Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Middle East Publishing Institution Arab Reform Initiative (ARI) Publication Year within 10 Years Publication Year within 5 Years

21. Partial Normalization: Morocco’s Balancing Act

Author:
Yasmina Abouzzohour
Publication Date:
08-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Arab Reform Initiative (ARI)
Abstract:
Following the UAE, and Bahrain, and one month before Sudan, Morocco became the third country in the MENA region to normalize ties with Israel in 2020. In exchange for resuming ties with Tel Aviv, Rabat benefited from important security and financial deals with the United States and ensured the recognition of the kingdom’s sovereignty over Western Sahara. This paper explores the domestic, regional, and international politics that determined the kingdom’s approach and assesses how the kingdom has navigated competing pressures.
Topic:
Security, Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, Bilateral Relations, and Peace
Political Geography:
Africa, Middle East, Israel, and Morocco

22. Sudan’s Normalization with Israel: In Whose Interests?

Author:
Magdi El-Gizouli
Publication Date:
08-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Arab Reform Initiative (ARI)
Abstract:
In January 2021, Sudan joined the UAE, Bahrain and Morocco and normalized its relations with Israel. This paper explores the record of largely back-door dealings between Khartoum and Tel Aviv, investigates the motives, weighs the bargains, and interrogates the ideological mystifications that cloud the policy choices of Sudan’s decision-makers.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, Bilateral Relations, Peace, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:
Africa, Sudan, Middle East, and Israel

23. How can activists best advance environmental reforms in MENA?

Author:
Rory Quick
Publication Date:
08-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Arab Reform Initiative (ARI)
Abstract:
Decarbonising the current energy system does not secure a sustainable future if challenges beyond carbon emission are ignored and the economic model which continues to exacerbate the challenges we face is not rectified. Genuine environmental reform requires an intersectional approach, one which does not just patch over problems but instigates reform. The socio-political and environmental crises we face are symptoms of the same problem and must be treated as such. In order to reach a sustainable future, policies should resolve current issues without creating or exacerbating existing challenges. If there is a reason for social movements to exist, it is to challenge dominant values as flexible and changeable and to offer alternative ways to live. Across the MENA region, there are growing calls - from experts and activists - for reform in the region to simultaneously deal with wider socio-political issues whilst decarbonizing energy systems. In the MENA region, states are preoccupied with developing renewable energy (RE) at large scale. Examples include Morocco’s Ouarzazate Noor Solar Plant and Dubai’s Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum Solar Park. This is an extension of the existing energy model. Megaprojects are political as much as economic projects. They support exclusionary political regimes and enable states to strengthen existing socio-political systems, and thus further reduce the political autonomy of the individual. Energy megaprojects are projections of state centralization, as they require no input from the localities in which they are placed. They therefore actively reduce political freedom. An alternative model - the decentralised RE model - allows for ownership and operation of RE to remain in the communities where it operates. Solar and wind technology is scalable, whereas previous technology was not. This allows for the creation of an energy system that is not only sustainable but also democratically owned and designed, and socially just. A decentralised system, whereby individuals have a direct say in how their energy systems operate, is vital in ensuring energy justice is achieved alongside climate justice.
Topic:
Climate Change, Environment, Political Activism, Reform, and Green Technology
Political Geography:
Africa, Middle East, North Africa, and MENA

24. Lebanon’s Student Movement: A New Political Player?

Author:
Tala Majzoub
Publication Date:
09-2021
Content Type:
Research Paper
Institution:
Arab Reform Initiative (ARI)
Abstract:
The victory of independent student groups in student council elections in late 2020 was hailed as a milestone in the fight against the influence of traditional sectarian political parties in Lebanon. This paper examines the significance of these student elections and the renewed mobilization of the student body. It aims to better understand the politics and strategies of the new student groups, notably their understanding of notions like independence, and attempts to address the role that these student groups can eventually play in national politics.
Topic:
Politics, Democracy, Youth, and Political Participation
Political Geography:
Middle East and Lebanon

