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.

 

 

 

ToC: Contemporary Jewry 35.3 (2015)

Contemporary Jewry

Volume 35, Issue 3, October 2015

ISSN: 0147-1694 (Print) 1876-5165 (Online)

New Article: Tenenboim-Weinblatt et al, Conflict Narratives in the Israeli News Media

Tenenboim-Weinblatt, Keren, Thomas Hanitzsch, and Rotem Nagar. “Beyond Peace Journalism. Reclassifying Conflict Narratives in the Israeli News Media.” Journal of Peace Research (early view; online first).

 

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022343315609091

 

Abstract

This article presents a general framework for deconstructing and classifying conflict news narratives. This framework, based on a nuanced and contextual approach to analyzing media representations of conflict actors and events, addresses some of the weaknesses of existing classification schemes, focusing in particular on the dualistic approach of the peace journalism model. Using quantitative content analysis, the proposed framework is then applied to the journalistic coverage in the Israeli media of three Middle-Eastern conflicts: the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, the conflict surrounding Iran’s nuclear program, and the Syrian civil war. The coverage is examined in three leading news outlets – Haaretz, Israel Hayom, and Ynet – over a six-month period. Based on hierarchical cluster analysis, the article identifies four characteristic types of narratives in the examined coverage. These include two journalistic narratives of violence: one inward-looking, ethnocentric narrative, and one outward-looking narrative focusing on outgroup actors and victims; and two political-diplomatic narratives: one interactional, and one outward-looking. In addition to highlighting different constellations of points of view and conflict measures in news stories, the identified clusters also challenge several assumptions underlying existing models, such as the postulated alignment between elite/official actors and violence frames.

 

 

 

New Article: Feniger & Kallus, Expertise in the Name of Diplomacy: The Israeli Plan for Rebuilding the Qazvin Region, Iran

Feniger, Neta, and Rachel Kallus. “Expertise in the Name of Diplomacy: The Israeli Plan for Rebuilding the Qazvin Region, Iran.” International Journal of Islamic Architecture 5.1 (2016): 103-34.

 

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1386/ijia.5.1.103_1

 

Extract

After the September 1962 earthquake in the Qazvin region of Iran, Israel sent planning experts to assist Iranian relief efforts. A small project, the reconstruction of one village, led to a larger project initiated by the United Nations, in which a team of experts from Israel were sent to survey and plan the region devastated by the quake. This resulted in a comprehensive regional plan, and detailed plans for several villages. Israeli assistance to Iran was also intended to reinforce bilateral relations between the countries. The disaster offered an opportunity for demonstrating Israeli expertise in a range of fields including architecture, and to consolidate Israel’s international image as an agent for development. This article examines transnational exchange via professional expertise, using the participation of Israeli architects in the rebuilding of Qazvin as a case study, in order to demonstrate that architects were agents of Israel’s diplomatic goals. The architects had professional objectives, namely the creation of a modern plan for the region and its villages. At the same time, these objectives were intertwined with the Shah of Iran’s national modernization plan, and with Israel’s desire to become Iran’s ally in this drive for change and modernization, in the hope of promoting a different, more modern, Middle East.

 

 

 

New Article: Morag, The Strategic Impact of an Iranian Nuclear Weapons Capability on Israel

Morag, Nadav. “The Strategic Impact of an Iranian Nuclear Weapons Capability on Israel.” In Nuclear Threats and Security Challenges, NATO Science for Peace and Security series (ed. Samuel Apikyan and David Diamond; Dordrecht: Springer, 2015): 135-46.

 

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JRME-09-2014-0023

 

Abstract

This paper will address the likely strategic impact of an Iranian nuclear weapons capability on Israeli security, both in terms of the country’s regional standing within the Middle East, and in terms of its homeland security issues. It should be emphasized that an Iranian capacity to produce and deploy nuclear weapons in a fairly short period of time will have largely the same strategic impact on Israel as an already existing Iranian nuclear weapons capability because Iran will be able to claim that, by developing this capacity, it will be able to counter Israeli “aggression” in the Middle East, thus enhancing its prestige in the region and beyond. Moreover, an Iranian capability to develop and deploy nuclear weapons may embolden Iran to risk further confrontation with Israel, the United States, and America’s Arab allies because a nuclear weapons capability is likely to be perceived in Teheran, particularly by regime hardliners, as an insurance policy against a catastrophic attack on Iran that could threaten the regime’s hold on power. Finally, even if Iran does not actually build nuclear weapons, once it has the capacity to build them in a short period of time, Israel will need to think about the implications of their use against Israeli cities and what this means for its homeland security.

