ToC: Israel Affairs, 23.2 (2017)

Posted on March 26, 2017 by Aryeh

Israel Affairs 23.2 (2017)

Table of Contents

Articles

The rise and decline of ‘optional control’ in the IDF / Eitan Shamir (205-230)
‘Spokesman-ship is a weapon’: Israeli army news management during the October 1973 war / Giora Goodman (231-252)
The erosion of US‒Israeli relations during Obama’s second term / Robert O. Freedman (253-272)
A ruling party in the making: Mapai in the 1948 war / Avi Bareli (273-302)
Politics vs. trade: a Realist view on Turkish‒Israeli economic relations / Cenap Çakmak & Murat Ustaoğlu (303-323)
Israel is too expensive for us? Political consumerism, public policy and entrepreneurship: the case of the cottage cheese boycott / Omri Shamir (324-341)
Banking and philanthropy in pre-state Jewish Palestine: particularist Sephardic philanthropy disguised as support for the general Zionist cause / Riki Galia (342-360)
‘Digital soap opera’ online radio listening patterns and the digital divide / Mira Moshe, Tal Laor & Shimon Friedkin (361-384)
The Palestinian Authority: the dangerous transition from failing entity to failing state / Kobi Michael (385-410)
The Holocaust paradox: Holocaust denial and its use in the Arab world / Nitza Davidovitch & Nissim Dana (411-426)
Cultural change in a kibbutz factory as an outcome of the privatization process: an Israeli case study / Yaffa Moskovich & Yuval Achouch (427-446)

Book Reviews

Divine service? Judaism and Israel’s armed forces (447-448)
Crossing: Suez, 1973 (448-449)
Eye to eye (450-451)
Defensive Shield: An Israeli Special Forces Commander on the Front Line of Counterterrorism (451-452)

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

Posted on June 14, 2016 by Aryeh

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

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: Waxman, Trouble in the Tribe

Posted on May 23, 2016 by Aryeh

Waxman, Dov. Trouble in the Tribe: The American Jewish Conflict over Israel. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2016.

Trouble in the Tribe explores the increasingly contentious place of Israel in the American Jewish community. In a fundamental shift, growing numbers of American Jews have become less willing to unquestioningly support Israel and more willing to publicly criticize its government. More than ever before, American Jews are arguing about Israeli policies, and many, especially younger ones, are becoming uncomfortable with Israel’s treatment of Palestinians. Dov Waxman argues that Israel is fast becoming a source of disunity for American Jewry, and that a new era of American Jewish conflict over Israel is replacing the old era of solidarity.

Drawing on a wealth of in-depth interviews with American Jewish leaders and activists, Waxman shows why Israel has become such a divisive issue among American Jews. He delves into the American Jewish debate about Israel, examining the impact that the conflict over Israel is having on Jewish communities, national Jewish organizations, and on the pro-Israel lobby. Waxman sets this conflict in the context of broader cultural, political, institutional, and demographic changes happening in the American Jewish community. He offers a nuanced and balanced account of how this conflict over Israel has developed and what it means for the future of American Jewish politics.

Israel used to bring American Jews together. Now it is driving them apart. Trouble in the Tribe explains why.

Table of Contents

Preface and Acknowledgments vii
Introduction 1
1. THE CHANGING AMERICAN JEWISH RELATIONSHIP WITH ISRAEL 18
2. THE END OF “ISRAEL, RIGHT OR WRONG” 55
3. THE ARGUMENT ABOUT ISRAEL 91
4. THE EROSION OF CONSENSUS 123
5. THE FRACTURING OF THE PRO-ISRAEL LOBBY 147
6. THE CHALLENGE TO THE JEWISH ESTABLISHMENT 174
7. THE POLARIZATION OF AMERICAN JEWRY 193
CONCLUSION 210
Notes 217
Bibliography 291
Index 309

DOV WAXMAN is professor of political science, international affairs, and Israel studies at Northeastern University. He is the author of The Pursuit of Peace and the Crisis of Israeli Identity and the coauthor of Israel’s Palestinians: The Conflict Within. He lives in Boston..