25. Mental Health Reforms in Lebanon During the Multifaceted Crisis

Author:
Sara Catherine Mourani and Marie-Christine Ghreichi
Publication Date:
09-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Arab Reform Initiative (ARI)
Abstract:
Multiple disasters over the past two years have greatly harmed the mental health of the Lebanese population. Despite a long history with political turmoil, discussing mental health in Lebanon remains culturally taboo. Responses to mental health remain under-supported and challenges surrounding this sector will be critical in Lebanon’s transition out of the crisis. This paper seeks to investigate the current state of the mental health system in Lebanon and provides policy recommendations to improve its adaptability in responding to the multifaceted crisis the country is currently experiencing.
Topic:
Health, Reform, Mental Health, and Health Crisis
Political Geography:
Middle East and Lebanon

26. Data with borders for a borderless virus: Insights and recommendations from the case of Lebanon

Author:
Ghinwa El Hayek, Sirine Anouti, Ghina R. Mumtaz, and Lilian A. Ghandour
Publication Date:
10-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Arab Reform Initiative (ARI)
Abstract:
Timely access to complete and accurate data proved to be one of the major lessons learned for an evidence-informed national public health response. In Lebanon, COVID-19 data reporting was mired with issues such as the fragmentation of publicly available data across many official reporting sources. This paper addresses the issue of data collection and sharing and provides recommendations for ways forward.
Topic:
Public Health, Pandemic, Data, COVID-19, and Health Crisis
Political Geography:
Middle East and Lebanon

27. Informal settlements in Syria: What approach after the conflict?

Author:
Ahmad Sukkar, Sawsan Abou Zainedin, and Hani Fakhani
Publication Date:
10-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Arab Reform Initiative (ARI)
Abstract:
A large proportion of Syria’s population lives in informal housing, with estimates that informal housing represented 30 to 40% of total dwellings before the 2011 uprising. Such housing was particularly prevalent in the peri-urban areas that have suffered most of the destruction and displacement during the subsequent conflict. Despite its prevalence, informal housing and the rights of its residents have not received sufficient attention in recent policy discussions around Syria’s reconstruction or with respect to protecting the rights of Syrians to housing. In recent years, the government has approved tens of regulatory master plans in different cities for ‘reconstruction’ and ‘development’. While little actual reconstruction has taken place because of the economic crisis, the economic sanctions, and the absence of international funds, these master plans have paved the way for the government to begin with deliberate mass-scale demolitions in many areas. An examination of the few approved reconstruction projects that have proceeded shows some commonalities: most of the approved master plans are targeting areas of informal urban settlement, and the few projects that have advanced on the ground have tended to be in informal urban settlements. These patterns raise many questions about the government’s intentions and plans for reconstruction and make it clear that informality needs to be a core element in the reconstruction debate. This policy research report aims at mapping and analysing the government’s approach towards informality. It starts by laying a pre-2011 historical background about the interlinks between the rise of informality in Syria and the Ba’ath government’s socialist approach towards housing provision and land management. It provides a critical reading of the trajectory of the legal framework, which underpinned the government policies on land management, arguing that informality was a natural product of the government’s chronic and systematic failure in coping with the increased needs for housing. The report then examines the evolution of the government’s post-2011 approach to informality. It maps a series of planned and ongoing reconstruction projects in several neighbourhoods across different cities in Syria while closely observing the legal foundations underpinning each case, the official narratives around them, the implementations procedures, the progress made, and the impact of these projects on the population. The research deepens this analysis through two detailed case studies: al-Qabun district in Damascus suburbs and al-Haydariyya district in east Aleppo. This selection is based on profound similarities between the two areas that were both opposition strongholds severely impacted by the military campaigns waged by the government to retake them but also the significant difference in the legal frameworks governing the reconstruction, the phase of implementation of the reconstruction project, and, most importantly, the type of land ownership, with al-Qabun existing on private land in contrast to al-Haydariyya where the authorities expropriated the land long before the conflict. Drawing on the interlinks between the different case studies and the historical contexts of the conflict, the research concludes with observational patterns about the political, economic, and technical interests and motivations that might have shaped the government’s approach to informality. It finds that the government has found in the massive informal reality of Syrian cities — which predates the conflict — a loophole through which it can advance a major politically loaded gentrification process that would reconfigure the reality of post-conflict Syria in favour of capitalist cronies at the expense of the rights of local residents. This insight has not yet gained sufficient attention in the important work conducted by Syrian and international actors attempting to tackle the consequences of the government’s urban planning system and its legislative framework that is currently paving the ground for wider reconstruction. Addressing the situation is not just a matter of acknowledging some forms of informal land-tenure in the current legal frameworks. It requires reframing our understanding of informality beyond its mere articulation as a form of illegal tenure.
Topic:
Migration, Diaspora, Settlements, and Humanitarian Crisis
Political Geography:
Middle East and Syria

