Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Palestine Content Type Policy Brief

1. Continuity vs. Overreach in the Trump Peace Plan (Part 1): Borders and Jerusalem

Author:
David Makovsky
Publication Date:
02-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:
If the latest U.S. effort winds up backing the Palestinians into a territorial corner from the outset, then Washington may not be able to move the process any closer to direct negotiations. The newly released U.S. peace plan marks a very significant shift in favor of the current Israeli government’s view, especially when compared to three past U.S. initiatives: (1) the Clinton Parameters of December 2000, (2) Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice’s “Annapolis Process” of 2007-2008, and (3) Secretary of State John Kerry’s 2013-2014 initiative. The message is clear: the Trump administration will no longer keep sweetening the deal with every Palestinian refusal, a criticism some have aimed at previous U.S. efforts. Yet the new plan raises worrisome questions of its own. Will its provisions prove so disadvantageous to the proposed Palestinian state that they cannot serve as the basis for further negotiations? And would such overreach enable Palestinian Authority president Mahmoud Abbas to sway Arab states who have signaled that they want to give the proposal a chance, convincing them to oppose it instead? If so, the plan may wind up perpetuating the current diplomatic impasse and setting the stage for a one-state reality that runs counter to Israel’s identity as a Jewish, democratic state. This two-part PolicyWatch will address these questions by examining how the Trump plan compares to past U.S. initiatives when it comes to the conflict’s five core final-status issues. Part 1 focuses on two of these issues: borders and Jerusalem. Part 2 examines security, refugees, and narrative issues.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Territorial Disputes, Borders, and Negotiation
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, North America, and United States of America

2. Continuity vs. Overreach in the Trump Peace Plan (Part 2): Security, Refugees, and Narratives

Author:
Ghaith al-Omari
Publication Date:
02-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:
By granting Israel much more say over the sovereignty of a future Palestinian state and its ability to absorb refugees, the document may undermine the administration’s ability to build an international coalition behind its policies. President Trump’s “Peace to Prosperity” plan was presented as a departure from previous approaches—a notion that invited praise from its supporters (who saw it as a recognition of reality) and criticism from its opponents (who saw it as an abandonment of valued principles). The plan does in fact diverge from past efforts in fundamental respects, yet there are also some areas of continuity, and ultimately, the extent to which it gains traction will be subject to many different political and diplomatic variables. Even so, the initial substance of the plan document itself will play a large part in determining how it is viewed by various stakeholders, especially those passages that veer away from the traditional path on core issues. Part 1 of this PolicyWatch assessed what the plan says about two such issues: borders and Jerusalem. This second installment discusses security, refugee, and narrative issues.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Refugees, and Peace
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, North America, and United States of America

3. The White House Peace Plan Meeting: U.S. Goals, Israeli Repercussions

Author:
David Makovsky
Publication Date:
01-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:
Whether they reveal a detailed plan or merely preview an aspirational document, U.S. officials still need to clarify their goals at a time when elections are looming and Palestinian participation seems highly unlikely. In a dramatic move, President Trump has announced that Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu and his leading rival, Blue and White Party leader Benny Gantz, will visit the White House on January 28 to be briefed on the administration’s long-awaited Middle East peace plan. Trump told reporters that the plan would likely be released before the summit. Predictably, no invitation was extended to the Palestinian Authority, which severed relations with Washington after the U.S. embassy was moved to Jerusalem in 2017.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Treaties and Agreements, Negotiation, Peace, and Donald Trump
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and United States of America

4. Development Cooperation with Conflict-Affected MENA Countries: Refocussing on the Social Contract

Author:
Mark Furness and Annabelle Houdret
Publication Date:
01-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
German Development Institute (DIE)
Abstract:
State–society relations are in flux across the Middle East and North Africa (MENA), nearly a decade after the Arab uprisings. The protests and revolts that swept the region in 2011 arose from widespread rejection of the post-independence Arab social contracts. These were based on redistribution of rents from natural resources and other forms of transfers and subsidies, as “compensation” for acquiescence to political and economic authoritarianism. In several MENA countries, including Iraq, Libya, Syria and Yemen, but also in Algeria, Lebanon and Palestine, the old social contracts have been destroyed by civil conflicts and internationally sponsored wars, which in some cases predated the 2011 uprisings. Since broken social contracts are at the root of conflict in the MENA region, supporting new social contracts should be the core objective of development cooperation with the region’s most conflict-affected countries. But “post-conflict reconstruction” often ignores the fact that conflicts do not end with peace agreements, and conflict-affected societies need more than reconstructed infrastructure, institutional capacity and private sector investment if they are to avoid violence in the future. Development agencies term this kind of cooperation “resilience”: promoting political, economic, social and environmental stability, rather than risking uncontrollable, revolutionary transformation. However, resilience has often provided cover for short-term measures aimed at preserving the position of particular actors and systems. Development cooperation needs to get beyond reconstruction and resilience approaches that often fail to foster the long-term stability they promise. By focussing on the social contract, development cooperation with conflict-affected countries can provide a crucial link between peacebuilding, reconstruction and longer-term socioeconomic and political development. It can thereby contribute not only to short-term, but also to long-term, sustainable stability. Using the social contract as an analytical lens can increase understanding not only of what donors should avoid doing, but also where they should concentrate their engagement during transitions from civil war. Practical examples from challenging contexts in the MENA region suggest that donors can make positive contributions in support of new social contracts when backing (a) stakeholder dialogues, (b) governance and reforms, and (c) socioeconomic inclusion. In Libya, the socioeconomic dialogue process has brought stakeholders together to outline a new economic vision for the country. The Municipal Development Programme in Palestine focusses on improving the accountability and delivery of local institutions. The Moroccan Economic, Social and Environmental Council provides an example of a process that engages previously marginalised groups. These programmes are all examples of targeted efforts to build cooperation among the groups that make up MENA societies. They aim to broaden decision-making processes, and to increase the impact of specific measures with the ultimate objective of improving state–society relations. They could be adapted for other fragile contexts, with external support. In backing more of these kinds of activities, donors could make stronger contributions to sustainable, long-term peace- and state-building processes in conflict-affected MENA countries.
Topic:
Development, Natural Resources, Conflict, Peace, and Social Contract
Political Geography:
Iraq, Middle East, Libya, Yemen, Palestine, Algeria, North Africa, Lebanon, and Syria