 

 

Events: Jewish Review of Books, Conversations on Jewish Future (Oct 18, 2015)

Image

JRB-future

New Article: Beres, Defending Israel against Iranian Nuclear Aggression

Beres, Louis René. “Defending Israel against Iranian Nuclear Aggression: War, Genocide, and International Law.” Israel Journal of Foreign Affairs (early view; online first).

 

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23739770.2015.1049400

 

Excerpt

Under authoritative international law, aggressive war and genocide need not be mutually exclusive. On the contrary, war can intentionally create the conditions that would make genocide possible; it can also be the more direct or immediate instrument of closely related crimes against humanity. It follows then, as Iran comes ever closer to achieving a viable nuclear weapons capability, that Israel has an especially good reason to fear future conflicts with such an aggression-prone Islamic republic.

Ultimately, any war launched by Iran could become genocidal.

ToC: Tikkun 30.3 (2015)

Table of Contents for Tikkun 30.3 (2015):

 

Letters

Editorials

  • RABBI MICHAEL LERNER

Repenting for What Israel Did to Gaza—Without Condoning the Wrongs Committed by Hamas

Tikkun (2015) 30(3): 5-7

Politics & Society

SAM ROSS-BROWN

  • JESSICA BENJAMIN

Acknowledging the Other’s Suffering: A Psychoanalytic Approach to Trauma in Israel/Palestine

Tikkun (2015) 30(3): 15-16

  • PETER GABEL

The Spiritual Dimension of Social Justice: Transforming the Legal Arena

Tikkun (2015) 30(3): 17-23

 

VANDANA SHIVA

Special Section: Nonviolence in Foreign Policy

Strengthening Local Economies: The Path to Peace?

Tikkun (2015) 30(3): 34-38

Rethinking Religion

JOY LADIN

Culture

Books

RAMI SHAPIRO

PHILIP TERMAN

The Poetry of a Jewish Humanist

Tikkun (2015) 30(3): 56-58; doi:10.1215/08879982-3140236

Poetry

Chana Bloch

Tikkun Recommends

New Article: Beres, Israel’s Strategic Doctrine

Beres, Louis René. “Israel’s Strategic Doctrine: Updating Intelligence Community Responsibilities.” International Journal of Intelligence and CounterIntelligence 28.1 (2015): 89-104.

 
 

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08850607.2014.962359

 

Excerpt

So long as a fully-nuclear Islamic Republic of Iran is not regarded in Jerusalem as incapable of coexistence with a Jewish State, Israel’s optimal doctrinal emphases should now be placed on more suitable configurations of diplomacy, nuclear deterrence, and ballistic-missile defense. Reevaluating the longstanding Israeli policy of deliberate nuclear ambiguity will be very important, including also the precise ways in which the country’s nuclear capacities and inclinations are newly communicated to potential aggressors. In all associated responsibilities for “bomb in the basement” policy assessment and disclosure, the Israel Intelligence Community must play a prominent and promising role. By such “wise counsel,” Israel could do much better than prepare for any future war. It could best avoid such a war altogether, thus providing its people the most meaningful “victory” of all.

 
 
 

New Article: Feniger & Kallus, Israeli Planning in the Shah’s Iran

Feniger, Neta, and Rachel Kallus. “Israeli Planning in the Shah’s Iran: A Forgotten Episode.” Planning Perspectives 30.2 (2015): 231-51.

 

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02665433.2014.933677

 

Abstract

In the 1970s, while the rest of the world was undergoing recession, vast economic growth in Iran, leading to fast urbanization, generated a growing international building market in which Israeli construction firms and architects also participated, benefiting from the good bilateral relationships at the time. To examine the experience of Israeli architects working in Iran and how it influenced their professional practice, this paper focuses on two projects planned and built simultaneously by Israeli teams. The Navy project was comprised of three massive housing estates and public amenities for the Iranian Navy’s troops and families on the coast of the Persian Gulf. The Eskan Towers in Tehran was a complex of residential luxury towers and a commercial centre catering for the Iranian elite. Review of these cases indicates that national knowledge was not always the basis for transnational planning, and that the international arena itself became the source of knowledge and flow. In the Navy project, the architect derived his ideas from professional practices acquired back home, while in the Eskan Towers project the team was confronted with the free-market economy and a globalized practice.