28. Activism in the Context of Reconstructing Nahr al-Bared Refugee Camp: Lessons for Syria’s Reconstruction?

Author:
Ismael Sheikh Hassan
Publication Date:
10-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Arab Reform Initiative (ARI)
Abstract:
The reconstruction of the Palestinian refugee camp of Nahr al-Bared in Northern Lebanon, destroyed in 2007 after fierce battles between the Lebanese army and an armed Islamist group, is sometimes suggested as a useful case study that can inform reconstruction processes in Syria. Such impressions usually emerge due to the relative success of the local activists – who hailed from a refugee camp where residents lived in informal housing with little formal legal protection – in confronting the security visions of the Lebanese State and military for the reconstruction of the camp. This paper aims to discuss the usefulness but also the limitations of the Nahr al- Bared reconstruction experience to the Syrian context.
Topic:
Political Activism, Refugee Crisis, Settlements, and Humanitarian Crisis
Political Geography:
Middle East and Syria

29. Lebanese Trade Unions and Independent Professional Associations: A Review in Light of the Popular Movement

Author:
Jamil Mouawad
Publication Date:
11-2021
Content Type:
Research Paper
Institution:
Arab Reform Initiative (ARI)
Abstract:
On 17 October 2019, Lebanon saw the rise of a popular movement denouncing the widespread corruption of the country’s ruling class. Dubbed the 17 October Uprising, the unprecedented movement swept through various major Lebanese cities, including Beirut, Saïda, Tyre, Tripoli, and many others. In parallel, academics and activists debated the importance of having various organizational frameworks (partisan, union-based, or professional) that could take charge of organizing popular protests. These organizations would help frame demands in political agendas that play a crucial role in achieving the desired democratic transition.[i] This discussion – or at least parts of it – resulted from the almost total absence of any effective official union role in the popular movement, as opposed to other uprisings in the Arab region, where independent professional associations or trade unions played a pivotal role in the action. They demanded change, organized protests, and even took part in negotiations – such as in Sudan’s case).[ii] In fact, a quantitative study carried out during the 17 October Uprising showed that 95% of protestors were unaffiliated with trade unions. It also revealed that only 5% of demonstrators were affiliated with free-profession unions, such as non-labour professional associations or unions that include physicians, lawyers, nurses, engineers or the Teacher Union for example.
Topic:
Labor Issues, Populism, Unions, and Trade Unions
Political Geography:
Middle East and Lebanon

