia Ghanem-Yazbeck looks at integration and inclusion of women in Algeria’s military, yet presents a critique on its superficiality. With an eye on Turkey’s destabilized southern border region, Joseph Sadek provides commentary on the political and geostrategic jostling between Turkey and its Kurdish population, as well as the complex relationships between Turkey, the PKK, and Syrian People’s Protection Units (YPG) rebels. Turning to terrorism, Lauren Fisher presents an argument against the stovepipe methodology of countering violent extremism by exploring the complexities behind the topic. Finally, we conclude with a literature review by Adi Saleem Bharat on the Boycott, Divest, Sanction (BDS) movement as it pertains to academia.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Conflict Prevention, Security, Development, Gender Issues, Peace Studies, Infrastructure, Armed Forces, Violent Extremism, Women, Radicalization, Islamic State, Political stability, Arab Spring, Humanitarian Intervention, Syrian War, Negotiation, Kurds, and BDS
Political Geography:
Iraq, Israel, Libya, Palestine, Algeria, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Tunisia, and Cyprus

37. "From Extremism to Inclusion": Aziz Abu Sarah, Nat Geo Explorer, Co-Founder of Mejdi Tours

Author:
Aziz Abu Sarah
Publication Date:
11-2016
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
Israel/Palestine Creative Regional Initiatives (IPCRI)
Abstract:
The 4th IPCRI forum for 2016 focused on: "From Extremism to Inclusion" How hardliners joined the peace process in Northern Ireland
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Conflict, Negotiation, and Peace
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and Northern Ireland

38. "From Extremism to Inclusion": Ariel Heifetz Knobel, Conflict Management Practitioner, Northern Ireland Specialist

Author:
Ariel Heifetz Knobel
Publication Date:
11-2016
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
Israel/Palestine Creative Regional Initiatives (IPCRI)
Abstract:
The 4th IPCRI forum for 2016 focused on: "From Extremism to Inclusion" How hardliners joined the peace process in Northern Ireland
Topic:
Negotiation, Peace, Inclusion, Political Extremism, and Reintegration
Political Geography:
Israel and Palestine

39. On the Palestinian issue, how much credit should Europe get amongst Arab opinion for its economic and political support?

Author:
Ralitsa Trifonova
Publication Date:
11-2010
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Strategic Studies (CSS)
Abstract:
The formulation in the Council of Ministers’ of the European Union statement, issued on 8 December 2009, that within “an agreed time-frame” an independent Palestinian state should emerge on the Middle East’s political map raised hopes for a breakthrough in the remaining unsolved more than 60 years Palestinian issue. Together with the statement of the United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon in Moscow in the late 2009, this formulation is viewed by members of the Palestinian National Authority itself as a sign, in being specific in contrast with previous statements excluding a set timeframe for the establishment of a viable independent Palestinian state. After the unveiled Israeli violations of the international law during the last war over Gaza, a lot of voices not only in Palestine, but from all over world are revealing the impatience, reaching its nadir as Israeli behaviour does not represent threat only to the Palestinian people, but to the whole international system, especially when it shelled the headquarters of one the United Nations agencies on 15 January 2009. Some analysts believe that after the continued over 60 year’s failure of the USA to reach any significant progress to the benefit of the Palestinian people, it is high time Europe entered the Middle East arena as the third party, which would lead the two parties of the IsraeliPalestinian issue to a balanced solution, which does not reply on forced compromise. As the distrust of the Palestinian people with the USA is growing, Europe would only play a positive role if it were a trust-worthy ally itself. In order to give this alternative a positive perspective, we need to go back to the beginning of the European involvement in the Palestinian issue, to follow its own history of internal development, to explore the character of its economic aid and the existence of political support to the Palestinian people in their most turbulent and crucial moments in last four decades.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Human Rights, Territorial Disputes, Conflict, and Negotiation
Political Geography:
Europe, Israel, Palestine, and United States of America

40. The Annapolis Meeting: Too Little Too Late!

Author:
Hassan Barari
Publication Date:
11-2007
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Strategic Studies (CSS)
Abstract:
As of writing this piece, no final date has yet been set for the Annapolis meeting, but most likely it will be the last week of November. Amid the premature optimism, the concerned parties need to realize that the meeting is likely to fail. Indeed, rejectionists on both sides are already rubbing their hands gleefully in anticipation of a colossal failure. Therefore, many observers have warned that this summit requires careful planning and, more importantly, a day-to-day strategy, should the meeting fail. They argue that US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice has backtracked from her original plans and has changed the agenda of the conference in such a way that it will have a limited purpose. The new thinking is that the Annapolis meeting should be seen as a process and not as an event. This article sheds light on the dynamics that will determine the degree of success.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Conflict, Negotiation, and Peace
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and United States of America