 

New Article: Göksel, A Political Economy of Azerbaijan-Israel Relations

Göksel, Oğuzhan. “Beyond Countering Iran: A Political Economy of Azerbaijan-Israel Relations.” British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies 42.4 (2015): 655-75.

 

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13530194.2015.1048973

 

Abstract

In recent years, Azerbaijan–Israel relations have come to the foreground of politics in the Middle East and Caucasus region. Ties between Baku and Tel Aviv have been directly interlinked with their relations with Iran. The nature of the Azerbaijan–Israel partnership must be analysed in order to comprehend the balance of powers and energy security in the region. Even though there have been a number of works analysing the relationship by focusing on its role in regional military security, there is a gap in the discourse in terms of understanding the economic drivers of relations and the implications of the ties for regional energy security. Particular attention will be given to discussing Azerbaijan’s emerging role as a major energy producer that has already made a profound impact on the region as an ‘alternative’ to Iran in the aftermath of the recently imposed sanctions on Tehran’s energy exports. It will be argued that the Azerbaijan–Israel relationship is built on solid economic grounds and it would be reasonable to expect the strength of the ties to be further intensified in the future. The article will also demonstrate that new developments in the energy security of the wider Middle Eastern region will affect the evolution of Azerbaijan–Israel ties and their rivalry with Iran in the next decade.

New Book: Alpher, Periphery – Israel’s Search for Middle East Allies

Alpher, Yossi. Periphery. Israel’s Search for Middle East Allies. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.

 

1442231017

 

Since its establishment after World War II, the State of Israel has sought alliances with non-Arab and non-Muslim countries and minorities in the Middle East, as well as Arab states geographically distant from the Arab-Israel conflict. The text presents and explains this regional orientation and its continuing implications for war and peace. It examines Israel’s strategy of outflanking, both geographically and politically, the hostile Sunni Arab Middle East core that surrounded it in the early decades of its sovereign history, a strategy that became a pillar of the Israeli foreign and defense policy. This “periphery doctrine” was a grand strategy, meant to attain the major political-security goal of countering Arab hostility through relations with alternative regional powers and potential allies. It was quietly abandoned when the Sadat initiative and the emerging coexistence between Israel and Jordan reflected a readiness on the part of the Sunni Arab core to deal with Israel politically rather than militarily. For a brief interval following the 1991 Madrid conference and the 1993 Oslo accords, Israel seemed to be accepted by all its neighbors, prompting then Foreign Minister Shimon Peres to muse that it could even consider joining the Arab League. Yet this periphery strategy had been internalized to some extent in Israel’s strategic thinking and it began to reappear after 2010, following a new era of Arab revolution. The rise of political Islam in Egypt, Turkey, Gaza, southern Lebanon and possibly Syria, coupled with the Islamic regime in Iran, has generated concern in Israel that it is again being surrounded by a ring of hostile states—in this case, Islamists rather than Arab nationalists.

The book analyzes Israel’s strategic thinking about the Middle East region, evaluating its success or failure in maintaining both Israel’s security and the viability of Israeli-American strategic cooperation. It looks at the importance of the periphery strategy for Israeli, moderate Arab, and American, and European efforts to advance the Arab-Israel peace process, and its potential role as the Arab Spring brings about greater Islamization of the Arab Middle East. Already, Israeli strategic planners are talking of “spheres of containment” and “crescents” wherein countries like Cyprus, Greece, Azerbaijan, and Ethiopia constitute a kind of new periphery.

By looking at Israel’s search for Middle East allies then and now, the book explores a key component of Israel’s strategic behavior. Written in an accessible manner for all students, it provides a better understanding of Israel’s role in the Middle East region and its Middle East identity.