30. Union Action and Protests in Iraq: A Problematic Relationship - Case Study on the National Union of Journalists

Author:
Ali Taher Alhammood
Publication Date:
11-2021
Content Type:
Research Paper
Institution:
Arab Reform Initiative (ARI)
Abstract:
he overthrow of the dictatorial regime in Iraq on 9 April 2003 raised many questions about the prospects for change, which did not occur in the country by internal will, but rather by foreign intervention. External powers left the country war-torn and without a clear internal social base to manage and organize the process of change. The collapse of institutional structures, the need for new institutions, and the strong desire to break free from the constraints of the past motivated protesters and civil movements to take over Iraqi streets. These protests began since the very first days of political change after 9 April 2003. For instance, hundreds of military personnel who were discharged held protests in Baghdad; thousands protested against the American occupation in Najaf; and dozens demonstrated in support of the Personal Status Law, rejecting its amendment by the Islamists who joined the government for the first time after the dictatorial era had come to an end. Intellectuals, journalists, and activists played a leading role in mobilizing people and shaping public opinion, as well as in defending individual and collective freedoms since the first years following a regime change. These continuous activities, which lasted for an entire decade after 2003, led to the formation of a parallel union to the official Iraqi Journalists Syndicate, which was established in 1959. This experience contributed to successes that have had an impact on Iraqi media, culture, and society overall. The trajectory of this union also offered profound lessons about collective volunteer work, which is essential to the establishment of any similar union in the early stages. The importance of this paper lies in the fact that the National Union of Journalists is the first union to demonstrate continuity and lasting influence over an extended period, not to mention that it has had a significant impact on the political process, the lives of journalists, and the experience of collective work. The importance of delving into the experience of the national union also stems from the fact that it challenged the prevailing obedience to the State as the historically dominant employer and sole economic rent provider. As such, the emergence of the national union was a breakthrough, as the overall context discouraged such experiences. It was not in the interest of citizens, most of whom were State employees, to adopt projects that challenged its policies. This study aims to explore a unique experience of union action led by young independent journalists. It explores the difficulties of establishing unions in Iraq – not only because of the limited margin of freedom – but also because of the ongoing economic, legal and political problems that have lasted for several decades.
Topic:
Labor Issues, Governance, Protests, and Unions
Political Geography:
Iraq and Middle East

31. The Mediterranean Region: A Hotspot of Inequalities in the Aftermath of COVID-19

Author:
Farah Al Shami
Publication Date:
11-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Arab Reform Initiative (ARI)
Abstract:
The COVID-19 pandemic, which broke out in China in late 2019, reached the Mediterranean region by late winter 2020. While the impact of this crisis has been notorious on a global scale, it was remarkably more pronounced in the Mediterranean region as a result of economic fragility, exposure and transmissibility, and more importantly the quality of state and non-state responses which had a multidimensional multiplier effect on wealth distribution, access to health and education as well as other essential services, regional disparities and gender inequality, among others. Ever since its outbreak, COVID-19 has significantly exacerbated existing inequalities and has created new ones. It has also exacerbated vulnerabilities and created new forms of vulnerability, thus increasing the gaps on various levels between different social groups. These consequences were also more concentrated in the Mediterranean region as compared to the rest of the world, as the region had already been witnessing rising trends of inequality in the last decade, and especially before the pandemic hit, due to political instability, economic decay and inefficient public policies. While this reality has been experienced by both the northern and southern sides of the Mediterranean, it has been more intense in the latter. However, this is not to deny that constantly increasing inequalities in recent history has made both poles of the Basin much more susceptible to an enigmatic and acute shock such as COVID-19. The impact of COVID-19 on multifaceted inequality in the Mediterranean is neither consistent nor linear. The region has witnessed declines in several forms of inequality and surges in several others. Yet, the overall impact in terms of the number and magnitude of increased inequalities versus reduced ones is negative, making the Mediterranean a hotspot of inequality in the aftermath of the sanitary crisis. Moreover, amplified inequalities have manifested in the Mediterranean Basin in the form of inter-country inequalities and intra-country inequalities – the former being mostly part driven by inter-sectoral imbalances. Inter-country inequalities have likely further cemented the north-south divide in the Basin. This paper examines the different forms and faces of inequality in the region by trying to conceptualize the situations of different countries, despite their dissimilar and divergent contexts. It proves that COVID-19 has massively increased multidimensional inequality through various channels and at a relatively higher rate with respect to other regions. The paper also demonstrates that the Mediterranean is the microcosm of the north-south cleavage, as it is the closest place where the South meets the North, which makes it a natural starting point for dialogue concerning the north-south dichotomy and inequalities. As such, this paper highlights the need for tangible cooperation across borders, between sectors, and among citizens and their representatives, both within the region – between the North and the South – and with other regions, to advance reforms that address the factors of inequity and inequality in an already fragile and shaky regional context.
Topic:
Inequality, Public Health, Pandemic, COVID-19, and Health Crisis
Political Geography:
Africa, Europe, Middle East, and Mediterranean

32. Framing what's breaking: Empirical analysis of Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya Twitter coverage of the Gaza-Israel conflict

