Bulletin: Israel and International Relations

Articles

 

Reviews

Report

Thesis

Advertisements

New Book: Starr and Dubinsky, The Israeli Conflict System

Starr, Harvey, and Stanley Dubinsky, eds. The Israeli Conflict System. Analytic Approaches, Routledge Studies in Middle Eastern Politics. Abingdon and New York: Routledge, 2016.

41wrGX-ZgvL__SX330_BO1,204,203,200_

Table of Contents

Introduction : crossing disciplinary and methodological boundaries in conflict systems analysis / Harvey Starr and Stanley Dubinsky — Event Type, sub-state Actor and Temporal Dimensions of the Dissent-Repression Relationship : Evidence from the Middle East / Philip A. Schrodt and Ömür Yilmaz — Turbulence in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict System : Predicting Change / G. Dale Thomas — Causes and Consequences of Unbalanced Relations in the International Politics of the Middle East, 1946-2010 / Zeev Maoz and Belgin San-Akca — Trade Networks and Conflict Processes in the Israeli Conflict System / Nadia Jilani, Ashley Murph-Schwarzer, Dona Roy, Matthew Shaffer, and Brian Warby — Trade in Conflict Zones : The Israeli Conflict System / Katherine Barbieri and Adrian R. Lewis — The Geography of Conflict : Using GIS to Analyze Israel’s External and Internal Conflict Systems / Harvey Starr, Roger Liu and G. Dale Thomas — Language, Conflict, and Conflicting Languages in Israel/Palestine / Stanley Dubinsky and William D. Davies — The Role of Holocaust Memory in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict / Andreas Musolff — An Experimental Procedure Comparing How Students in Middle Eastern and Western Democracies Cope with International Conflicts / Ranan D. Kuperman — Subjectivity in the Application of the Just War Doctrine to Collateral Damage : An Experimental Test in Israel and the US / Nehemia Geva and Belinda Bragg — Predicting Revolution and Regime Instability in the Middle East : The Uncertain Future of Arab-Israeli Relations / Bruce Bueno de Mesquita and Alastair Smith.

New Article: Harpaz and Heimann, Sixty Years of EU-Israeli Trade Relations

Harpaz, Guy, and Gadi Heimann. “Sixty Years of EU-Israeli Trade Relations: The Expectations-Delivery Gap.” Journal of World Trade 50.3 (2016): 447-74.

 

URL: http://www.kluwerlawonline.com/abstract.php?area=Journals&id=TRAD2016020

 

Abstract

This article identifies a common thread throughout the sixty years of European-Israeli relations, namely a gap that has prevailed between the lofty rhetoric of the EU regarding envisaged special trade relations and its much more modest willingness/ability to establish such relations. At various junctures of these relations (three of which are analysed in this article), turgid European promises were not fully realized. Consequently, a wide gap has been created between rhetoric and concrete actions and between the de jure and de facto economic and trade value of the legal regimes governing EU-Israel bilateral relations. The article reveals that gap and offers a typology and analysis of various factors which contributed to the creation and widening of the Expectations-Delivery Gap.

New Article: Heimann, The Negotiations for a Trade Agreement with Israel

Heimann, Gadi. “The EEC Commission and the Negotiations for a Trade Agreement with Israel, 1958–1964.” Journal of European Integration (early view, online first).
 
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07036337.2016.1193175
 
Abstract

This article examines the role played by the European Commission in negotiations between the European Economic Community and Israel concerning a trade agreement. It demonstrates that the Commission’s attitude to such an agreement was far more positive than that of the six member states. The Commission’s leadership pushed the Israelis into pursuing an association agreement, and when this was revealed to be impossible, it took a leading role in concluding a more limited trade agreement. The Commission’s proposal formed the basis for the final agreement, which took shape in 1964. The article attempts to discern the motives behind the Commission’s behaviour; its central claim is that the Commission’s leadership viewed negotiations with Israel and the conclusion of an agreement as a means to achieve their ideological and institutional goals.

