Bulletin: Peacemaking, Peace Building and the Israeli-Palestinian Peace Process

Books

Articles

Reviews

Theses

Advertisements

Bulletin: Journal ToCs, Israel Studies, Israel Affairs, Constellations

Journal ToCs:

Israel Studies, 21.3 (2016): https://muse.jhu.edu/issue/34103

 

Israel Affairs 22.3-4 (2016): http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/fisa20/22/3-4

Constellations 23.3 (2016): Special Section: Israel and Palestine: Thinking the “One State Solution” onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8675.2016.23.issue-3/issuetoc

 

New Article: Asseburg & Busse, The End of a Two-State Settlement?

Asseburg, Muriel, and Jan Busse. “The End of a Two-State Settlement? Alternatives and Priorities for Settling the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict.” SWP Comments 24 (2016).

 

URL: http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-46893-9

 

Abstract

On the occasion of their joint government consultations in February 2016, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Chancellor Angela Merkel stressed that this was not the time for making major progress in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, given the instability in the Middle East. However, merely adhering to a two-state settlement as a mantra without taking any concrete steps to implement it effectively reinforces the one-state reality under Israeli dominance. Ultimately, this will make settling the conflict impossible. Popular support for a two-state solution is waning on both sides. While at present alternative one-state or confederate models have even slimmer chances of being realized, Germany and the EU should nevertheless explore the creative and constructive aspects of these models, which would enable the two sides to maintain their national identities as well as realize their individual and collective rights. Their priority, however, should be to alter the cost-benefit calculation of the parties to the conflict, so as to generate the political will for bringing about a settlement at all.

 

 

 

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: Greene, Israel’s Two States Debate

Greene, Toby. “Israel’s Two States Debate.” International Affairs 91.5 (2015): 1009-1026.
 
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-2346.12395
 
Abstract

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is of enormous interest to scholars and policy-makers, yet the internal Israeli policy debate on this issue is often overlooked or oversimplified. It is impossible to understand Israeli actions, the constraints on Israeli decision-makers and the trajectory of the conflict itself without a deeper understanding of this debate. This article presents a framework for categorizing the leading policy prescriptions currently advocated in Israel with respect to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, drawing on public statements by politicians and leading think-tanks, and surveys of public opinion. The most discussed Israeli policy options are presented as follows: maintain the status quo; proactively move towards two states through either a negotiated agreement (Plan A) or unilateral separation (Plan B); or entrench Israeli presence in the West Bank through settlement expansion and annexation. Various public opinion surveys show the extent to which the Israeli public is divided on the issues, and an analysis of Israel’s 2013–14 coalition demonstrates how all these approaches were being promoted simultaneously within the same cabinet, contributing to policy incoherence. The article concludes by outlining how Palestinian and international actions are influencing the Israeli debate, and argues that a move away from the status quo will require decisive Israeli leadership. It also suggests that third party attempts to impose terms for resolving the conflict that do not respond to concerns held widely in Israel are likely to fuel the argument of the status quo camp in the Israeli debate.

 

 

 

New Article: Thrall, The Two-Stage Solution: Toward a Long-Term Israeli-Palestinian Truce

Thrall, Nathan. “The Two-Stage Solution: Toward a Long-Term Israeli-Palestinian Truce.” Mediterranean Politics (early view; online first).

 

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13629395.2015.1126392

 

Abstract

There is growing consensus among Israelis and Palestinians that the paradigm of pursuing a two-state solution through bilateral talks has reached a dead end. Yet the widely discussed alternatives to this supposedly expired model have not posed a credible challenge to it. Instead they have been confined largely to academic discussions among activists who enjoy little support in their societies; the proposals are more a reflection of widespread desperation than a serious movement to bring change. In the absence of a negotiated settlement to the conflict, one possibility, though currently remote, is that Israel and a future Palestinian state will establish a long-term truce that settles some disputes, such as over territory, while leaving other issues unresolved.

 

 

 

New Article: Kabiri, Systemic Cultures in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

Kabiri, Ariel. “Hobbes, Locke, and Kant: Systemic Cultures in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict and Prospects for Peace.” In Regional Peacemaking and Conflict Management: A Comparative Approach (ed. Carmela Lutmar and Benjamin Miller; Abingdon and New York: Routledge, 2016): 158ff.