Author:
Tala Majzoub
Publication Date:
12-2021
Content Type:
Research Paper
Institution:
Arab Reform Initiative (ARI)
Abstract:
The role of social media’s fast coverage is ever more important in shaping grander narrative and exposing state bias. Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya, both state-sponsored media, are emblematic of how these narratives are formed in the MENA region. This paper analyzes and compares the content of tweets from the official Twitter breaking news accounts of Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya in order to observe the narratives and better identify the bias. Doing so, it aims to expose the tight link between the framing of breaking news and the changing political dynamics in the region.
Topic:
Mass Media, Territorial Disputes, Media, Social Media, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and Gaza

33. The Palestinians and Arab normalization of Greater Israel

Author:
Mouin Rabbani
Publication Date:
12-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Arab Reform Initiative (ARI)
Abstract:
This paper explores the dynamics of the Palestinian response to the recent wave of normalization deals between Israel and certain Arab states. It analyzes the motivations that contributed to this wave of normalization, examines the state of Palestinian institutions, and concludes with options for a path forward.
Topic:
Territorial Disputes, Conflict, Institutions, Peace, and Normalization
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, and Palestine

34. “What is a State without the People?”: Statehood Obsession and Denial of Rights in Palestine

Author:
Alaa Tartir
Publication Date:
01-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Arab Reform Initiative (ARI)
Abstract:
The Palestinian political leadership’s obsession with the idea of statehood as a means to realise self-determination and freedom has proved to be detrimental to the struggle of decolonising Palestine. By prioritising “statehood under colonialism” instead of focusing on decolonising Palestine first and then engaging in state formation, the Palestinian leadership – under pressure from regional and international actors – disempowered the people and empowered security structures which ultimately serve the colonial condition.
Topic:
State Formation, Colonialism, Decolonization, and Repression
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, and Palestine

35. Lebanese Women and the Politics of Representation

Author:
Carmen Geha
Publication Date:
02-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Arab Reform Initiative (ARI)
Abstract:
Lebanese women have been leaders in the revolution that has shaken Lebanon since October 2019. This paper argues that the next stage will be critical if women want to transform their involvement into equal rights. For them to do so, they need to move beyond informal revolutionary politics to formal electoral and party politics with meaningful and substantive representation.
Topic:
Gender Issues, Human Rights, United Nations, Social Movement, Feminism, and Revolution
Political Geography:
Middle East, Lebanon, and Beirut