 

 

 

New Article: Almog, Israel, Romania and the Egyptian–Israeli Peace Accord

Almog, Orna. “Unlikely Relations: Israel, Romania and the Egyptian–Israeli Peace Accord.” Middle Eastern Studies (early view; online first).

 

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00263206.2016.1186015

 

Abstract

The history of Israel’s turbulent relations with the Eastern bloc nations during the Cold War has one exception, Romania. Unlike other Warsaw Pact members, Romania did not sever relations with Israel following the 1967 war. Central to these relations was Romanian Communist leader Nicolai Ceausescu, who managed to establish himself as an important figure among both Arabs and Israelis. This article will examine Romanian–Israeli relations during the 1970s and especially Ceausescu’s role in the Egyptian–Israeli peace negotiations. Recent Israeli and some Romanian documents released from the Israeli State Archive and the Begin Centre reveal much about Israel’s attitude towards Romania and Ceausescu’s involvement in the Middle East, and serve to shed light on a heretofore neglected aspect of Israeli foreign policy. Some of the main issues to be addressed are Ceausescu’s influence on Egyptian and Israeli decision makers, Israel’s prime motives in maintaining a close relationship with Romania, the importance of Romanian Jewry’s position to Israel’s policy vis-à-vis Romania and the extent to which these relations represented a back channel that facilitated some contact with the Kremlin. All these will be examined against the larger backdrop of the Cold War and the Arab–Israeli conflict.

New Article: Ginor & Remez,Veterans’ Memoirs as a Source for the USSR’s Intervention in the Arab-Israeli Conflict

Ginor, Isabella, and Gideon Remez. “Veterans’ Memoirs as a Source for the USSR’s Intervention in the Arab-Israeli Conflict: The Fluctuations in Their Appearance and Character With Political Change in Post-Soviet Russia.” Journal of Slavic Military Studies 29.2 (2016): 279-97.

 

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13518046.2016.1168136

 

Abstract

Shortly before and after the USSR’s demise, a new literature emerged: memoirs by veterans of the Soviet Union’s massive military intervention in the Arab-Israeli conflict in the 1960s and ’70s. Resurgent Russian pride, coupled with condemnation of its corruption by Soviet crimes, permitted startling disclosures. Tools we developed to evaluate these sources found them remarkably reliable and necessitated a reassessment of existing historiography. The Putin administration marked a reversal. Russian nationalism now stressed continuity with the USSR’s great-power status. ‘Falsification of history against Russian interests’ was criminalized. Some veterans resorted to purported ‘fiction’, which if challenged could be disclaimed. But under even stricter scrutiny, these narratives generally proved to reflect the authors’ actual experience, providing significant pointers for further research.

 

 

 

ToC: Washington Report on Middle East Affairs (May 2016): Israel’s Influence: Good or Bad for America?

Washington Report on Middle East Affairs
May 2016
Israel’s Influence: Good or Bad for America?

wrmea052016

ON THE COVER: Haaretz columnist and keynote speaker Gideon Levy addresses the conference, “Israel’s Influence: Good or Bad for America?”

5 Introduction

6 Welcoming Remarks Dale Sprusansky

7 PANEL 1: Israel’s Influence on Congress and Government Agencies — Moderator Grant F. Smith

7 Ten Ways the Israel Lobby “Moves” America — Grant F. Smith

11 Did Israel Steal U.S. Weapons-Grade Uranium and Did It Have Help From U.S. Citizens? — Dr. Roger Mattson

15 How Congress Shapes Middle East Policy, and How the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) Shapes Congress — Prof. Kirk J. Beattie