 
51cBuj7rJSL__SX331_BO1,204,203,200_
 

Extract

Unlike in the case of Europe’s pacification, a transition period between enmity and friendship – the systemic culture of rivalry – never occurred, nor was even proposed with respect to Israeli-Palestinian social relations. Its omission can explain why the peace process failed; furthermore, by incorporating it, a real option for lasting peace might be revealed. I propose that a culture of rivalry can and will be imposed if a viable Palestinian state is established and that over time, relations of rivalry would approach internationalization at the level of legitimacy in Israeli and Palestinian societies. Rivalry generates a more moderate social reality than the one among enemies, though less peaceful than the one among friends.

 

 

 

ToC: Journal of Palestine Studies 44.4 (2015)

 
University of California Press
Table of Contents Alert
University of California Press is happy to notify you that the new issue of Journal of Palestine Studies is now available. The online issues of this journal are hosted on JSTOR on behalf of University of California Press.
Journal Cover Journal of Palestine Studies
Vol. 44, No. 4, Summer 2015

Cover
Journal of Palestine Studies Summer 2015, Vol. 44, No. 4

Front Matter
Journal of Palestine Studies Summer 2015, Vol. 44, No. 4

Table of Contents
Journal of Palestine Studies Summer 2015, Vol. 44, No. 4

FROM THE EDITOR
Rashid I. Khalidi
Journal of Palestine Studies Summer 2015, Vol. 44, No. 4: 5-6.

ARTICLE

The Two-State Model and Israeli Constitutionalism: Impact on the Palestinian Citizens of Israel
Mazen Masri
Journal of Palestine Studies Summer 2015, Vol. 44, No. 4: 7-20.

INTERVIEW

Elia Suleiman: The Power of Ridicule
Nehad Khader
Journal of Palestine Studies Summer 2015, Vol. 44, No. 4: 21-31.

ESSAYS

Dream-Work of Dispossession: The Instance of Elia Suleiman
Stathis Gourgouris
Journal of Palestine Studies Summer 2015, Vol. 44, No. 4: 32-47.

The Way Forward: Full Citizenship for Israel’s Palestinian Minority
Avraham Burg
Journal of Palestine Studies Summer 2015, Vol. 44, No. 4: 48-56.

REMEMBRANCE

Eric Rouleau: Journalist Extraordinaire, Champion of the Palestinian Cause
Linda Butler
Journal of Palestine Studies Summer 2015, Vol. 44, No. 4: 57-67.

SPECIAL DOCUMENT FILE

The Iran Nuclear Negotiations: Israel and the U.S. Congress
Journal of Palestine Studies Summer 2015, Vol. 44, No. 4: 68-92.

RECENT BOOKS

Review: From Palestine to Israel: A Photographic Record of Destruction and State Formation, 1947–1950
From Palestine to Israel: A Photographic Record of Destruction and State Formation, 1947–1950 by Ariella Azoulay
Review by: Issam Nassar
Journal of Palestine Studies Summer 2015, Vol. 44, No. 4: 93-95.

Review: Colonial Jerusalem: The Spatial Construction of Identity and Difference in a City of Myth, 1948–2012
Colonial Jerusalem: The Spatial Construction of Identity and Difference in a City of Myth, 1948–2012 by Thomas Philip Abowd
Review by: Michael Dumper
Journal of Palestine Studies Summer 2015, Vol. 44, No. 4: 95-97.

Review: Contested Land, Contested Memory: Israel’s Jews and Arabs and the Ghosts of Catastrophe
Contested Land, Contested Memory: Israel’s Jews and Arabs and the Ghosts of Catastrophe by Jo Roberts
Review by: Awad Halabi
Journal of Palestine Studies Summer 2015, Vol. 44, No. 4: 97-98.

Review: Conscientious Objectors in Israel: Citizenship, Sacrifice, Trials of Fealty
Conscientious Objectors in Israel: Citizenship, Sacrifice, Trials of Fealty by Erica Weiss
Review by: Mark Levine
Journal of Palestine Studies Summer 2015, Vol. 44, No. 4: 99-101.

Review: Producing Spoilers: Peacemaking and the Production of Enmity in a Secular Age
Producing Spoilers: Peacemaking and the Production of Enmity in a Secular Age by Joyce Dalsheim
Review by: Anna Bernard
Journal of Palestine Studies Summer 2015, Vol. 44, No. 4: 101-103.

