Search

Begin New Search Topic Treaties and Agreements Political Geography Middle East

11. Prospects for Saudi Arabia-Israel Normalization

Author:
Alistair Taylor, Martin Indyk, Sanam Vakil, and Bilal Y. Saab
Publication Date:
09-2023
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
Middle East Institute (MEI)
Abstract:
On this week's episode, MEI's Editor-In-Chief Alistair Taylor discusses the Biden administration’s push to reach a normalization accord between Saudi Arabia and Israel with Martin Indyk, Sanam Vakil, and Bilal Saab. While there are plenty of potential hurdles to reaching a deal — including Saudi Arabia’s steep demands, Israel’s far-right government, and challenging domestic politics here in the US — if done right, the potential geopolitical ramifications could be substantial.
Topic:
Treaties and Agreements, Geopolitics, Domestic Politics, Far Right, and Normalization
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and Saudi Arabia

12. Arab Peace Initiative II: How Arab Leadership Could Design a Peace Plan in Israel and Palestine

Author:
Amr Hamzawy and Nathan J. Brown
Publication Date:
11-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
Past peace processes in Israel and Palestine failed to offer long-term solutions to the conflict, but they showed what makes negotiations work. In the latest round of hostilities in Gaza, key Arab governments are uniquely positioned to leverage relationships with all parties to lay out the conditions that could broker a lasting peace. An Arab Peace Initiative II, with multilateral oversight, would have to offer real benefits for all parties. But for any lasting framework to take hold, these important conditions need to be met. Palestinian and Jewish national identities should be recognized as legitimate and in need of institutional expression. Individual human rights in both communities need to be protected. Antisemitic, Islamophobic, and racist rhetoric and actions must be explicitly and unconditionally repudiated by all actors. Any targeting of civilians should not be merely rejected but actively combated by all actors. Settlement activities in the Palestinian territories and forced displacement of Palestinians to Egypt, Jordan, or anywhere else should be considered outlawed actions that all actors commit to fight against. Full diplomatic, political, and economic relations among participating states should be an outcome of the negotiation process. No stateless people should be left behind at the conclusion of any set of agreements.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Politics, Treaties and Agreements, Reform, and Occupation
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, North Africa, and Egypt

13. Promoting water cooperation in the Middle East

Author:
Tobias von Lossow
Publication Date:
09-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Clingendael Netherlands Institute of International Relations
Abstract:
Climate change exacerbates the pronounced water scarcity in the Middle East and also acts as a threat multiplier, for instance in the areas of health, food security and livelihoods. Increasing competition over water and the failure to address related challenges intensify tensions and conflicts within and between countries. Considerable tensions between countries and the polarising and emotional nature of water as an existential resource often prevent neighbouring states from concluding water agreements. Against this backdrop, the urgency for action is high, but the scope of action for traditional transboundary water agreements is limited. In response to this challenge, this report proposes five water-related action areas in which water cooperation is ‘reimagined’ and pursued via thematic entry points of national and regional interest. The report looks into established resource management frameworks, less politicised water-related challenges or topics of increasing political urgency with a strong water component – all of which are already being addressed and debated at national and local levels. By linking them with regional dialogue, capacity development and joint strategies, these thematic clusters provide promising spaces for inter-state water cooperation.
Topic:
Climate Change, International Cooperation, Treaties and Agreements, Natural Resources, Water, and Resource Management
Political Geography:
Middle East

14. Between Humanitarian Assistance and Externalizing of EU Borders: The EU-Turkey Deal and Refugee Related Organizations in Turkey

Author:
Ludger Pries and Berna Safak Zülfikar Savci
Publication Date:
03-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal on Migration and Human Security
Institution:
Center for Migration Studies of New York
Abstract:
This paper examines whether multilevel transnational cooperation makes a difference in refugee protection, especially in protracted displacement. In response to the forced migration of millions of Syrians to Turkey starting in 2011, the EU and Turkish government published a joint statement in March 2016. The so-called EU-Turkey deal (EUTD) provided a substantial flow of money (EUR 6 billion in four years) from the EU to Turkey. In return Turkey had to commit to contain and control migration movement toward the EU. In social science, there are quite diverse evaluations of the EUTD. Whereas some studies focus on its effectiveness and efficiency in reaching the outlined goals, other publications stress its geo-political effects on migrants’ mobility and (externalized) border control. Meanwhile some studies look for points to improve the EUTD while others criticize it fundamentally. This article analyzes the involvement of different types of international governmental and non-governmental organizations (IGOs and INGOs) in the four main action fields of the EUTD and its implicit side effects on the Turkish regime of migration management. It first summarizes some crucial findings and pending questions in the social science literature. Based on analysis of available documents and our own interviews in Turkey, we then shed light on the organizations involved in the implementation of the EUTD and its effects on the Turkish regime of refugee protection. In 2022, Turkey hosted some 3.7 million Syrian refugees of a total of almost four million registered international forced migrants. The EUTD of 2016 was mainly a response by the EU to the large numbers of Syrian refugees arriving in its members’ territories. When more than 1.2 million asylum seekers were registered in the then EU-28 in 2015 alone — more than twice the number in the preceding year — some EU member states (MS) negotiated with the Turkish government (Eurostat 2015, 2016). Based on a meeting of the European Council and its “Turkish counterpart” the so-called “EU-Turkey statement” was published on March 18 in 2015 (European Council 2016). From the very beginning, this EUTD was controversial — both in public discussions and in the social science literature. Was it primarily a payment from the EU to the Turkish government for externalizing its responsibilities of refugee protection? Or was it an appropriate measure for sharing the burden of an urgent humanitarian crisis? Was the money spent for refugee-oriented humanitarian aid and development expenses or was it instrumentalized by the Turkish government for its own ends? How did refugee related IGOs and INGOs participate in the management of the EUTD? In the following sections, we focus on some selected aspects of the role of national and international, governmental and non-governmental organizations active in the field of refugee protection, specifically the role and cooperation dynamics of these refugee related organizations (RRO) in implementing the Facility for Refugees in Turkey (FRIT) as part of the EUTD. Based on expert interviews in Turkey and an analysis of spending under the EUTD, the paper analyzes (1) how the landscape of RROs developed in the context of the EUTD, (2) how the budget of the EUTD was spent, and (3) how the cooperation between these RROs developed. The paper adds new insights into the contradictory dynamics between organizing services for refugees and controlling and containing refugee movements to the EU, between assisting and instrumentalizing forced migrants in Turkey, and between humanitarian aid and development activities. Especially the last point is relevant for contexts of protracted displacement as instruments of immediate humanitarian assistance have to be combined with means of longer-term development. From a perspective of organizational sociology, it argues that the EUTD contributed to a multi-level transnational organizational field of refugee protection, where collective and corporate actors relate in conflict and cooperation between the poles of rational self-interests and mutually recognized norms, between control-oriented state authorities up to grass root action networks. Analysis of the EUTD enables us to draw out specific insights and practical lessons for a broader audience. Before presenting our own empirical findings we first will sketch out the broader landscape of social science research and analysis of the EUTD.2
Topic:
Treaties and Agreements, European Union, Refugees, Borders, Protection, and Humanitarian Assistance
Political Geography:
Europe, Turkey, and Middle East