20 Questions & Answers

22 KEYNOTE ADDRESS: What I Would Tell a Visiting Congressional Delegation — Gideon Levy

27 Questions & Answers

30 PANEL 2: Israel’s Influence on U.S. Foreign Policy — Moderator Dale Sprusansky

30 A Diplomatic and Military Perspective — Col. Lawrence Wilkerson

35 American Neoconservatives: A History and Overview — Jim Lobe

39 Israel and Foreign Policy Issues in the Presidential Campaign — Justin Raimondo

42 Questions & Answers

44 PANEL 3: Responding to Israel’s Influence on Campus and in Court — Moderator Janet McMahon

44 The Birth of Palestine Solidarity Activism at George Mason University — Tareq Radi

49 Concerted Attempts to Silence Criticism of Israel in the U.S. — Maria LaHood

53 Why We’re Suing the U.S. Treasury Department — Susan Abulhawa

57 Holding Israel Accountable for the Gaza Flotilla Raid — Huwaida Arraf

62 KEYNOTE ADDRESS: Voices Prohibited by Mainstream Media and Its Role Spreading Islamophobia — Rula Jebreal

66 PANEL 4: Israel’s Influence on Mainstream Media — Moderator Delinda Hanley

66 Mainstream Media Coverage of Israel and Palestine — Philip Weiss

70 “Valentino’s Ghost: Why We Hate Arabs” — Catherine Jordan

72 Questions & Answers

74 CLOSING REMARKS

75 CONCLUSION

78 ELECTION WATCH: Party Loyalty, Party Schmoyalty — Israel Comes First — Janet McMahon

79 Pro-Israel PAC Contributions to 2016 Congressional Candidates — Compiled by Hugh Galford

New Book: Herf, Undeclared Wars with Israel

Herf, Jeffrey. Undeclared Wars with Israel. East Germany and the West German Far Left, 1967–1989. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016.

 
undeclared-wars

 

Undeclared Wars with Israel examines a spectrum of antagonism by the East German government and West German radical leftist organizations – ranging from hostile propaganda and diplomacy to military support for Israel’s Arab armed adversaries – from 1967 to the end of the Cold War in 1989. This period encompasses the Six-Day War (1967), the Yom Kippur War (1973), Israel’s invasion of Lebanon in 1982, and an ongoing campaign of terrorism waged by the Palestine Liberation Organization against Israeli civilians. This book provides new insights into the West German radicals who collaborated in ‘actions’ with Palestinian terrorist groups, and confirms that East Germany, along with others in the Soviet Bloc, had a much greater impact on the conflict in the Middle East than has been generally known. A historian who has written extensively on Nazi Germany and the Holocaust, Jeffrey Herf now offers a new chapter in this long, sad history.

 

Table of Contents

1. Introduction
2. East Germany and the Six-Day War of June 1967
3. An anti-Israel left emerges in West Germany: the conjuncture of June 1967
4. Diplomatic breakthrough to military alliance: East Germany, the Arab states, and the PLO 1969–73
5. Palestinian terrorism in 1972: Lod airport, the Munich Olympics, and responses
6. Formalizing the East German alliance with the PLO and the Arab states: 1973
7. Political warfare at the United Nations during the Yom Kippur War of 1973
8. 1974: Palestinian terrorist attacks on Kiryat Shmona and Maalot and responses in East Germany, West Germany, Israel, the United States, and the United Nations
9. The UN ‘Zionism is racism’ revolution of November 10, 1975
10. The Entebbe hijacking and ‘selection’ and the West German ‘revolutionary cells’
11. An alliance deepens: East Germany, the Arab states, and the PLO: 1978–82
12. Terrorism from Lebanon to Israel’s ‘operation peace for Galilee’: 1977–82
13. Loyal friends in defeat: 1983–9 and after
14. Conclusion.

 

JEFFREY HERFis a Distinguished University Professor in the Department of History at the University of Maryland, College Park. His publications on modern German history include Reactionary Modernism: Technology, Culture and Politics in Weimar and the Third Reich (Cambridge, 1984); Divided Memory: The Nazi Past in the Two Germanys (1997), winner of the American Historical Association’s George Lewis Beer Prize; The Jewish Enemy: Nazi Propaganda during World War II and the Holocaust (2006), winner of the National Jewish Book Award; Nazi Propaganda for the Arab World (2009), winner of the bi-annual Sybil Halpern Milton Prize of the German Studies Association in 2011 for work on Nazi Germany and the Holocaust. He has also published essays and reviews on history and politics in Partisan Review, The New Republic, The Times of Israel, and The American Interest.