36. After the Trump “Peace Plan”: One-State Solution is the Only Way Forward

Author:
Diana Buttu
Publication Date:
03-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Arab Reform Initiative (ARI)
Abstract:
Last month, a Palestinian think tank, the Palestinian Centre for Policy and Survey Research, revealed its survey results following the release of the Trump/Netanyahu plan. In announcing the results, Dr Khalil Shikaki, the head of the polling centre, noted that 94 percent of Palestinian respondents opposed the plan: “I don't think we've ever seen such a level of consensus among the Palestinian public,” he said. These results are unsurprising, of course, as the Trump/Netanyahu plan effectively seeks Palestinian approval for Israeli land theft, ethnic cleansing and continued subjugation. But alongside the results of the question pertaining to the Trump/Netanyahu plan was a more important question: “Do you support the two-state solution?” A mere 39 percent of surveyed respondents answered affirmatively, while 37 percent indicated that they support a one-state solution. These results should be placed in their proper light: for more than two decades, as the Palestinian leadership and the international community have repeatedly called for the implementation of the two-state solution, increasing numbers of Palestinians have moved away from this view and increasingly supported one state, even though there is not a single Palestinian party – whether inside ‘48 borders or in the occupied territories – advocating for it. In fact, Palestinian leaders and the international community both espouse the common view of decrying the concept of one state and adamantly holding that “There is no Plan B.” The reason for this steadily increasing Palestinian support for one state has both everything and nothing to do with the Trump/Netanyahu plan. This plan makes clear that it aims to ensure that Palestinians will never have a state and instead remain forever under Israel’s boot. But it isn’t just the Trump plan. Over time, Palestinians increasingly have seen that the version of “two states” that the international community will support – and indeed press for – is not the version of two states that Palestinians demand. To the contrary, while the world spoke of a two-state settlement, Palestinians witnessed a tripling of the number of Israeli settlers living on their land. The international community appears content with allowing Israel to build and expand settlements, while at the same time allowing it to demolish Palestinian homes and schools and imprison Palestinians into cantons. This approach condones Israel holding our economy hostage and mercilessly besieging the Gaza Strip, with only the mildest, mealy-mouthed international condemnations. The world community has blocked attempts to press for a condemnation of Israeli settlements in the International Criminal Court and has, in some cases, criminalized support for boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS). Even the European Union has been loath to uphold its trade agreement with Israel, under which Israeli settlement products should be labelled separately and should not benefit from free trade status. It has become clear that while the international community speaks of wanting a two-state settlement, it has shown itself wholly unwilling to do anything to make that happen. As someone who participated in the peace negotiations, I observed that a state for Palestinians was the furthest thing from the Israeli public and political leadership’s thinking. Instead, they were concerned with how to forever contain and control Palestinians, and how to maintain longstanding international community support in this endeavour. In short, the concept of two states has become devoid of all meaning, with the focus instead on form – whether labelled as a “state” and however dysfunctional and lacking any of the powers that actually define a state. This increasing realization has led many Palestinians to abandon the statehood project. This may sound like a defeatist position or the expression of frustration. Indeed, over the years, we have heard PLO leaders threaten to abandon the two-state project and, separately, threaten to dissolve the Palestinian Authority. Some support for one state is undoubtedly borne of that feeling. But not all. To be clear, my support for one state grew not from the futility of negotiations – even though they were indeed futile – but from a sense that the approach was incorrect. The attempt to divide land simply modelled the power structures I was attempting to fight – economic and political structures that aim to maintain Israeli power and control over Palestinians lives. Therefore, rather than focus on land – where Israel always has an advantage –, the focus should be on people and how we, as people, should live. The time has come to look to a model that focuses on equal rights for all, irrespective of religion; a model which seeks reconciliation and not separation and where people are protected and not viewed as subjects of control or, in the case of refugees, of wholesale and heartless exclusion. Today Israel and the occupied territories function as one territory, with rights and privileges granted to some and not to others. There are no separate border crossings for “Palestine” and no separate Palestinian currency. Yet Palestinians, including Palestinian citizens of Israel, are denied the same rights and privileges as Israeli Jews. I am under no illusion that achieving this equality will be easy. Power is never voluntarily given up by those who wield it but taken through pressing for rights. Palestinians will be better able to break down the system of ethnic-religious privilege that plagues Palestinians (a similar system ruled apartheid South Africa) by getting to the root cause – that of Zionism, a nationalist project that favours one group over another –, by pushing for BDS and for accountability internationally and by challenging racist Israeli laws. In short, we can and must create a just system for all, irrespective of whether we demand one or two states. History demonstrates that ethnic privilege ultimately fails in a multi-ethnic world. And given that Palestinians and Israelis are fated to live together, the real question is whether we will continue to allow this system of ethno-religious privilege to prevail or whether we will press for equality, irrespective of religion. Borders, flags, and currencies can wait.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Territorial Disputes, Borders, Peace, and Settlements
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, and Palestine

37. After the Trump “Peace Plan”: Two Perspectives on Palestinian Options

Author:
Diana Buttu and Mouin Rabbani
Publication Date:
03-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Arab Reform Initiative (ARI)
Abstract:
The “Peace Plan” presented by Trump and his administration as the ultimate solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been overwhelmingly rejected by Palestinians and their leadership. But what comes next? What strategy should Palestinians adopt? These two papers, written by two leading Palestinian analysts, lay out two distinct approaches for attaining Palestinian rights and aspirations. Diana Buttu argues that it is time for Palestinians to push for a one-state solution focusing on equal rights for all, while Mouin Rabbani contends that a one-state approach will not succeed given the current power dynamics and, therefore, favours a renewed Palestinian strategy to preserve the pre-Trump international consensus focused on the establishment of an independent Palestinian state on the territories occupied by Israel in 1967 and a just resolution of the refugee question.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Territorial Disputes, Borders, Peace, and Settlements
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, and Palestine