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

Posted on May 23, 2016 by Aryeh

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

Posted on May 23, 2016 by Aryeh

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 Article: Gutfeld & Vanetik, The American Airlift to Israel During the Yom Kippur War

Posted on May 23, 2016 by Aryeh

Gutfeld, Arnon, and Boaz Vanetik. “‘A Situation That Had to Be Manipulated’: The American Airlift to Israel During the Yom Kippur War.” Middle Eastern Studies 52.3 (2016): 419-47.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00263206.2016.1144393

Abstract

As he had hoped, Kissinger’s wartime policy indeed led to his anticipated post-war diplomatic achievements. In this respect it could be said that it was his finest hour. Immediately upon the cessation of fighting, Kissinger launched the disengagement agreement in what became known as a ‘shuttle diplomacy’ to the Middle East. During his visit to Cairo on 7 November, Sadat and Kissinger announced that diplomatic relations between Egypt and the US would resume shortly. In the months to follow, Kissinger worked fervently to bring about a disengagement agreement between Egypt and Israel, which was finally signed on 18 January 1974. In this Sinai I Agreement, Israel consented to withdraw entirely from the west bank of the Suez Canal and 20 kilometres from its east bank. In the agreement it was also stated that the Suez Canal would be reopened, which indeed was cleaned and opened in January 1975. The Egyptians presented the agreement not as a diplomatic, but as a military one; however, the agreement included a clause stating that it was a first step toward a future peace agreement, indicating that the conflict between the two countries would be resolved by peaceful means. Furthermore, the agreement stipulated that a new agreement would replace it within a year’s time. Indeed, on 4 September 1975, Sinai II, an interim agreement between Israel and Egypt was signed. These agreements were vital and necessary stages of the path toward the Israeli–Egyptian Peace Treaty that was signed on the White House lawn on 26 March 1979. Moreover, another disengagement agreement mediated by Kissinger was signed between Israel and Syria on 31 March 1974. It is doubtful whether these impressive agreements could have come to fruition had the Yom Kippur War ended differently because of the roles played by the delay tactics, leading to Israel’s difficulties on the battlefield and Egypt’s and Syria’s impressive wartime advances, followed by the massive airlift to Israel, which sealed the Israeli victory but did not allow for a humiliating defeat of its Arab foes. Washington’s wartime policy clearly underscored the central, vital role played by the US in the Middle Eastern arena. Moreover, the manner in which Kissinger managed and manipulated the crisis highlighted his own role as the key policy-maker of the Arab–Israeli conflict; he was the only one who possessed the necessary clout and communication channels with all of the parties involved: the USSR, Egypt, Syria, and Israel.

Based on newly published documentation, this study depicts a clear and unequivocal picture of Washington’s policy toward Israel during the first week of the Yom Kippur War. A policy adopted by all sections of the US executive branch, which necessitated coordination among these sections. This policy can be defined as ‘sophisticated manipulation’ in all communications with Israeli officials, with the purpose of delaying and limiting the transfer of military aid. Secretary of State Kissinger had overwhelming influence over the planning and execution of this foreign policy, receiving the full support of all components of the executive branch. Kissinger also succeeded in creating the false impression that the Pentagon was responsible for the delays in supplying military aid. Indeed, Israeli officials refused to believe that Kissinger had a hand in the delay tactics. When Prime Minister Meir was asked in 1977 whether she believed Kissinger purposely acted to delay arms shipments to Israel, she responded ‘I honestly still do not know.’.

New Book: Barnett, The Star and the Stripes

Posted on April 11, 2016 by Aryeh

Barnett, Michael N. The Star and the Stripes. A History of the Foreign Policies of American Jews. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2016.

How do American Jews envision their role in the world? Are they tribal—a people whose obligations extend solely to their own? Or are they prophetic—a light unto nations, working to repair the world? The Star and the Stripes is an original, provocative interpretation of the effects of these worldviews on the foreign policy beliefs of American Jews since the nineteenth century. Michael Barnett argues that it all begins with the political identity of American Jews. As Jews, they are committed to their people’s survival. As Americans, they identify with, and believe their survival depends on, the American principles of liberalism, religious freedom, and pluralism. This identity and search for inclusion form a political theology of prophetic Judaism that emphasizes the historic mission of Jews to help create a world of peace and justice.

The political theology of prophetic Judaism accounts for two enduring features of the foreign policy beliefs of American Jews. They exhibit a cosmopolitan sensibility, advocating on behalf of human rights, humanitarianism, and international law and organizations. They also are suspicious of nationalism—including their own. Contrary to the conventional wisdom that American Jews are natural-born Jewish nationalists, Barnett charts a long history of ambivalence; this ambivalence connects their early rejection of Zionism with the current debate regarding their attachment to Israel. And, Barnett contends, this growing ambivalence also explains the rising popularity of humanitarian and social justice movements among American Jews.

Rooted in the understanding of how history shapes a political community’s sense of the world, The Star and the Stripes is a bold reading of the past, present, and possible future foreign policies of American Jews.