 

 

 

New Article: Burton, Beijing’s Shift in Relation to the Arab-Israeli Conflict

Burton, Guy. “Explaining Beijing’s Shift from Active to Passive Engagement in Relation to the Arab-Israeli Conflict.” Sociology of Islam 4.2 (2016): 93-112.

 

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/22131418-00402001

 

Extract

As a ‘rising power’, China is expected to play a greater global role. But current Chinese involvement in the long-running and internationalised Arab-Israeli conflict is limited. How to explain this? What does it suggest about China’s regional and global role? Studying Beijing’s involvement since the 1950s, I note Chinese military assistance to the Palestinians during the 1960s-70s and strong criticism of Israel. But from the 1980s Beijing adopted a more diplomatic approach and endorsed the two-state solution. The change was due to China’s broader regional and international relations. During the Cold War Beijing’s ‘active’ pro-Palestinian stance was associated with being ‘outside’ the superpower-dominated international system. By the end of the Cold War Beijing was ‘inside’ the international system and increasingly integrated into the global economy. Commercial considerations trumped political ones, emphasising diplomacy. This suggests China’s exercise of global power may be more nuanced and less overt than otherwise assumed.

 

 

 

New Article: Donaghy, Canada, the Middle East, and the Suez Crisis, 1950–1956

Donaghy, Greg. “The Politics of Accommodation: Canada, the Middle East, and the Suez Crisis, 1950–1956.” International Journal (early view; online first).

 

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0020702016643261

 

Abstract

This paper re-examines Canada’s response to the Suez Crisis within the context of its overall approach to the Middle East in the early 1950s. It reminds contemporary readers that most Canadian policymakers, including Prime Minister Louis St. Laurent and his Secretary of State for External Affairs, Lester B. Pearson, viewed the distant and unfamiliar region with reserve, as one better left to the Great Powers to sort out. That view only changed in 1956, when the Suez Crisis, Anglo-American discord, and the possibility of nuclear war threatened Canadian strategic interests, transforming Canada into a small regional stakeholder.

 

 

 

New Article: Xu & Rees, Comparing the Anglo-American and Israeli-American Special Relationships in the Obama Era

Xu, Ruike, and Wyn Rees. “Comparing the Anglo-American and Israeli-American Special Relationships in the Obama Era: An Alliance Persistence Perspective.” Journal of Strategic Studies 39.4.

 

URL: http://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/33077/

 

Abstract

The Anglo-American and Israeli-American security relationships have proved to be unusually close and have confounded expectations that they would wither away with the changing international environment. In order to explain this, the article proposes a theory of ‘alliance persistence’ that is based on reciprocity over shared geostrategic interests, sentimental attachments and institutionalized security relations. The article employs this theoretical framework to explore how Anglo-American and Israeli-American relations have developed during the Obama administration. It argues that the Anglo-American relationship has been closer because of the two countries’ shared strategic interests, whilst the Israeli-American relationship has experienced divergences in how the security interests of the two sides have been pursued. The article concludes by assessing how the two relationships will fair in the post-Obama era and argues that there are numerous areas of tension in the US-Israeli relationship that risk future tensions.

 

 

 

New Book: Goldstein and Shichor, China and Israel from Discord to Concord (Hebrew)

יונתן גולדשטיין ויצחק שיחור, עורכים. סין וישראל – מאיבה לקרבה. ירושלים: מאגנס, 2016.