Table of Contents

For Whom it May Concern
Preface
Acknowledgements
Introduction

  1. The Periphery Doctrine at Work
  1. Evolution of a Grand Strategy
  2. The Northern Triangle: Iran and Turkey
  3. Morocco
  4. The Southern Periphery
  5. The Levant Minorities
  6. The Kurds of Northern Iraq
  7. The Jewish Dimension
  8. The American Dimension
  9. End of the First Periphery, 1973-1983

  1. Ramifications
  1. Iran: periphery nostalgia and its costs
  2. Israeli skeptics
  3. Between peripheries: peace, isolation and Islam
  4. Is there a new periphery?
  5. Arab reaction

  1. Conclusion
  1. Can Israel find a regional identity?

Heads of Mossad
Persons interviewed
Maps:

  1. The original periphery concept
  2. The expanded southern periphery
  3. The ethnic periphery
  4. A new periphery?

Index
About the Author

Yossi Alpher was an officer in Israeli military intelligence, followed by twelve years of service in the Mossad. Until 1995, he was director of the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies at Tel Aviv University. In July 2000, he served as Special Adviser to the Prime Minister of Israel during the Camp David talks. From 2001 to 2012 he was coeditor of the bitterlemons.net family of internet publications.

New Article: Zeitzoff et al, Social Media and the Iranian–Israeli Confrontation

Zeitzoff, Thomas, John Kelly, and Gilad Lotan. “Using Social Media to Measure Foreign Policy Dynamics. An Empirical Analysis of the Iranian–Israeli Confrontation (2012–13).” Journal of Peace Research 52.3 (2015): 368-83.

 

URL: http://jpr.sagepub.com/content/52/3/368.abstract

 

Abstract

Does social media reflect meaningful political competition over foreign policy? If so, what relationships can it reveal, and what are the limitations of its usage as data for scholars? These questions are of interest to both scholars and policymakers alike, as social media, and the data derived from it, play an increasingly important role in politics. The current study uses social media data to examine how foreign policy discussions about Israel–Iran are structured across different languages (English, Farsi, and Arabic) – a particularly contentious foreign policy issue. We use follower relationships on Twitter to build a map of the different networks of foreign policy discussions around Iran and Israel, along with data from the Iranian and Arabic blogosphere. Using social network analysis, we show that some foreign policy networks (English and Farsi Twitter networks) accurately reflect policy positions and salient cleavages (online behavior maps onto offline behavior). Others (Hebrew Twitter network) do not. We also show that there are significant differences in salience across languages (Farsi and Arabic). Our analysis accomplishes two things. First, we show how scholars can use social media data and network analysis to make meaningful inferences about foreign policy issues. Second, and perhaps more importantly, we also outline pitfalls and incorrect inferences that may result if scholars are not careful in their application.

New Article: Rezaei and Cohen, Iran’s Nuclear Program and the Israeli-Iranian Rivalry

Rezaei, Farhad and Ronen A. Cohen, “Iran’s Nuclear Program and the Israeli-Iranian Rivalry in the Post Revolutionary Era.” British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies 41.4 (2014): 442-60.

URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13530194.2014.942081

Abstract

The 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran led to a set of major shifts in the Middle East and an anti-Israeli stance became a central approach of the revolutionaries. Up to 1979, however, Tel Aviv had a close relationship with Tehran whose enmity with its Arab neighbours was anchored in a historical struggle for regional supremacy. Israel has remained an enemy of Islam and the Muslims for the revolutionary leaders and as Iran’s power grew Israel’s anxiety increased accordingly. A new division of power in the region and Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons led to a direct rivalry between Iran and Israel and consequently many Israelis have come to regard Iran and its nuclear program as an existential threat to Israel that has to be halted. This article explores the roots of enmity between these two countries, scrutinizes the threats of a nuclear armed Iran for Israel and attempts to determine what kind of measures might work to convince Iran to renounce its nuclear program. The article has four sections with the first section covering the history of the relations and the origins of hostility between Iran and Israel. The second section provides a brief overview of how the division of regional power led to direct rivalry between Tehran and Tel Aviv. The third section details Iran’s nuclear program and examines its threats to Israel and the last section covers the current sanctions debate over what type of measures might work to compel Iran to renounce its nuclear weapons.