38. After the Trump “Peace Plan”: Ending the Occupation is the Priority

Author:
Mouin Rabbani
Publication Date:
03-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Arab Reform Initiative (ARI)
Abstract:
It is incontestable that a unitary state encompassing all of historic Palestine in which Palestinians and Israelis live in full equality represents the preferred resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Assuming this entity guarantees both individual and communal parity, and satisfactorily resolves the refugee question, it would achieve the fundamental Palestinian right to national self-determination and be consistent with the broader Palestinian aspiration of greater Arab integration. It is also irrefutable that a democratic one-state outcome in Palestine cannot be achieved without the disestablishment of Zionism, and specifically Israel’s renunciation of the core principles of Jewish political supremacy, demographic superiority, and territorial hegemony that have guided state policy since 1948. The cost-benefit calculation required for a one-state solution is thus one where Israel’s rulers determine that the price of maintaining a Zionist state has become unacceptably high and choose to relinquish it. In practice, there is no political pathway to such a resolution. Israel’s elites, and the overwhelming majority of its Jewish citizens from across the political spectrum, will contemplate a future without Zionism only as a consequence of decisive military defeat. Even then, the temptation of Israel’s leaders to rely on their nuclear arsenal to avert defeat – the so-called Samson option – cannot be dismissed. In view of the geopolitical realities which reinforce, rather than challenge, the prevailing balance of power between Israel and the Palestinians, the only one-state solutions currently on offer are those proposed by the United States in its January 2020 diplomatic initiative, and by the radical Israeli right whose agenda has been embraced by Washington. In other words, proponents of a unitary secular democratic state in Palestine who are unable to offer a credible military strategy for achieving it are dealing in unattainable illusions rather than feasible solutions. The dynamics that have produced these realities may well change, but the current state of the Palestinian national movement and the broader region suggests this will consume decades, not years. It should also be noted that economic pressure – far exceeding that exerted by the BDS movement – has had a particularly poor impact on regime change during the past century, and can play a secondary role at best. How, then, can and should the Palestinians respond to Washington’s latest proposal to formalize permanent Israeli control over the Palestinian people? Should they just abandon the two-state framework in hopes of an eventual democratic unified state? Widely condemned as the institutionalization of apartheid, the Trump-Netanyahu Plan, in fact, goes far beyond the model of structural racism devised by the white minority regime in South Africa. Israel seeks not to exploit a captive population, but rather to achieve its eventual permanent removal. Indeed, this Plan goes so far as to recommend changing the legal status of hundreds of thousands of Palestinian citizens of Israel to residents of a Palestinian entity that will be occupied territory in all but name. The Trump-Netanyahu Plan offers nothing to the Palestinians, neither presently nor in the future, and does not even pretend to do so. It was transparently devised to accomplish each and every Israeli strategic objective at the expense of all Palestinian rights, rather than lay the basis for meaningful negotiations between the two parties in which the core interests of each are met within the framework of international legality. The measures Washington has already undertaken concerning Jerusalem, Palestinian refugees, the PLO, settlements, the legal status of the occupied territories and other issues reveal this agenda and require no further comment or analysis. It is thus imperative that the various Palestinian leaderships categorically refuse any interaction – whether direct or indirect – with this initiative, as such dealings will only serve to legitimize it and provide cover for regional and international parties to seriously engage with it. The strategic purpose and primary threat of the Trump-Netanyahu plan is to transform the international consensus on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. For better or worse, this consensus comprises the inadmissibility of territorial conquest, the establishment of an independent Palestinian state on the territories occupied by Israel in 1967, living at peace with Israel within its 1949 boundaries, and a just resolution of the refugee question. Against this, Washington and Tel Aviv propose a resolution of the conflict on the basis that might makes right, that rights are irrelevant, and that international law is of no consequence. Rather than mobilize alongside the United States and Israel to denounce the international consensus of a two-state framework and demand its replacement, even if for radically different reasons and objectives, and to promote goals which - as noted above - are simply unattainable, Palestinians should do everything within their power to preserve, mobilize, and activate this consensus and present it as the litmus test for the preservation of the international order Washington is seeking to systematically dismantle. Indeed, under current circumstances, the only alternative is a one-state solution, which would permanently remove Palestinian national rights from the international agenda. One may not be enthusiastic about the two-state paradigm, but it would be dishonest to deny that the purpose of the Trump-Netanyahu plan is to replace it with something much worse. The above notwithstanding, to frame the Palestinian debate as a choice between a one-state solution and two-state settlement misses the point, and is today somewhat akin to a condemned prisoner spending the night before his execution agonizing over whether to spend next summer on the French or Italian Riviera. The core issue in 2020 is not about the form of eventual statehood, but rather about upholding the principle that Israel has no right to incorporate territories that international law and the international community consider to be occupied, and that its continued rule in these territories is both illegal and illegitimate. In contrast to a democratic one-state outcome, there are political avenues to ending the occupation that do not require the military resources that neither the Palestinians nor their regional allies currently possess. The cost-benefit calculation for ending the blockade of the Gaza Strip, reversing settlement expansion in the West Bank, and terminating the occupation does not require the wholesale transformation of the Israeli state. Yet, compelling Israel to dismantle the settlement enterprise and to withdraw from the occupied territories rather than annex them may – in the process – transform the state and establish pathways that in time would produce better outcomes It is commonplace to characterize the Trump administration approach to the Question of Palestine as a radical departure from traditional US policy. While this is true in certain respects, it is perhaps more useful to understand the Trump-Netanyahu Plan as the logical culmination of seven decades of US Middle East policy, and of the Oslo agreements, which never envisioned an end to occupation nor the realization of Palestinian self-determination, in particular. The prevalence of this reality and this debate attest above all to the extraordinarily weakened position in which the Palestinian people find themselves. Surpassing it will be particularly difficult, but is by no means impossible. First and foremost, Palestinians must resolve their internal differences and establish a unified national movement led by a credible leadership, with a clear strategy to disentangle from the matrix of control established by the Oslo agreements, as well as to mobilize Palestinians and their regional and international allies and supporters. Palestine needs to become a cause that stands above and beyond regional rivalries once again, rather than a political pawn used by petty autocrats for trivial advantage. It needs to once again become a primary issue on the international agenda, and a global litmus test for justice and decency, rather than a secondary dispute in a region roiled by conflict. In doing so it will also be able to rely on greater levels of popular support than perhaps ever before. A mobilized Palestinian national movement, capable of activating and – where necessary – coercing the support of regional governments, and deploying their collective wherewithal in the international arena, can successfully implement a combination of popular, political, economic, legal, and even military strategies to effectively challenge Israel’s occupation, and in critical instances compel foreign states to do the right thing out of self-interest. The Palestinians today are experiencing an existential moment. This is not a time to pursue the impossible at the expense of survival.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Territorial Disputes, Occupation, Peace, and Settlements
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, and Palestine