Review: Violence and Understanding in Gaza: The British Broadsheets’ Coverage of the War
Violence and Understanding in Gaza: The British Broadsheets’ Coverage of the War by Dávid Kaposi
Review by: Ben White
Journal of Palestine Studies Summer 2015, Vol. 44, No. 4: 103-105.

Review: Intellectual Resistance and the Struggle for Palestine
Intellectual Resistance and the Struggle for Palestine by Matthew Abraham
Review by: Bruce Robbins
Journal of Palestine Studies Summer 2015, Vol. 44, No. 4: 105-106.

Review: Steve Sabella: Photography, 1997–2014
Steve Sabella: Photography, 1997–2014 by Hubertus von Amelunxen; Hubertus von Amelunxen; Kamal Boullata
Review by: Dorothea Schoene
Journal of Palestine Studies Summer 2015, Vol. 44, No. 4: 106-108.

SELECTIONS FROM THE PRESS
Journal of Palestine Studies Summer 2015, Vol. 44, No. 4: 109-136.

PHOTOS FROM THE QUARTER
Journal of Palestine Studies Summer 2015, Vol. 44, No. 4: 137-144.

PALESTINE UNBOUND
Journal of Palestine Studies Summer 2015, Vol. 44, No. 4: 145-152.

UPDATE ON CONFLICT AND DIPLOMACY
Paul Karolyi
Journal of Palestine Studies Summer 2015, Vol. 44, No. 4: 153-193.

CONGRESSIONAL MONITOR
Paul Karolyi
Journal of Palestine Studies Summer 2015, Vol. 44, No. 4: 194-243.

DOCUMENTS AND SOURCE MATERIAL
Journal of Palestine Studies Summer 2015, Vol. 44, No. 4: 244-268.

 

New Article: Leifer, Toward a Post-Zionist Left

Leifer, Joshua. “Toward a Post-Zionist Left”. Dissent 62.4 (2015): 102-104.

 

URL: http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/dissent/v062/62.4.leifer.html/

 
Abstract

Liberal Zionists position themselves as a third way between the two poles of right-wing religious Zionism and left-wing anti-Zionism, and as the most vocal supporters of the two-state solution. However, in the years since Yitzhak Rabin’s murder, and especially since the collapse of the Oslo Accords and the Second Intifada, the two-state solution increasingly appears dead beyond resurrection. The numbers of settlers and settlements continue to grow; there are now more than half a million Jewish settlers living over the Green Line. The Israeli public is more right-wing than it has ever been, and so is its government.

 

 

 

New Article: Saaty et al, A Structured Scientific Solution to the Israeli–Palestinian Conflict

Saaty, Thomas L., Luis G. Vargas and H. J. Zoffer. “A Structured Scientific Solution to the Israeli–Palestinian Conflict: The Analytic Hierarchy Process Approach.” Decision Analytics 2.7 (2015): 53pp.

 

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40165-015-0017-3

 

Abstract

While the Israeli–Palestinian conflict has raged for decades, in all of its ramifications there has never been a totally structured or scientific approach to the conflict with all of its details. The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) approaches the problem along these lines. There are a plethora of reasons why the traditional face to face negotiations have broken down over the years. This paper identifies a significant number of those impediments and indicates how the AHP can productively address them. A summary of the highlights of the AHP approach precedes how it has been applied to the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. To date, the participants, significant members of both communities, have derived and agreed upon a solution that includes all the major issues, except for the refugee problem. That problem is currently being worked on, but will take an extended period because of the unique factors involved. What has been provided is an agreed upon solution to virtually all of the issues impeding past negotiations, including borders, settlements, the status of Jerusalem, the Holy Places, security and expectations of each side.

 

 

New Article: Haklai, Israeli Settlers in the West Bank in Comparative Perspective

Haklai, Oded. “The Decisive Path of State Indecisiveness: Israeli Settlers in the West Bank in Comparative Perspective.” In Settlers in Contested Lands. Territorial Disputes and Ethnic Conflicts (ed. Oded Haklai & Neophytos Loizides; Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2014): 17-39.

