Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
Russia seeks to be more involved in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict by presenting it as critical to the stability of the whole Middle East. But the legitimacy that it accords to Hamas rules out deeper Russian involvement from Israel’s point of view.
Topic:
Security, Terrorism, Military Strategy, Hegemony, Conflict, and Foreign Interference
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, Middle East, Israel, and Palestine
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
Lebanon has neither the desire nor the ability to address Hezbollah’s threat to its sovereignty. The likelihood of Lebanon suffering severe damage in a war against Israel does not change this situation.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, Sovereignty, Terrorism, Military Strategy, and Hezbollah
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
One way Iran’s efforts are taking place are below the official Syrian state structures – in the arming and sponsoring of Iran-controlled paramilitary formations on Syria soil.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, Military Strategy, Hegemony, and Israel Defense Forces (IDF)
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
It is in Israel’s interest that Assad regain control of northwestern Syria. Aside from improving the economic situation in Syria, this may increase Israeli leverage in the campaign against Iran’s military entrenchment.
Topic:
Security, Economics, Military Strategy, Conflict, and Strategic Interests
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
Israel needs enhanced naval capability for the protection of its own EEZ and for the creation of a proper balance of power in the eastern Mediterranean.
Topic:
Security, Military Strategy, Hegemony, Navy, Maritime, and Conflict
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
Israel’s security requirements on other fronts, require containment of the conflict on the southern front, while continuing to build the western Negev notwithstanding Hamas’ arson attempts.
Topic:
Security, Terrorism, Territorial Disputes, Deterrence, and Hamas
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
For analytical as well as practical and even political reasons, the time has come to re-define Israel’s place in the world in terms of belonging to the “eastern Mediterranean” region, not the “Middle East.”
Topic:
Security, Regional Cooperation, Military Strategy, and Hegemony
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
The fitting Israeli response is to demonstrate resilience, and to declare that despite the terror and the pain we will remain in the land of our forefathers.
Topic:
Security, Terrorism, Military Strategy, and State Sponsored Terrorism
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
Israel will need to increase the intensity of its operations against the Iranians. US withdrawal from the arena is a good opportunity for Israel to update its strategy in Syria.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, Military Strategy, and Hegemony
Political Geography:
Iran, Middle East, Israel, Syria, North America, and United States of America
It has been more than two decades since the signing of the first Oslo Accord, which set into motion a process that was designed to achieve a lasting peace based on a two-state solution. Subsequent rounds of diplomacy have failed to realize that vision. Growing numbers of Israelis and Palestinians have begun to question the “land for peace” bargain. Yet the strategic logic of a two-state solution, with an independent state of Palestine alongside the state of Israel, remains strong. Without two states—both viable, thriving, secure, and free—Israel faces a difficult dilemma in reconciling its identity as a Jewish state with its tradition of democracy.
The stalled peace negotiations have left Palestinians looking for other options to achieve greater control over their own affairs. Former Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayyad has called for a long-term nation-building project independent of negotiations with Israel to set the foundations for an eventual Palestinian state. But various crises continue to chip away at the legitimacy of the Palestinian Authority, or PA. Plans for a Palestinian political transition also remain opaque. As one observer in the West Bank town of Ramallah put it, “There is no longer a story that Palestinians can tell themselves about how our lives get better.”
In recent years, some Palestinians have shifted their rhetoric toward the pursuit of full economic and political rights as part of a so-called one-state solution. For his part, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has sought to increase international pressure on Israel to force recognition of Palestinian statehood. This strategy hinges on a campaign to leverage international boycotts, divestment, and sanctions—or BDS—against Israel. But some BDS leaders have conflated opposition to Israeli policy in the West Bank with a challenge to the “legitimacy of the concept of Israel as a democratic and Jewish State”—a stance at direct odds with the objective of a two-state solution.
The next U.S. president will enter office facing an unresolved Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The new administration will need to take steps to sustain a two-state solution until a resumption of talks becomes politically feasible. As the Center for American Progress has previously argued, the window on a two-state solution is rapidly closing. Key security, institutional, and economic challenges must be addressed to keep that window open. This report looks at the set of economic challenges that must be tackled in order to maintain a viable Palestinian polity capable of anchoring a future Palestinian state.
Topic:
Security, Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, and State Building
Development organisations face numerous challenges in the context of violent conflict. Development cooperation has to be sensitive to conflict in order to be effective and do no harm. PCIA as developed by Kenneth Bush is one approach among others to ensure conflict sensitivity for development and peacebuilding efforts. This working paper applies Bush’s concept of PCIA to the Palestinian case in order to analyse benefits, limitations and potential improvements of his approach. His specific method will be discussed critically based on a literature review and expert interviews conducted with practitioners from the most relevant state and multilateral development agencies. Considering the specific challenges in the Palestinian context this study aims to contribute to the debate on conflict sensitive development cooperation. The analysis of the Palestinian case eventually should help to identify gaps and potential fields for future research.
Topic:
Security, Development, Conflict, Borders, Peace, and Territory
Far too much of the analysis of Iran's search for nuclear weapons treats it in terms of arms control or focuses on the potential threat to Israel. In reality, Iran's mix of asymmetric warfare, conventional warfare, and conventionally armed missile forces have critical weaknesses that make Iran anything but the hegemon of the Gulf. Iran's public focus on Israel also disguises the reality that its primary strategic focus is to deter and intimidate its Gulf neighbors and the United States – not Israel. It has made major progress in creating naval forces for asymmetric warfare and developing naval missiles, but it has very limited air-sea and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (IS) capabilities. It lacks modern conventional land, air, air defense and sea power, has fallen far behind the Arab Gulf states in modern aircraft and ships, and its land forces are filled with obsolete and mediocre weapons that lack maneuver capability and sustainability outside Iran. Iran needs nuclear weapons to offset these facts.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, Arms Control and Proliferation, Nuclear Weapons, Treaties and Agreements, and Weapons of Mass Destruction
Political Geography:
United States, Iran, Middle East, Israel, and Arabia
Upon taking office in January 2009, Obama administration officials proclaimed a U.S. “return to Asia.” This pronouncement was backed with more frequent travel to the region by senior officials (Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's first trip was to Asia) and increased U.S. participation in regional multilateral meetings, culminating in the decision to sign the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Treaty of Amity and Cooperation and to participate in the East Asia Summit (EAS) at the head-of-state level. The strategic “rebalance to Asia” announced in November 2011 builds on these earlier actions to deepen and institutionalize U.S. commitment to the Asia-Pacific region.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Arms Control and Proliferation, Diplomacy, Economics, and Bilateral Relations