 

ToC: Israel Journal of Foreign Affairs, 8.1

At Issue: Iran
Iran Thirty-Five Years After the Islamic Revolution: A Conversation
David Menashri
“Like Two Scorpions in a Bottle”: Could Israel and a Nuclear Iran Coexist in the Middle East?
Louis René Beres
“No Permanent Allies, No Permanent Enemies, Only Permanent Interests”: Israeli–Iranian Relations
Avi Primor
Middle East Currents
Breakdown and Possible Restart: Turkish–Israeli Relations under the AKP
Matthew S. Cohen and Charles D. Freilich
Egypt’s Quest for Normalcy
David Sultan
Internationalizing the Arab–Israeli Conflict
Yehuda Bauer
European Currents and Retrospectives
Israel and the EU: Beyond the Horizon
Frans Timmermans
Combating Antisemitism in Europe
Michael Whine
Two Vignettes on Israeli–European Economic Community Relations in the Late 1950s
Sharon Pardo
Linking the Vistula and the Jordan: The Genesis of Relations between Poland and the State of Israel
Szymon Rudnicki
Counterpoints
Absolving the Allies? Another Look at the Anglo–American Response to the Holocaust
Alexander J. Groth
Holocaust Rescue Revisited: An Unexplored Angle
Wojtek Rappak
Reviews
Israel Has Moved by Diana Pinto
Reviewed by Colette Avital
Israel in Africa 1956–1976 by Zach Levey
Reviewed by Joel Peters
The Wisdom of Syria’s Waiting Game: Foreign Policy Under the Assads by Bente Scheller
Reviewed by Dimitar Mihaylov
Shiism and Politics in the Middle East by Laurence Louër
Reviewed by Harold Rhode
Beyond War: Reimagining American Influence in a New Middle East by David Rohde
Reviewed by Juliana Geran Pilon
The Nixon Administration and the Middle East Peace Process, 1969–1973: From the Rogers Plan to the Outbreak of the Yom Kippur War by Boaz Vanetik and Zaki Shalom
1973: The Road to War by Yigal Kipnis
Reviewed by David Rodman
Race and US Foreign Policy: The African-American Foreign Affairs Network by Mark Ledwidge
Reviewed by Fred A. Lazin
Useful Enemies: John Demjanjuk and America’s Open-Door Policy for Nazi War Criminals by Richard Rashke
Reviewed by Efraim Zuroff
The Influence of Airpower upon History: Statesmanship, Diplomacy, and Foreign Policy since 1903 edited by Robin Higham and Mark Parillo
Reviewed by Danny Shalom
Governments-in-Exile and the Jews during the Second World War edited by Jan Lánič ek and James Jordan
Reviewed by Alexander J. Groth
Forgotten Ally: China’s World War II, 1937–1945 by Rana Mitter
Reviewed by Yitzhak Shichor
Letters
Bertram Marc Katz, Rafael Medoff, Konrad Baumeister

New Article: Guzansky, Israel’s Periphery Doctrine 2.0

Guzansky, Yoel. “Israel’s Periphery Doctrine 2.0: The Mediterranean Plus.” Mediterranean Politics 19.1 (2014): 99-116.

URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13629395.2013.870365

DOI: 10.1080/13629395.2013.870365

Abstract

This article discusses the bilateral ties that have been forming between Israel and its periphery – that is, Greece, Cyprus, Azerbaijan and South Sudan – and draws a comparison to Israel’s previous relations with Iran, Turkey and Ethiopia. It considers the contribution of those partnerships at the security-intelligence and economic level and suggests its potential impact in the political arena. This research concludes that, despite the dividends that can be gained from security, economic and energy cooperation, its value compared to that of its predecessor is lower based on their instability, domestic issues and lower levels of regional or international influence.

Cite: Eiran and Malin, Israel’s Perception of a Nuclear-Armed Iran

Eiran, Ehud and Martin B. Malin. “The Sum of all Fears: Israel’s Perception of a Nuclear-Armed Iran.” Washington Quarterly 36.3 (2013): 77-89.

 

URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0163660X.2013.825551

 

Extract

Four do’s and four don’t’s for policymakers in the United States and beyond flow from this analysis:
First, don’t bet on Israel’s next move. The fears expressed in Israel’s domestic debate are real and rooted, but so are divisions over how to respond. It is anyone’s guess who will prevail in the struggle over how to respond to Iran.
Second, don’t believe everything you hear. Politicians make statements for many reasons. Not every comparison of Iran and Nazi Germany needs to be heeded. Although Israeli fears may be genuine, the Holocaust analogies are deeply flawed and not a sound guide to policy. Although Prime Minister Netanyahu does draw on Jewish history as a compass, he has also used the framing of threats (terrorism, Iran) as a tool to garner political support.
Third, don’t walk away. If Israel feels a growing sense of abandonment, it could cause an escalation of fears and precisely the kinds of responses that could be most destructive for Israel, U.S. policy, and the region.