 

pid_21544

 

Excerpt

Many analysts identify Israeli settlements in the territories Israel conquered in the 1967 war as one of the key issues that needs to be resolved in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The significance of settlers in the context of this conflict derives from the conventional perception that partition of the territory into two sovereign states is the preferred and most feasible conflict resolution mechanism. More generally, partition solutions to ethnonational conflict rely on the assumption that the intensity of hostilities between the warring ethnic groups makes it impossible for them to live peacefully together in a single state. The underpinning, usually implicit, premise is that ethnic sorting is required for such conflict management; Israeli settlements in the territories designated for a Palestinian stat are seen as an impediment in this quest.

 

 

New Book: Del Sarto, The Israel-Palestine-European Union Triangle

Del Sarto, Raffaella A., ed. Fragmented Borders, Interdependence and External Relations. The Israel-Palestine-European Union Triangle. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015.

 

Fragmented borders

 

This edited volume investigates the complex relations between Israel, the Palestinian territories and the European Union. They are considered as three entities that are linked to each other through various policies, bonds and borders, with relations between any two of the three parties affecting the other side. The contributors to this study explore different aspects of Israeli-Palestinian-European Union interconnectedness, including security cooperation; the movement of people; trade relations; information and telecommunication technology; legal borders defining different areas of jurisdiction; and normative borders in the context of conflict resolution and international law. By assessing the rules and practices that establish a web of interlocking functional and legal borders across this space, together with their implications, this volume adopts a novel perspective and sheds light on the complex patterns of interdependence and power asymmetries that exist across these fragmented borderlands.

 

Table of Contents

PART I: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
1. Borders, Power, and Interdependence: A Borderlands Approach to Israel-Palestine and the European Union; Raffaella A. Del Sarto
PART II: SECURITY, SOVEREIGNTY, PEOPLE
2. EU-Palestinian Security Cooperation after Oslo: Enforcing Borders, Interdependence and Existing Power Imbalance; Dimitris Bouris
3. Visa Regimes and the Movement of People across the EU and Israel-Palestine; Raffaella A. Del Sarto
PART III: ECONOMIC BORDERS AND INFRASTRUCTURE
4. Territorial Borders and Functional Regimes in EU-Israeli Agreements; Benedetta Voltolini
5. Bordering Disputed Territories: The European Union’s Technical Custom Rules and Israel’s Occupation; Neve Gordon and Sharon Pardo
6. Between Digital Flows and Territorial Borders: ICTs in the Palestine-Israel-EU Matrix; Helga Tawil-Souri
PART IV: LEGAL AND NORMATIVE BORDERS
7. The Legal Fragmentation of Palestine/Israel and European Union Policies Promoting the Rule of Law; Asem Khalil, Birzeit University and Raffaella A. Del Sarto
8. The Legal Foundations of Normative Borders and Normative Orders: Individual and Human Rights and the EU-Israel-Palestine Triangle; Stephan Stetter
PART V: CONCLUSIONS
9. On Borderlands, Borders, and Bordering Practices; Federica Bicchi

Raffaella A. Del Sarto is a part-time professor at the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, European University Institute, and an Adjunct Professor in Middle East Studies and International Relations at SAIS Europe, Johns Hopkins University. She is the author of Contested State Identities and Regional Security in the Euro-Mediterranean Area (Palgrave, 2006).

 

 

New Article: du Plessix, The Case of the (Future) Borders of Israel and Palestine

du Plessix, Caroline. “EU3 Resistance to Norms in External Action: The Case of the (Future) Borders of Israel and Palestine.” European Foreign Affairs Review 20.1-2 (2015): 103–21.