 

china

 

In January 1950, Israel was the first country in the Middle East and the seventh in the non-communist world who recognized the PRC. Israel did not promote the establishment of diplomatic relations, mainly because of pressure from the US and fears of Chinese communism, while China avoided their promotion because it favored relations with the Arab and Muslim world. Only 42 years later, in January 1992, the two countries established diplomatic relations. Despite the geographic, cultural, and political distance between Israel and China, today the ties between the two countries are flourishing, especially but not exclusively in the financial arena. This volume includes articles dealing with the connection between the two countries before the establishment of diplomatic relations and afterwards. Among other things, it discusses the historical and Jewish background, diplomatic aspects, Asian and the Middle Eastern contexts, the role of the Communist Party, the process of establishing relations, international, military, and economic dimensions of these relations, as well as the development of relations between Israel, Hong Kong and Taiwan. The authors reflect a combination of the academic world of research and the practical world of diplomacy.

The book deals with the relations between Israel and China and their dramatic change from enmity and lack of contact to friendship and closeness. The articles are based on documents and primary sources as well as personal experiences. In addition to the references in every article, the book includes a reading list of publications which do not appear in it. The book, which is a new version of a previous edition published in English in the late nineties, includes new sources and additional and updated articles that refer to relations between the two countries to this day. It is intended for students and a general readership, both professional and unprofessional.

 

New Article: Cuéllar & Silverburg, South America and the Recognition of Palestine

Cuéllar, Angélica Alba, and Sanford R. Silverburg. “Diplomatic Dominos: South America and the Recognition of (the State of) Palestine.” Review of Social Sciences 1.3 (2016): 11-24.

 

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.18533/rss.v1i3.18
Abstract

All but one of the states in South American have extended some type of diplomatic recognition to Palestine. There is a discussion of the meaning of diplomatic recognition in the current state system with its importance. The central theme of this paper is an examination of the process and an explanation for South American states’ provision of diplomatic recognition to Palestine while one other in the same cultural-geographical region has not.

 

 

 

New Article: Pardo, Israeli Views of NATO

Pardo, Sharon. “An American Military Organization or a European Political Alliance? Israeli Views of NATO.” Israel Journal of Foreign Affairs (early view; online first).

 

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23739770.2016.1158445

 

Extract

In a January 2016 national survey of Israeli attitudes toward Europe and the European Union (EU), 45 percent of those surveyed supported the idea of Israel joining NATO as a full member, simply because NATO countries would help Israel defend itself. Yet, despite this wide public support, NATO has never obtained a central place in Israeli foreign policy, security, political, and social discourse. one of the reasons for this lack of centrality has to do with Israeli perceptions of the Alliance, the three most salient of which are explored in this article. By providing empirical findings concerning the attitudes of Israel public opinion, and that of the political and military elites, this article offers insights into the overall assessment on the part of key Israeli stakeholders of NATO’s global and regional actorness.

 

 

 

New Book: Wittstock, 50 Years of German-Israeli Diplomatic Relations

Wittstock, Alfred, ed. Rapprochement, Change, Perception and Shaping the Future. 50 Years of German-Israeli and Israeli-German Diplomatic Relations. Berlin: Frank & Timme, 2016.

6de6462cb7

 

The relations between the two states and societies have been rather complex during both the previous half-century and beyond. Embedded in changing political landscapes, the ramifications reach back to the early 19th century. Yet the uniqueness of the relationship network only shows in light of the wholesale murder of Jews in Europe, the creation of the State of Israel, the discussions surrounding the initiation of diplomatic relations and their arrangement until the present day. The development and intensity of the relations with regard to civil society and politics are quite astonishing when considering the beginnings. Approaches, changes and the in part greatly-varying perceptions of the other side can be observed over the course of 50 years of history, and these give rise to questions concerning the current state of the relationship and its future design.

 

Click here for Table of Contents (PDF).

ALFRED WITTSTOCK is the Director of the Israel Study Unit at the Department of Political Science at Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz. Co-founder of the German Study Program “Study in Israel – One year at the Hebrew University Jerusalem”. Teaching activities at several secondary schools and Universities. Research interests: state and society of Israel, role of religions in the Middle East conflict, German-Israeli Relations.