Israel’s elected officials may favor an attack, but its military leadership shuns one.
Finally, don’t feed fear. Talk is not cheap. U.S. officials, particularly members of Congress, should stop echoing the worst Israeli hyperbole about Iranian capabilities and intentions. At the same time, it would help if Iranian officials stopped making ridiculous statements denying the Holocaust and declaring their desire to see the Zionist entity wiped from the pages of history. Israeli leaders should avoid boxing themselves into making unnecessary choices by giving voice to their deepest fears.
If policymakers avoid these pitfalls, what positive steps should they take to help rein in fears in Israel and across the region? First, the United States should quietly help Israel and its neighbors realize their common interests vis-à-vis Iran and build upon them—not so much to deepen Iran’s isolation but to enable coordinated action in resolving the stalemate with Iran. The United States could facilitate, for example, a quiet exchange between security officials from Israel and other regional players to clarify their respective approaches to the emerging security environment and to discuss the kinds of transparency and oversight measures that might ultimately provide reassurance about Iran’s nuclear intentions.
Second, the United States should continue to coordinate its policies toward Iran with Israel. Despite the reported tensions between President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu during the former’s first term in office, relations between the professional policymaking establishments of the two countries have never been closer; this coordination will continue to reassure Israel and to encourage Jerusalem to act with restraint.

Don’t bet on Israel’s next move; it is anyone’s guess.
Third, the United States should support cooperative frameworks which would allow the states of the Middle East to begin to discuss, face to face, principles of regional security. The proposal to convene a conference on a WMD-free zone in the Middle East may be a vehicle for initiating such discussions. The architecture for regional coordination and management of security in the Middle East does not exist today, and is difficult to imagine, but it will remain elusive unless the United States pushes like-minded states into discussions of the shared challenges they face. These discussions will eventually need to address the challenge of banning all weapons of mass destruction in the region.
Finally, and most urgently, the best way to address Israeli fears of Iran is for Washington to break the logjam in its bilateral relations with Tehran, enable Iran to clarify its past nuclear activities, accept negotiated limits on its nuclear activities, and move beyond the years of confrontation which have both undermined regional security and defined Israeli–Iranian relations.

 

Cite: Kumaraswamy, Israel: The Non-Parallel Player

Kumaraswamy, P. R. “Israel: The Non-Parallel Player.” Strategic Analysis 36.6 (2012): 976-986.

URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09700161.2012.728866

Abstract

Political tensions and rivalry between Iran and Israel have cast a shadow over India’s bilateral relations with both these countries. While one offers energy security, the other provides military–security capability towards ensuring greater Indian influence in the Middle East. Conscious of their relative advantages and challenges, India has managed to maintain a fine balance in its relations with Iran and Israel. Despite the suspected involvement of Iranian citizens in the 13 February 2012 terror attack on the Israeli embassy vehicle in New Delhi, Israel could continue to be a marginal player in Indo-Iranian relations. The same, however, will not be true for the US, which seeks to limit and if possible change the substance and direction of Indo-Iranian relations.

Cite: Kuntsman and Raji. “Love, Hate, and Transnational Politics from the ‘Israel Loves Iran’ and ‘Iran Loves Israel’ Facebook Campaigns

Kuntsman, Adi and Sanaz Raji. “‘Israelis and Iranians, Get A Room!’: Love, Hate, and Transnational Politics from the ‘Israel Loves Iran’ and ‘Iran Loves Israel’ Facebook Campaigns.” Journal of Middle East Women’s Studies 8.3 (2012): 143-154.

 

URL: http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/journal_of_middle_east_womens_studies/v008/8.3.kuntsman.html

 

Abstract

So is there a room for Israelis and Iranians to inhabit, in cyberspace and beyond? Can they get a (“fucking”) room, and what would happen, if they do? The message of love sent by both sides seems to be strikingly powerful, when politicians—as well as ordinary citizens—speak the language of war. Yet, as our brief description of the Israel Loves Iran and Iran Loves Israel campaign suggests, “get a room” signals proximity that is not possible if political violence—inside each of the countries and elsewhere in the region—is not addressed.