 
URL: http://www.kluwerlawonline.com/abstract.php?id=EERR2015027

 
Abstract

This article deals with the resistance of France, Germany and the United Kingdom (EU3) to comply with the EU norms regarding the (future) borders of Israel and Palestine. To do so, it focuses on two cases studies: the issue of Israel’s exports to the EU originating from the settlements, and EU companies operating in settlements in East Jerusalem. The EU3’s reactions differ when it comes to ensure the implementation of the EU soft law regarding the two state solution, and more particularly the issue of future borders. Yet, they all reflect the Member States’ resistance to directly enforce CFSP norms on this matter. In the case of a territorial dispute, the EU’s soft and hard laws are de facto intertwined through EU external action. As matter of fact, the rule of origin defined in EU free trade agreements with both Israel and the Palestinian Authority strongly relies on CFSP positions regarding their future borders. This article argues that conflicting objectives related to this issue between Member States and the EU and among national actors account for the EU3’s resistance attitudes. In other words, a certain form of cognitive distance – the fourth hypothesis of the introduction – between the content of EU norms and Member States’ objectives affects the implementation of CFSP norms. In this case, Germany’s reaction to the Brita case demonstrates its unwillingness to take direct responsibility for setting a precedent regarding the sensitive case of Israeli exports from the settlements, due to its special relationship with Israel. France’s cautious reaction is more particularly related to the latent conflict within its population about this issue. The United Kingdom’s preference for the labelling solution illustrates its liberal nature and its willingness to let British consumers assume the responsibility to decide, though this solution proves difficult to implement in fact. Yet, this article also shows that these resistance attitudes can also lead to the renegotiation of the means of implementation of CFSP norms on this matter, and potentially to their strengthening.

 

 

New Article: Mirilovic and Siroky, Two States in the Holy Land? International Recognition and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

Mirilovic, Nikola and David S. Siroky. “Two States in the Holy Land?: International Recognition and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict.” Politics and Religion 8.2 (2015): 263-85.

 

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1755048315000164

 

Abstract
How do states decide to extend or withhold international recognition in cases of contested sovereignty? We focus on how religion shapes the incentives of states in making this decision, both at the domestic level through religious institutions and at the international level through religious affinities. States with transnational religious ties to the contested territory are more likely to extend recognition. At the domestic level, states that heavily regulate religion are less likely to extend international recognition. We test these conjectures, and examine others in the literature, with two new data sets on the international recognition of both Palestine and Israel and voting on the United Nations resolution to admit Palestine as a non-member state observer, combined with global data on religious regulation and religious affinities. In cases of contested sovereignty, the results provide support for these two mechanisms through which religion shapes foreign policy decisions about international recognition.

 

 

 

New Article: Zemach, International Law and the Future of Israeli Settlements in the Occupied Territories

Zemach, Ariel. “Frog in the Milk Vat: International Law and the Future of Israeli Settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.” American University International Law Review 30.1 (2015): 53-100.

 
URL: http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/amuilr30&div=7

 
Excerpt

State Responsibility Rules provide illegally implanted settlers with protection that is weaker but broader than that they enjoy under international human rights law. International human rights law may prohibit the repatriation of certain settlers. Such protection is not available under State Responsibility Rules. Yet, the interests of individual settlers may support an occupant being exempt from its obligation to dismantle illegally established settlements even if international human rights law allows this measure. Such exemption neither depends on the contours of human rights contained in international human rights treaties of which the occupant is a signatory, nor does it have to be justified under a strict balancing-ofinterest analysis. Rather, State Responsibility Rules exempt an occupant from eliminating the consequences of its illegal conduct whenever such measure would entail the forceful eviction of a large number of individuals from their homes. Israel is therefore allowed, but is not required, to repatriate the settlers it has transferred into the Arab territories it occupies. The absence of a duty to repatriate the settlers allows for a strong argument in favor of including nonrepatriation within the sphere of interests that Israel may legitimately promote in negotiating the end of occupation.

 

 

Reviews: Perrson, The EU and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, 1971-2013

Persson, Anders. The EU and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, 1971-2013 : In Pursuit of a Just Peace. Lanham : Lexington Books, 2014.

 

0739192442

Reviews

Hollis, Rosemary. “Review.” Middle East Journal 69.3 (2015): 469-71.

Reviews: Ayoob, Will the Middle East Implode?

Ayoob, Mohammed. Will the Middle East Implode? Cambridge: Polity, 2014.

0745679242

Reviews

  • Waterbury, John. “Review.” Foreign Affairs Capsule Review, March/April 2014.
  • Postel, Danny. “Review.” Middle East Policy 21.3 (2014).
  • Delgado, Magdalena C. “Review.” LSE Review of Books blog
  • Beckerman-Boys, Carly. “Review.” Global Policy, December 18, 2014.
  • Khashan, Hilal. “Review.” Middle East Quarterly 22.3 (2015).
  • Cappucci, John. “Review.” Political Studies Review 13.3 (2015): 465-66.