Table of Contents

Acknowledgments vii
Introduction 1
Chapter One Heine’s Law and Jewish Foreign Policies 19
Chapter Two The Making of a Prophetic People (pre-1914) 51
Chapter Three Prophets Mugged by Reality (1914–1945) 87
Chapter Four The Cosmopolitan and the National (1945–1967) 121
Chapter Five The New Tribalism (1967–1990) 155
Chapter Six Back to the Future? (1990–present) 195
Chapter Seven The Foreign Policies of an Uncertain People 243
Notes 275
Bibliography 303
Index 335

MICHAEL N. BARNETT is the University Professor of International Affairs and Political Science at George Washington University. His many books include Empire of Humanity and Dialogues in Arab Politics.

New Article: Lubin, American Studies, the Middle East, and the Question of Palestine

Posted on April 6, 2016 by Aryeh

Lubin, Alex. “American Studies, the Middle East, and the Question of Palestine.” American Quarterly 68.1 (2016): 1-21.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/aq.2016.0002

Abstract

This essay examines the intellectual history of American studies programs and departments in the Middle East, especially the relationship of these programs to US State Department efforts at cultural diplomacy or “soft power” after the Cold War. Through this examination, the essay theorizes the relationship of transnational American studies scholarship in the Middle East to the internationalization of the field. In their efforts to understand the United States, American studies programs in the Middle East have foregrounded the question of Palestine in ways that make these programs distinct from US-based American studies programs that still often regard Palestine as “America’s last taboo.” In their insistence on centering the question of Palestine within their vision of American studies, American studies programs in the Middle East demonstrate the unruly consequences of the internationalization of the discipline in political geographies where American primacy and exceptionalism are contested.

New Article: Felson and Silk, National Affairs

Posted on March 22, 2016 by Aryeh

Felson, Ethan, Mark Silk. “National Affairs.” American Jewish Year Book 115 (2015):89-106.

URL: dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24505-8_3

Abstract

This chapter details the major events of the past year, international and domestic, and how they impacted the American Jewish community. Tensions between the Israeli prime minister and the American president, the threat of a nuclear Iran, a war in Gaza, rising Islamic radicalism, and the growth of the boycott, divestment and sanction movement consumed the attention of much of the organized Jewish community. Closer to home, racial unrest in several major cities roiled during the year – and the country awaited a Supreme Court decision requiring recognition of same sex marriage nationwide, a move that liberal Jews sought but which raised concerns among more traditional Jews, particularly those who might be called upon to recognize such unions in their businesses and communities.

Dissertation: Condron, The Nixon Administration between Cairo and Jerusalem

Posted on March 22, 2016 by Aryeh

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.

Online paper: Ben-Meir, The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. Time for a New Strategy

Posted on March 16, 2016 by Aryeh

Ben-Meir, Alon. “The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. Time for a New Strategy.”

URL: http://www.socialistsanddemocrats.eu/sites/default/files/Proposal%20Full%20Document_EU_final_saving_jordan_river_160303.pdf (PDF)

Abstract

After nearly seven decades of conflict, peace between Israel and the Palestinians remains elusive. The longer the conflict persists, the more intractable it will become. Those Israelis and Palestinians who wish to have it all are dangerously misguided and will ultimately condemn any prospect for peaceful coexistence.
The new international effort led by the US and the EU to resume the peace negotiations must not lose sight of the popular demand of the majority on both sides to live in peace, because on their own, they will not come to terms with one another. The regional turmoil must not forestall the Israeli-Palestinian peace process; on the contrary, it should serve as the catalyst that could end one of the longest conflicts in modern history.
Past experiences also revealed that although some progress was made through US mediation, the negotiations failed to produce an agreement and nothing indicates that the resumption of the negotiations under US auspices would lead to different results. As such, it has become increasingly clear that only international intervention would provide the practical channel for the peace negotiations and motivate or incentivize both sides to come to terms with the inevitability of coexistence. The EU role is central to the success of these efforts, provided that Obama or his successor stop enabling Israel to pursue its self-destructive path by no longer providing Israel with unconditional political backing as well as economic and military support. Indeed, the two-state solution remains the only viable option that allows for peaceful coexistence, on which any new initiative must be based.

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

Posted on February 19, 2016 by Aryeh

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.

ToC: Israel Affairs 22.1 (2016)

Posted on February 4, 2016 by Aryeh

Israel Affairs, Volume 22, Issue 1, January 2016 is now available online on Taylor & Francis Online.