 

 

 

New Book: Setton, Spanish–Israeli Relations

Setton, Guy. Spanish–Israeli Relations, 1956–1992. Ghosts of the Past and Contemporary Challenges in the Middle East. Sussex: Sussex Academic Press, 2016.

Spanish-Israeli Relations

Despite a common heritage dating back centuries and mutual national interests, such as their joint fear of Soviet influence across the Mediterranean, it took 38 years after the establishment of the State of Israel (1948) and a decade after Franco’s death (1975) for relations to be established between Jerusalem and Madrid (1986). The absence of ties between both countries prior to 1986 was an anomaly that requires explanation. There was no apparent reason why both countries should not have established full diplomatic ties prior. Indeed, during the first years of Israeli statehood until 1952, Spain sought unsuccessfully to establish official ties with Israel as a means to overcome international isolation. But adhering to a moral foreign policy standard, Israel refused formal ties with the former Axis supporter. By 1953, however, Israel began adopting a more pragmatic view.

 

Despite a common heritage dating back centuries and mutual national interests, such as their joint fear of Soviet influence across the Mediterranean, it took 38 years after the establishment of the State of Israel (1948) and a decade after Franco’s death (1975) for relations to be established between Jerusalem and Madrid (1986). The absence of ties between both countries prior to 1986 was an anomaly that requires explanation. There was no apparent reason why both countries should not have established full diplomatic ties prior. Indeed, during the first years of Israeli statehood until 1952, Spain sought unsuccessfully to establish official ties with Israel as a means to overcome international isolation. But adhering to a moral foreign policy standard, Israel refused formal ties with the former Axis supporter. By 1953, however, Israel began adopting a more pragmatic view.

Five centuries after the expulsion of the Jews from Spain bilateral ties were formalized after Spain’s successful transition from Franco’s dictatorship to democracy and Madrid’s ascension to the EEC in 1986. Once in the Community, Madrid had to align its foreign policy with Brussels which necessitated diplomatic relations with Israel. Without this systematic pressure on Madrid, the anomaly of Israeli–Spanish relations would have likely continued. Post 1986 the ties between the two countries were overshadowed by strong international political forces – the Arab–Israeli conflict and the Israeli–Palestinian struggle – which delayed bilateral progress. Explaining the impact of these forces is key to understanding the relationship. Although many positive milestones have been reached there are substantive issues of concern for both sides, and a feeling that much work remains if the relationship, and indeed friendship, is to become worthy and rewarding.

 

GUY SETTON has a PhD in History from Tel Aviv University after majoring in International Relations at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. He obtained a Master’s degree in International History at the London School of Economics.

 

 

 

New Article: Tziarras, Israel-Cyprus-Greece: a ‘Comfortable’ Quasi-Alliance

Tziarras, Zenonas. “Israel-Cyprus-Greece: a ‘Comfortable’ Quasi-Alliance.” Mediterranean Politics (early view; online first).

ְְ 

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13629395.2015.1131450

 

Abstract

By adopting a neorealist approach to alliance formation this paper examines the trilateral partnership of Israel, Cyprus and Greece. It argues that since its inception in 2011 it has developed into a (‘comfortable’) quasi-alliance – a less formal and more flexible form of alliance than the traditional ones – driven by profit and threat-related individual and collective motivations. The primary motivations behind the formation of the quasi-alliance have been the common perceptions of Turkey as a security threat and energy-related interests. Moreover, it is suggested that the ‘comfortable’ and quasi nature of the alliance could allow the three states to manoeuvre politically so as not to exclude future and parallel relations with Turkey. This means that the transformation of the quasi-alliance into a more formal alliance is a rather unlikely scenario and that it could fade out should Turkish‒Israeli relations improve.

 

 

 

Dissertation: Condron, The Nixon Administration between Cairo and Jerusalem

Condron, Aidan. The Nixon Administration between Cairo and Jerusalem, 1969-1974: Concepts, Strategies, and Implementation, PhD thesis. Aberystwyth, Wales: Aberystwyth University, 2015.
 
