Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Middle East Content Type Working Paper Publication Year within 10 Years

481. The Egypt-Sudan Border: A Story of Unfulfilled Promise

Author:
Sherif Mohyeldeen
Publication Date:
06-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
Along the Egypt-Sudan border, tensions have been rising for several decades despite limited efforts at cooperation. Both countries need to reexamine their border policies to prevent further escalation. Since Sudan’s independence in 1956, its border relations with Egypt have been characterized more by mutual suspicion than by peaceful exchange. This legacy has been exacerbated over the decades by myriad obstacles and conflicts, particularly over the disputed Halayeb triangle, even if both sides did try to improve relations after Egypt’s uprising in 2011. Border communities, suffering from this reality, have pushed for improved ties, but mistrust has prevailed to the detriment of both countries.
Topic:
Regional Cooperation, History, and Borders
Political Geography:
Sudan, Middle East, North Africa, and Egypt

482. The Sunni Religious Establishment of Damascus: When Unification Creates Division

Author:
Laila Rifai
Publication Date:
06-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
The religious sphere in Rural Damascus Governorate is poised to become a political battleground as both the regime and the exiled opposition seek to court a new rising group of religious leaders. The uprising in Syria, which began in 2011 and is ongoing, has altered the Sunni Muslim religious landscape of the capital, Damascus, beyond recognition. Ironically, both the regime and the Islamic opposition have achieved an important goal: The regime has fashioned, and asserted control over, a religious establishment previously made up of disparate and competing fiefdoms. Meanwhile, long fractious Damascene religious institutes and individuals, now forced into exile, have united within a single opposition organization, the Syrian Islamic Council (SIC).
Topic:
Islam, Religion, Syrian War, and Sunni
Political Geography:
Middle East and Syria

483. How Southern Syria Has Been Transformed Into a Regional Powder Keg

Author:
Armenak Tokmajyan
Publication Date:
07-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
In southern Syria, the regime, opposition, foreign powers, and local groups navigate a contentious zone of conflict. Any shift in this delicate balance could mean yet another escalation. Syria’s conflict has transformed the country’s southern border region into a zone of regional contention. The status quo there, largely forged and maintained by Russia since 2018, aims to prevent expanded control by the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and Iranian and pro-Iranian military forces, which could trigger a regional confrontation. The south will remain a volatile area, probably for years, and its fate will be affected by regional politics, not the government’s will.
Topic:
Government, Conflict, and Syrian War
Political Geography:
Iran, Middle East, and Syria

484. Playing Politics: International Security Sector Assistance and the Lebanese Military’s Changing Role

Author:
Hijab Shah and Melissa Dalton
Publication Date:
09-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
Following the August Beirut port explosion, the Lebanese Armed Forces must rebuild trust with the civilian population. The LAF can serve as a critical pillar in Lebanese government efforts to strengthen national security and identity in the midst of the crisis, in light of security sector assistance from the United States and other Western partners. The Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF), and Lebanon more broadly, is one of the largest recipients of foreign assistance in the Middle East. The United States and allied governments have sought to build the capabilities and professionalism of the LAF since the 2006 Israel-Hezbollah war, focusing primarily on counterterrorism and border security. The LAF stood in stark contrast to other Lebanese security services in their restraint vis-à-vis the civilian population during the 2019 protests. However, recent reported violent incidents against civilians, ambiguity of the role of police forces, and concerns about both recovery efforts following the August 2020 port explosion in Beirut and extended powers under the state of emergency established by the Lebanese parliament have raised international concerns about the role of Lebanon’s security services, including the LAF. The LAF has a critical role to play in stabilizing Lebanon through a multi-faceted crisis, but will need to take concrete steps to bolster its professionalism. Lebanon’s modern politics have long been defined by confessionalism, a reality that persists even as the country is engulfed in crisis. International assistance to the LAF over the last fourteen years had intended to support the LAF as a legitimate national institution transcending confessions and supporting a broader sense of Lebanese security and identity. In the midst of the ongoing crisis in Lebanon, political turmoil at the helm of the country, and the ongoing coronavirus pandemic, there is an important opportunity for the international community to support a new path for governance in the country—as shaped and envisioned by its populace. This opportunity hinges upon leveraging existing channels of support to the LAF and building in conditionality mechanisms that hold the LAF accountable for its actions, while continuing to promote a clear articulation of priorities for the LAF and a plan to improve military effectiveness through policy and doctrine; training and equipment, education, and exercises; operations; and institutional capacity building.
Topic:
Security, Government, Politics, International Security, Military Affairs, and Identity
Political Geography:
Middle East and Lebanon

