American Jews and the International Arena (August 2019–July 2020): The US, Israel, and the Middle East

Author(s):  
Mitchell G. Bard
Keyword(s):  
Author(s):  
Michael N. Barnett

This chapter examines the period from the mid-nineteenth century to the turn of the century, when American Jews were absorbed by the task of acculturation. As American Jews grew more settled, accepted, and confident, they began asking the US government to use its growing power to stop the persecution of Jews abroad. In the long run, American Jews placed their faith in the same sort of liberalism and rule of law that had been so good to them. Because illiberal states that were tormenting Jews were unlikely to become converts to liberalism, the Jews of France, Britain, and the United States hoped that their governments would impose these reforms. Additionally, they were antinationalists and anti-Zionists. In their view, the answer to the Jewish Problem was not a Jewish homeland in some godforsaken backwater in the Middle East where they were not wanted. Zionism was unrealistic and could potentially lead to questions American Jews would prefer were never asked.


2004 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 163-187
Author(s):  
Donald E. Wagner

It is a common assumption in the international media that the fundamentalist Christian Right suddenly appeared on the US political scene following the 11 September 2001 tragedy, and that it became a major force in shaping US policy in the Middle East. While it is true that fundamentalist Christians have exercised considerable influence during the George W. Bush administration, their ascendance is neither new nor surprising. The movement has demonstrated political influence in the US and England intermittently for more than a hundred years, particularly in the formation of Middle East policy. This article focuses on the unique theology and historical development of Christian Zionism, noting its essential beliefs, its emergence in England during the nineteenth century, and how it grew to gain prominence in the US. The alliance of the pro-Israel lobby, the neo-conservative movement, and several Christian Zionist organizations in the US represents a formidable source of support for the more maximalist views of Israel's Likud Party. In the run-up to the 2004 US presidential elections this alliance could potentially thwart any progress on an Israeli–Palestinian peace plan in the near future. Moreover, Likud ideology is increasingly evident in US Middle East policy as a result of this alliance.


2017 ◽  
Vol 71 (1) ◽  
pp. 147-154
Author(s):  
Richard A. Clarke
Keyword(s):  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Israa Daas ◽  

Abstract The Palestine-Israel conflict is probably one of the most pressing problems in the Middle East. Moreover, the United States has been involved in this conflict since the 1970s. Therefore, the present research aims to learn more about the American perception of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. It was conducted using a survey that addressed Americans from different backgrounds, focusing on four variables: the American government’s position, solutions, the Israeli settlements, and Jerusalem. The research suggests a correlation between political party and the American perception of the conflict. It appears that Republicans seem to be against the withdrawal of the Israeli settlements, and they believe that the US government is not biased toward Israel. Nevertheless, Democrats tend to believe that the US government is biased in favor of Israel, and they support withdrawing the Israeli settlements. Moreover, there might be another correlation between the American perception and the source of information they use to learn about the conflict. Most of the surveyed Americans, whatever their resource of information that they use to learn about the conflict is, tend to believe that the US is biased in favor of Israel. It is crucial to know about the American perception when approaching to a solution to the conflict as the US is a mediator in this conflict, and a powerful country in the world. Especially because it has a permanent membership in the UN council. KEYWORDS: American Perception, Palestine-Israel Conflict, Jerusalem, Israeli settlements


China Report ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
pp. 375-378 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruan Zongze ◽  
Debasish Chaudhuri

The trend of Bush's policy and its impact in international affairs is worth noting during the second presidential term of George Bush. The US, besides persisting in pushing forward its ‘democratisation plan in the greater Middle East’, has been intensifying its attempt to penetrate into Central Asia. For some time now, the main focus of US foreign policy has been Iraq, the Gulf and the Middle East, but it has given equal importance to containing the so-called ‘North Korean nuclear weapon’ and to the ‘Iranian nuclear issue’. There were new developments in China-Russia-India tripartite relations. China and India agreed to establish a strategic partnership, greatly promoting bilateral relations between them. The developmental process in these countries, Russia-China and India, has provided ample scope for strengthening trilateral cooperation among them.


2021 ◽  
pp. 45-65
Author(s):  
Kardo RACHED ◽  
Salam ABDULRAHMAN

Since the Second World War, the Middle East has been mentioned in connection with the national interest of America manifested by US presidents. This paper looks at the US foreign policy in the Middle East from Truman to Clinton on the premise that the US foreign policy has contributed to creating a breeding ground for dissatisfaction toward the US In this context, the paper focuses on the doctrines in use from the time of President Truman to Clinton. Thus, every American president has a doctrine, and this doctrine tells what political line the president follows regarding domestic and foreign policies. Keywords: Middle-East, Israel, US national interest, Soviet Union, Natural resources, ideologies.


2021 ◽  
Vol 705 (2) ◽  
pp. 45-66
Author(s):  
Arıboğan Deniz Ülke ◽  
Ibrahim Arslan

In the studies carried out within the scope of geopolitical discipline, the expression "geography is destiny" is frequently used and it is claimed that geography has unchangeable, irreversible qualities and the policies implemented are shaped through this assumption. This assumption ignores the humanitarian interventions over the geography and makes it difficult to understand the results produced by these interventions at both regional and global level. Similarly, the dynamic nature of international relations reveals new actors in the international system in times of bounce and collapse, and the borders that expand or narrow with each transformation can differentiate the geopolitical view with new sovereign countries. In the historical process, transportation accessibility, trade, search for raw materials, security and alliance relations have caused the same geography to be interpreted differently in different periods. This situation also applies to the geography of Turkey had been the homeland of empires. The developments in the Middle East over the past two decades has created a sensitivity in the relations between Turkey and the West, especially the United States. Competing interests with the EU and the US in the Middle East and the Eastern Mediterranean, has necessitated a reassessment of Turkey's geography.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document