URL: http://hdl.handle.net/2160/30577
 
Abstract

This thesis traces the origins of the Egypt-Israel peace process begun in the immediate aftermath of the October 1973 Arab-Israeli War. This American-brokered process led to the restoration of Egyptian land seized by Israeli in 1967 in exchange for a bilateral peace treaty, the first between Israel and an Arab state. Formal US-Egypt diplomatic relations were restored in 1974. By the time of the Egypt-Israel peace treaty in 1979, Egyptian defection from Soviet to American was complete, and Egypt had become estranged from the remainder of the Arab world, which refused to recognise, negotiate, or make peace with Israel. Recontextualising wartime and post-war strategic realignments with reference to developments during the first four and three-quarter years of the Nixon administration, from January 1969 – September 1973, this thesis sets presents a thoroughgoing revisionist account of the origins of this process. Tracing concepts and strategies implemented during and after the war in the antebellum period, the work demonstrates that the concepts implemented during the peace process were developed in negotiations involving Egypt, Israel, the Soviet Union, and the United States from early 1969, and forged into a coherent strategy by Egyptian President Anwar Sadat during the period from October 1970 – September 1973. Reversing the usual interpretation that Sadat conformed to an American grand design in the aftermath over the October War, this thesis demonstrates instead that the United States collaborated and colluded in implementing an Egyptian strategy for a new regional order, premised on peace between Egypt and Israel and partnerships both between Washington and Jerusalem and between Washington and Cairo.

 

 

 

New Article: Reda, The Palestinian-Israeli Conflict in Khomeini’s Discourse

Reda, Latife. “Origins of the Islamic Republic’s Strategic Approaches to Power and Regional Politics: The Palestinian-Israeli Conflict in Khomeini’s Discourse.” Middle East Critique (early view; online first).
 
URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1080/19436149.2016.1141587
 
Abstract

The article discusses Ruhollah Khomeini’s strategic endorsement of the Palestinian cause and his challenging stance vis-à-vis Israel as revealed by his discourse. It argues that Khomeini constructed an alternative definition of power based on opposition to the United States and, by extension, to Israel as exemplified by his statements on the Palestinian-Israel conflict in order to legitimize Iran’s Islamic leadership in a matter that historically had been infused with Arab nationalism and widely supported by Arab leaders. The article analyzes Khomeini’s discursive stance against Israel and his support for Palestinian liberation, which he portrayed as a position of moral superiority and an ‘Islamic duty.’ It shows also how adopting a stance of both confrontation with Israel and radical support of the Palestinian cause was used as a powerful propaganda tool before the 1979 Iranian revolution, and later was transformed into a central component of the Islamic Republic’s regional agenda. The article deals with Khomeini’s views on Israel and Palestine as one defining element of the Islamic Republic’s post-revolutionary foreign policy.

 

 

 

New Article: Riccardelli, U.S. Grand Strategy: Should America Come Home?

Riccardelli, Joseph. “U.S. Grand Strategy: Should America Come Home?” Political Analysis 16, article 7 (2015): 92-118.

 
URL: http://scholarship.shu.edu/pa/vol16/iss1/7/
 
Abstract

The United States needs to re-evaluate its relationship with Israel. Presently, Israel does what it wants and the U.S. constantly stands by to defend it. While Israel is the most important relationship in the Middle East for the United States, it needs to give back to the United States what it receives. Israel is a major reason why the United States is hated by those in Middle Eastern states; they see Israel as a relic of Western Imperialism since Middle Easterners had very little say in its formation.

Regardless of Israeli’s aggressive nature, the United States should also focus on Egypt and Saudi Arabia, two of the largest and most influential states in the region next to Israel. Egypt’s future, because of recent events, is still uncertain. Many posit that regardless of the outcome of nation’s changes, there will be less U.S. influence, and more contention with Israelas Egypt heads towards Islamist populism. This means that the United States must try to show its ability to cooperate with the new regime regardless of their ideological differences.