5. Ensuring Water Security in the Middle East: Policy Implications

Author:
Liel Maghen, Shira Kronich, Christiane Frohlich, Mahmoud Shatat, Tobias von Lossow, Ali Oguz Diriöz, Giulia Giordano, and Desirée A.L Quagliarotti
Publication Date:
04-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Israel/Palestine Creative Regional Initiatives (IPCRI)
Abstract:
Over the last decades, desertification and water-scarcity have become major problems in the Middle East, and more specifically in the Eastern Mediterranean region (Jordan, Israel, Lebanon, the Occupied Palestinian Territories and Syria). These developments have had significant political and socioeconomic impacts for the region. Increasingly securitized, water has been transformed into a political card, discouraging inter-state cooperation. Securitization of water has also led to exclusion of civil society and non-governmental actors from resource management. ​ This Joint Policy Study resulted from a partnership between IPCRI, AIES and Euromesco. IT discusses securitisation and de-securitisation trends in the region and examines the policies that can ensure water security. It argues that multilateral cooperation can trigger effective cooperation over shared water resources. Furthermore, civil society should be reincorporated into management and monitoring of water resources, which would lead to gradual desecuritisation of this resource.
Topic:
Security, Regional Cooperation, Natural Resources, and Water
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, Lebanon, and Jordan

6. 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

7. New Gaza Crossing Raises Questions About Blockade Policies

Author:
Neri Zilber
Publication Date:
10-2019
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:
The items being moved from Egypt through Salah al-Din Gate underline the contradictions and long-term unsustainability of the current stalemate regarding Gaza assistance. The Gaza Strip has been blockaded for more than a decade now, owing primarily to the violent takeover and continued militant rejectionism of the territory’s Hamas rulers. Even after certain restrictions were eased after the 2014 Gaza war, Israel and Egypt maintained tight limits on the entry of goods into the coastal enclave. This policy began to fray in early 2018 as conditions inside Gaza further deteriorated, culminating in the “Great March of Return” border demonstrations and short-lived rounds of escalation between Israel and Hamas. Indirect negotiations over a long-term truce have since provided some relief, yet the impact of one of the most noteworthy concessions has been under-examined—namely, the opening in 2018 of Salah al-Din Gate, a commercial border crossing between Gaza and Egypt. This crossing puts the lie to the narrative of a “besieged” Gaza, yet also raises questions about Israel’s continuing blockade policy and Hamas’s pretensions to be a responsible ruling entity.
Topic:
Border Control, Borders, Trade, and Hamas
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, Gaza, and Egypt

8. The Motives and the Consequences of the Gaza Great Return March

Author:
Omar Shaban
Publication Date:
04-2018
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Pal-Think For Strategic Studies
Abstract:
For four consecutive Fridays, tens of thousands of Gaza’s gather close which began on Friday, 30/3/2018 to the Gaza border with Israel what became known as “Gaza Great Return March, GRM. According to several reports, it can be said that the most the important motive for the Great Return Marches, are the tragic conditions in which Gaza’s live. Gaza has been besieged for more than 11 years. It suffers from a severe Palestinian division, and its people are suffering from a shortage of electricity, water scarcity, and inability to travel. Not to forget the three previous wars that destroyed everything in the Gaza Strip. Not to mention the failure of both options; the peace process led by the PA and armed resistance led by Hamas. The GRM was driven by the siege, the high level of unemployment, the ongoing consequences, up to today of the three wars, and the prevention of freedom of movement. However, raising the slogan “right of return” for the march was a unifying factor that helps to mobilize tens of thousands of participants. This slogan goes beyond any ideologies or socio-political issues. The march has achieved part of the goals, which is to have peaceful movements that begin with the commemoration of Land Day on March 30 till May, 15, the 70th anniversary of the Palestinian Nakba.
Topic:
International Security
Political Geography:
Palestine

9. Trade restrictions lead to lower wages and more violence: Although motivated by security considerations, the Israeli restrictions on imports to the OPT have negative economic and political consequences

Author:
Francesco Amodio and M. Di Maio
Publication Date:
01-2017
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Institute for the Study of International Development, McGill University
Abstract:
Import restrictions of dual-use goods and materials led to lower output and wages paid in sectors using those materials more intensively as production inputs. Local labor market conditions worsened in areas where employment is concentrated in these sectors. Episodes of political violence were more likely to occur in those same localities as a consequence. Security-motivated trade restrictions have a negative effect on industrial output and local labor markets. Economic integration could bring possibly high returns in terms of political stabilization.
Topic:
Security, Political Violence, Political stability, and Trade
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, and Palestine

10. 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