485. Two Paths to Dominance: Military Businesses in Turkey and Egypt

Author:
Zeinab Abul-Magd, İsmet Akça, and Shana Marshall
Publication Date:
06-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
Egyptian and Turkish military businesses have used their institutional privileges to dominate their respective economies, but they have key differences. Turkey’s military businesses are centrally managed while Egypt’s use multiple complex conglomerates. In recent years, Turkish and Egyptian military institutions have followed divergent paths in their respective states. After many decades of full or partial control over the government, the Turkish military today is largely marginalized in politics. By contrast, after periods of exclusion from power, the Egyptian military is now in full control of the state. Despite these differences, both military institutions are powerful economic actors within their states. They have developed extensive civilian economic enterprises over the decades, dominating important sectors by capitalizing on their political influence, legal and regulatory privileges unique to their enterprises, and opportunities provided by market liberalization.
Topic:
Government, Economy, Business, and Liberalization
Political Geography:
Turkey, Middle East, and Egypt

486. Israel and the Environment in the Mediterranean Basin

Author:
Mitvim
Publication Date:
06-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Mitvim: The Israeli Institute for Regional Foreign Policies
Abstract:
This paper focuses on climate change in the Eastern Mediterranean Basin and the challenges and opportunities which it presents Israel. It is based on the main points raised at the fifth meeting of the research and policy group on “Israel in the Mediterranean” held at the IDC School of Sustainability in Herzliya on February 13, 2020 at the initiative of the Mitvim Institute, the Hebrew University’s Leonard Davis Institute for International Relations and Haifa University’s National Security Studies Center. The paper highlights the vulnerability of the Eastern Mediterranean Basin to the climate change crisis, the key challenges it poses to different aspects of life in the region, as well as the opportunities for Israel and for regional cooperation in tackling it. The paper sums up the discussions and presentations at the meeting and does not reflect agreement among all participants.
Topic:
International Relations, Climate Change, Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, and Economy
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and Mediterranean

487. Europe's Initial Reactions to Israel’s Annexation Intentions

Author:
Maya Sion-Tzidkiyahu
Publication Date:
06-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Mitvim: The Israeli Institute for Regional Foreign Policies
Abstract:
US President Donald Trump's plan for resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, presented in January 2020, was perceived in Jerusalem as a green light to annexation of some 30 percent of the West Bank. It was in accordance with the intentions declared over the past year by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Accordingly, the April 2020 coalition agreement between the Likud and Blue and White political parties included a clause allowing Netanyahu to bring a USapproved annexation plan for government or Knesset approval as of July 1, 2020. 1 Soon after, reactions began pouring in from around the world, including Europe, expressing opposition to annexation and warning Israel against such a move. This paper presents the reactions of the EU, its member states and the UK. It examines them in light of the hurdles to formulating an EU consensus on the issue, and maps them according to the extent of the criticism and the attitudes of the various European states toward the Israeli government’s policy.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, International Law, Territorial Disputes, European Union, and Annexation
Political Geography:
Europe, Middle East, Israel, and Palestine