15. Jordan’s role in a possible Saudi-Israeli-American deal: A vital link in the chain

Author:
Eran Lerman
Publication Date:
10-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
Amid the ongoing complex negotiations of Saudi-Israeli normalization, keeping the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan on board is essential. Despite grudges and occasional tensions, Jordan shares strategic interests with Saudi Arabia and stands to gain significant benefits once the proposed trade and transportation “corridor” from India to Europe passes through its territory. It is, therefore, advisable to leave the status quo in Jerusalem intact, and include Jordan in formulating any “package.”
Topic:
Treaties and Agreements, Trade, Normalization, Strategic Interests, and Regional Politics
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan

16. Israel’s relations with Morocco and the future of the Abraham Accords

Author:
Eran Lerman
Publication Date:
06-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
The time is ripe for Israel to take the initiative rather than wait for pre-arranged reciprocal terms and remove the critical remaining obstacle to full and formal diplomatic relations with the kingdom.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Treaties and Agreements, Bilateral Relations, Normalization, and Regional Politics
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, North Africa, and Morocco

17. Seven Myths about the “Historic” Israel-Lebanon Maritime Border Agreement

Author:
Michael Doran
Publication Date:
10-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Hudson Institute
Abstract:
Commentators in the United States and Israel have hailed the agreement on the maritime border between Israel and Lebanon, which the Biden administration recently brokered, as a great success. They liken it to the Abraham Accords and claim that it is a major step toward normalizing relations between the Jewish State and a historic Arab foe. But a close examination of the agreement simply does not support this view. Amos Hochstein, the US State Department senior advisor for energy security, led the mediation effort to resolve this dispute. He built on the initiatives of Presidents Barack Obama and Donald Trump to reconcile the conflicting claims of Israel, which claimed Line 1 (see map) as the northern border of its exclusive economic zone (EEZ), and Lebanon, which claimed Line 23 as its southern border. In the final months of the Trump administration, Lebanese negotiators revised their claim, moving it further south to Line 29. Beirut, however, never registered this new claim with the United Nations. In other words, Line 23 always remained the official Lebanese position. When Hochstein arrived in Beirut last February, the Lebanese government abruptly dropped its insistence on Line 29 and presented its retreat as a sign of its flexibility, a compromise proposal that it could withdraw if the negotiations failed to produce satisfactory results.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Terrorism, Treaties and Agreements, Territorial Disputes, and Borders
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, and Lebanon

18. Israel and Lebanon Conclude Maritime Agreement

Author:
Sara Nowacka and Michał Wojnarowicz
Publication Date:
10-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Polish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
On 27 October, Israel and Lebanon, which do not have official relations, concluded an agreement with U.S. mediation on the maritime border of the two states and the exploitation of gas deposits. The agreement will serve to increase stability in the Eastern Mediterranean, although the direct benefits for Lebanon’s economy depend on an improvement in the political situation.
Topic:
Treaties and Agreements, Gas, Economy, Political stability, and Maritime
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, and Lebanon

19. Reciprocal Pressures: Are Israel-Lebanon maritime border talks doomed to fail?

Author:
FARAS
Publication Date:
09-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARAS)
Abstract:
The future of talks between Israel and Lebanon on delineating a shared maritime border, mediated by US Special Envoy and Coordinator for International Energy Affairs, Amos Hochstein remains uncertain following an exchange of escalatory statements from Israel and Lebanon’s Hezbollah about the disputed Karish natural gas field. Both sides suggested that the tensions can escalate into an all-out war unless their conditions are met. However, Lebanese officials including President Michel Aoun stated that the negotiations to demarcate the border are in the final stages.
Topic:
Oil, Treaties and Agreements, Maritime, and Energy
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, and Lebanon

20. Stalling: Analysing Iran’s written response to EU nuclear deal draft

Author:
FARAS
Publication Date:
08-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARAS)
Abstract:
EU’s high representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Josep Borrell, said on August 15 that both the EU and US were studying Iran’s written response and hoping to restore the tattered nuclear deal. There was no timeline given on when the world powers would respond, but Iran’s official media said Tehran expected a reply in two days.
Topic:
Treaties and Agreements, European Union, Nonproliferation, and Nuclear Energy
Political Geography:
Iran and Middle East