 

New Article: Lustick, Ari Shavit, Baruch Marzel, and Zionist Claims to Territory

Lustick, Ian S. “Making Sense of the Nakba: Ari Shavit, Baruch Marzel, and Zionist Claims to Territory.” Journal of Palestine Studies 44.2 (2015): 7-27.

 

URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/jps.2015.44.2.7

 

Abstract

Zionist claims to rightful rule of most or all of Palestine/the Land of Israel ultimately depend on naturalizing those claims into common sense, for Jews, of course, but also for the international community. Following the 1967 war, Israelis in favor of withdrawing from occupied territories have relied on distinguishing between the justice of the 1949 Armistice Lines, and the process that led to the State of Israel within those lines, versus the injustice of the occupation of territories conquered in 1967 and of their settlement and gradual absorption. But as the truth of the expulsions and forced dispossession of Palestinians in 1948 becomes accepted by wider swaths of both Israeli-Jewish and international public opinion, the traditional narrative distinguishing the justice of 1948 and the injustice of 1967 breaks down. Ari Shavit’s book, My Promised Land, can be understood as a response by Israeli two-staters to accusations of hypocrisy by the extreme right.

New Article: Beinin, Regrouping in the Absence of a Two-State Solution

Beinin, Joel. “Coexistence, Equality, and Universal Principles in Israel/Palestine: Regrouping in the Absence of a Two-State Solution.” Tikkun 30.2 (2015): 9-15.

 

URL: https://muse.jhu.edu/journals/tikkun/v030/30.2.beinin.html

 

Excerpt

The inordinate focus on a Palestinian state has diverted attention from the fate of the Palestinian people. The conditions of many Palestinians — citizens of Israel, inhabitants of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip, and refugees in Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq — have deteriorated dramatically since 2000. Evictions of Palestinians from the East Jerusalem neighborhoods of Sheikh Jarrah and Silwan by messianic religious-nationalist settlers, the expansion of settlements to surround East Jerusalem and prevent its return to Palestinian rule, home demolitions and disruption of normal economic and academic life throughout the West Bank, the siege (tighter or looser as Israel chooses) imposed on the population of the Gaza Strip, attacks on refugee camps in Lebanon and Syria, insecure and dysfunctional conditions throughout Iraq — all these have taken a toll on Palestinians. The most urgent task is to focus on the present and future conditions of actual Palestinians, not to speculate on the nature of a state or states that have little chance of coming into existence anytime soon.

This means exposing and resisting Israeli efforts to diminish the Palestinian presence through various mechanisms of expulsion. It means dismantling the separation barrier and other infrastructures that separate Palestinian communities, including the massive checkpoints at Qalandiya and Bethlehem in the West Bank that are effectively international frontier posts, and opposing the continuing confiscation of lands for new settlements and the violent campaign of settler fanatics like the “Hilltop Youth” to terrorize Palestinian farmers and shepherds. It means demanding an end to Israeli occupation of all the lands conquered in 1967. It means advocating the full equality, including individual and collective rights, of the Palestinian citizens of Israel. Perhaps most painfully for some, but nonetheless absolutely necessary, it means educating ourselves about and recognizing the full extent of the Palestinian Nakba, whose effects continue today. Resolution of the conflict necessitates that we confront our moral obligations as Jews, as Americans, and as global citizens to acknowledge responsibility, make restitution, and pay compensation.

 

Seminar: Azrieli Institute Student-Faculty Seminar (March 18, 2015)

Azrieli-March

 

Azrieli Institute of Israel Studies

Student-Faculty Seminars

Wednesday March 18, 2015

10:30AM-12:30PM

A History of Conflict Between Israel and Palestine: Can the U.N. Ever Facilitate a Two-State Solution?

Kristy Rogers, Masters Candidate, Department of Sociology and Anthropology

 

Why Peacemaking Begins with States and Ends with Societies: Evidence from Arab-Israeli Peace Treaties

Professor Norrin Ripsman, Department of Political Science

 

‘Rebellion Was Strong Amongst Them’: Irish Jews and National Politics, 1900-1922

Mike Rast, PhD Candidate, Department of History

 

Yehuda Kaufman (Even Shmuel): The Portrait of an Israeli Scholar, Intellectual, and Activist, 1927-1976

Professor Ira Robinson, Department of Religion

 

Click here for a PDF file of the flyer.