488. Egyptian Plague or Spring of Youth? The Israeli Discourse regarding the Arab Spring

Author:
Lior Lehrs
Publication Date:
07-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Mitvim: The Israeli Institute for Regional Foreign Policies
Abstract:
From the outset of the protest events in Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen, Libya and other countries, many people in the world began using the term “Arab spring” to describe the sequence of events in the various locations. The term was based on the term “theSpring of Nations,” that refers to a wave of national revolutions in Europe in the mid-19th century. It seemed to take a little longer for the term to penetrate the Israeli discourse on the subject and even when it did many hesitated to accept it and had reservations about its positive and optimistic connotations. For instance, Minister of Strategic Affairs Moshe (Bogie) Yaalon stated that “the event is dramatic and historic and will be given a name, but not the Arab spring.” Former Mossad chief Meir Dagan also opined it was a mistake to use the term “Arab spring” and explained that “whoever coined the phrase drew it from events that occurred in Europe in 1848, when liberal ideas proliferated in the world. The truth is there is no liberal message.” Former head of military intelligence Amos Yadlin said “we understand today that the pair of words ‘Arab spring’ did not describe correctly the phenomenon that rocked the Middle East in 2011.” The Israel Defense Forces’ intelligence branch discussed the issue and decided that the term “Arab spring” was unsuitable and decided to use the term “upheaval” as the official term describing the events.4 Many other people in Israel, as shall be described below, began using the terms “Arab winter” or “Islamic winter” as terms to challenge the original term and express a negative reading of the events. This article wishes to present an analysis of the Israeli discourse following the Arab Spring events as articulated by different parties in diverse forums of conversation. The article analyzes the public and media conversation in Israel and includes an analysis of statements, articles and public opinion surveys and refers to different players (politicians, public figures, journalists and military commanders) and different issues and questions that have arisen as part of the conversation on the subject.
Topic:
Security, Intelligence, Arab Spring, History, and Protests
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and Arab Countries

489. The Differences between the EU’s Differentiation Policy and the BDS Movement

Author:
Maya Sion-Tzidkiyahu and Shira Hirsch
Publication Date:
07-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Mitvim: The Israeli Institute for Regional Foreign Policies
Abstract:
The differentiation policy led by the European Union (EU) distinguishes between the sovereign State of Israel within the 1967 borders and the occupied territories. The BDS Movement calls for what its initials stand for – boycott, sanctions and divestment – to be inflicted upon the whole State of Israel. Although they differ in essence, public discourse in Israel often confuses the two – whether unintentionally, stemming from ignorance, or intentionally because of certain political views. This paper aims to draw a clear distinction between the two policies in order to enable a more nuanced, less impassioned and more conducive dialogue in Israel and with the EU, along with an uncompromising fight against the BDS movement. The EU’s differentiation policy seeks to maintain trade and cooperation with the State of Israel within its 1967 borders, in adherence to international law and Europe’s consumer protection laws – unlike the BDS movement that seeks to boycott and sanction the entire State of Israel. Recognizing the value of EU-Israel relationship, the EU's differentiation policy aims to incentivize Israel to resume negotiations with the Palestinians. The BDS movement, on the other hand, sets goals (such as revoking the right of return and abrogating the Law of Return) that if fully achieved would mean Israel’s end as a Jewish state. The differentiation policy includes an element of normative condemnation but not delegitimization of the State of Israel as a whole, as espoused by the BDS movement. Whereas the differentiation policy implements existing international law, the BDS movement aspires to change the international perception of Israel even within its 1967 borders. Currently, the economic implications of both the differentiation policy and the BDS movement are negligible. However, in the long term, the threat posed by the BDS activities is greater than that of the differentiation policy, since the BDS is not limited to the settlements. The UN recently issued a list of companies operating in the settlements, which could serve in the future to boycott the settlements and damage major companies that play a significant role in Israel’s economy. The EU does not see any connection between its differentiation policy and the BDS movement, to which some European states oppose.
Topic:
European Union, Economy, Occupation, Borders, and BDS
Political Geography:
Europe, Middle East, Israel, and Palestine

490. Senior Jordanian Officials: Annexation Endangers Israel-Jordan Relations

Author:
Ksenia Svetlova
Publication Date:
08-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Mitvim: The Israeli Institute for Regional Foreign Policies
Abstract:
The second wave of the coronavirus sweeping Israel has overtaken the annexation issue in the headlines and relegated it to the margins of the public agenda. However, although Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his ministers have rarely mentioned the annexation since July 1, and have abandoned public activity related to the issue, the world keeps discussing the inherent dangers of such a move. Warnings against the hasty move that could have crucial repercussions for regional processes continue to be heard, especially in Europe and the Hashemite Kingdom. King Abdullah recently declared that his country would reject any kind of territorial annexation, big or small, warning that “annexation would undermine prospects of achieving peace”. His restrained diplomatic language reflects a real fear that prompted by political considerations of one kind or another, the annexation issue will soon be restored to the table and the headlines. In July 2020, Mitvim Institute experts conducted a policy dialogue with several leading Jordanian figures from the diplomatic, political, academic and military fields, in order to understand the thinking in Amman about annexation and what Jordan fears in that sense. This document sums up key insights from the dialogue.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Bilateral Relations, Annexation, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and Jordan