39. Syria’s Growing Economic Woes: Lebanon’s Crisis, the Caesar Act and Now the Coronavirus

Author:
Jihad Yazigi
Publication Date:
03-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Arab Reform Initiative (ARI)
Abstract:
The already bleak prospects of the Syrian economy have worsened in recent months with the Lebanon crisis, the enactment of the Caesar Act and now the coronavirus pandemic. This paper examines their impact on the Syrian economy and the population at large. While the cumulative impact is hard to assess at this stage, Syria’s population will remain heavily dependent on the international humanitarian effort. The future of this effort will itself depend on major donor countries whose own economies are likely to emerge weakened from the coronavirus pandemic.
Topic:
Economics, Public Health, Humanitarian Crisis, Pandemic, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Middle East, Lebanon, and Syria

40. After the Pandemic: Reimagining the Role of State and Non-State Actors in (Re)building National Health Systems in the Arab World

Author:
Fadi El-Jardali
Publication Date:
04-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Arab Reform Initiative (ARI)
Abstract:
In the Arab region, countries have become increasingly dependent on non-state actors, notably the private sector, for healthcare provision and any response that includes the State alone may not be sufficient to address the COVID-19 pandemic. This paper explores how state and non-state actors in Arab countries have collaborated so far and suggests ways forward to ensure quality healthcare services for all.
Topic:
Non State Actors, Governance, Health Care Policy, Public Health, Pandemic, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Africa and Middle East