This new issue contains the following articles:

Articles Sixty-two years of national insurance in Israel
Abraham Doron
Pages: 1-19 | DOI: 10.1080/13537121.2015.1111632

Rethinking reverence for Stalinism in the kibbutz movement
Reuven Shapira
Pages: 20-44 | DOI: 10.1080/13537121.2015.1111640

Making war, thinking history: David Ben-Gurion, analogical reasoning and the Suez Crisis
Ilai Z. Saltzman
Pages: 45-68 | DOI: 10.1080/13537121.2015.1111638

Ethos clash in Israeli society
David Rodman
Pages: 250-251 | DOI: 10.1080/13537121.2016.1120967

Nazis, Islamists and the making of the modern Middle East
David Rodman
Pages: 252-254 | DOI: 10.1080/13537121.2016.1120968
The new American Zionism
David Rodman
Pages: 255-257 | DOI: 10.1080/13537121.2016.1120969
Rise and decline of civilizations: lessons for the Jewish people
David Rodman
Pages: 258-259 | DOI: 10.1080/13537121.2016.1120970

New Book: Golan | Lavi: The United States, Israel, and a Controversial Fighter Jet

Posted on January 26, 2016 by Aryeh

Golan, John W. Lavi. The United States, Israel, and a Controversial Fighter Jet. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 2016.

The Lavi fighter program, the largest weapons-development effort ever undertaken by the State of Israel, envisioned a new generation of high-performance aircraft. In a controversial strategy, Israel Aircraft Industries intended to develop and manufacture the fighters in Israel with American financial support. The sophisticated planes, developed in the mid-1980s, were unique in design and intended to make up the majority of the Israeli air force. Though considerable prestige and money were at stake, developmental costs increased and doubts arose as to whether the Lavi could indeed be the warplane it was meant to be. Eventually the program became a microcosm for the ambitions, fears, and internal divisions that shaped both the U.S.-Israeli relationship and Israeli society itself. But the fighter never made it to operational service, and until now, the full breadth and significance of the Lavi story have never been examined and presented.

Lavi: The United States, Israel, and a Controversial Fighter Jet traces the evolution of the Lavi fighter from its genesis in the 1970s to its scrapping in August 1987. John W. Golan examines the roles of Israeli military icons and political leaders such as Ezer Weizman, Ariel Sharon, Menachem Begin, and Yitzhak Rabin in the program and in relation to their counterparts in the United States. On the American side, Golan traces the evolution of government policy toward the program, detailing the complex picture of the U.S. foreign policy apparatus and of U.S.-Israeli relations in general—from President Reagan’s public endorsement of the program on the White House lawn to Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger’s unremitting attempts to cancel it in succeeding years.

JOHN W. GOLAN has served as a designer, structural analyst, and engineering manager in the U.S. aerospace industry for the last two decades, developing future-generation technology concepts. He has published articles with Air Forces Monthly, Combat Aircraft, Aviation History, and the Jerusalem Post Magazine.

New Article: Bloch-Elkon & Rynhold, Israeli Attitudes to the Obama Administration

Posted on January 26, 2016 by Aryeh

Bloch-Elkon, Yaeli, and Jonathan Rynhold. “Israeli Attitudes to the Obama Administration.” In US Foreign Policy and Global Standing in the 21st Century: Realities and Perceptions (ed. Efraim Inbar and Jonathan Rynhold; Abingdon and New York: Routledge, 2016): 248-66.

Extract

Overall, the polls show that Israelis strongly support the United States, while also being very critical of the Obama administration’s Middle East policies. More specifically, the findings are that Israelis overwhelmingly view the relationship with the United States as vital to Israeli security. Indeed, they rank it as more important than any factor other than Israel’s own military capabilities. They also clearly view the United States in general as a reliable ally of Israel. However, Israelis are evenly divided as to whether Obama’s approach to Israel is a positive one, and, even more significantly, a clear majority of Israelis view Obama’s policies in the Middle East in a negative light. This is true for the administration’s policies toward the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq (ISIS), the Iranian nuclear issue, and the Israeli-Palestinian process.

New Article: Sandler, The Impact of a Transformed US Global Stance on Israel’s National Security Strategy

Posted on January 26, 2016 by Aryeh

Sandler, Shmuel. “The Impact of a Transformed US Global Stance on Israel’s National Security Strategy.” In US Foreign Policy and Global Standing in the 21st Century: Realities and Perceptions (ed. Efraim Inbar and Jonathan Rynhold; Abingdon and New York: Routledge, 2016): 267-83.

Extract

A reduced US presence in the Middle East would lead to regional instability and upset the balance of power between Israel and its neighbors. Accordingly, Jerusalem may have to reconsider its national security doctrine. Each pillar of Israel’s national security strategy would be affected.

[…]

Finally, without a committed United states to prevent a nuclear Iran, Israel may feel more compelled and less restrained than ever to strike, in order to prevent the nightmare of a potential Iranian “breakout,” and/or the emergence of several threshold Middle Eastern nuclear states.

New Book: Waldman, Anglo-American Diplomacy and the Palestinian Refugee Problem

Posted on January 20, 2016 by Aryeh

Waldman, Simon A. Anglo-American Diplomacy and the Palestinian Refugee Problem, 1948-51. Basingstoke, UK and New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015.

This volume examines British and US attitudes towards the means and mechanisms for the facilitation of an Arab-Israeli reconciliation, focusing specifically on the refugee factor in diplomatic initiatives. It explains why Britain and the US were unable to reconcile the local parties to an agreement on the future of the Palestinian refugees.

Table of contents

Acknowledgements
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations
Introduction: The Palestinian Refugee Problem as an Impediment to Peace
1. The Palestine Factor in Anglo-American Post-War Middle Eastern Policy, 1945–48
2. Friends Reunited? Britain and the US Respond to the Palestinian Refugee Problem
3. Diplomatic Deadlock: The Palestine Conciliation Commission and the Palestinian Refugee Problem (Part 1)
4. Economics over Politics: The Palestine Conciliation Commission and the Palestinian Refugee Problem (Part 2)
5. Compensation: The Key to Break the Logjam?
6. The Refugee Factor in Direct Arab-Israeli Negotiations
7. The Birth of UNRWA: The Institutionalization of Failed Diplomacy
Conclusion
Notes
Bibliography
Index

SIMON A. WALDMAN is Lecturer in Middle Eastern Studies at King’s College London, UK. He teaches the Arab-Israeli Conflict, statebuilding in the Middle East and Turkish history and politics.

New Article: Rodman, American Arms Transfers to Israel, 1962–1970

Posted on December 18, 2015 by Aryeh

Rodman, David. “American Arms Transfers to Israel, 1962–1970: The Nuclear Weapons Dimension.” Israel Journal of Foreign Affairs (early view; online first).

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23739770.2015.1114769

Extract

The American-Israeli relationship underwent a dramatic transformation during the 1960s. From its establishment in 1948 and throughout the 1950s, Israel had largely been kept at arm’s length by the administration of Presidents Harry S. Truman and Dwight D. Eisenhower. Both feared that an intimate relationship with Israel would alienate the Arab world, and therefore threaten access to Middle Eastern oil, as well as encourage Soviet penetration of the region. The truncated logic in formulating its Middle Eastern policy, but eventually came around to adopting a more favorable attitude toward Israel. Presidnet Lyndon B. Johnson’s administration deepened the trend begun by its predecessor. And, by the early 1970s, during the administration of President Richard M. Nixon, Israel had come to be seen as a strategic asset to the United States in its quest to contain Soviet influence in the Middle East.

New Article: Lynch & McGoldrick, Psychophysiological Audience Responses to War Journalism and Peace Journalism

Posted on December 1, 2015 by Aryeh

Lynch, Jack, and Annabel McGoldrick. “Psychophysiological Audience Responses to War Journalism and Peace Journalism.” Global Media and Communication (early view; online first).

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1742766515606295

Abstract

This article presents and discusses the results of an experiment in which television viewers were exposed to either a war journalism (WJ) or a peace journalism (PJ) version of two news stories, on Australian government policies towards asylum seekers and US-sponsored ‘peace talks’ between Israel and the Palestinians, respectively. Before and after viewing, they completed a cognitive questionnaire and two tests designed to disclose changes in their emotional state. During the viewing, they also underwent measurement of blood volume pulse, from which their heart rate variability (HRV) was calculated. HRV measures effects on the autonomic nervous system caused by changes in breathing patterns as subjects respond to stimuli with empathic concern. Since these patterns are regulated by the vagal nerve, HRV readings can therefore be interpreted as an indicator of vagal tone, which Porges et al. propose as an ‘autonomic correlate of emotion’. In this study, vagal tone decreased from baseline through both WJ stories, but showed a slightly smaller decrease during the PJ asylum story and then a significant increase during the PJ Israel–Palestine story. These readings correlated with questionnaire results showing greater hope and empathy among PJ viewers and increased anger and distress among WJ viewers, of the Israel–Palestine story.