The Arab-Israeli and Israeli-Palestinian Conflicts in the Netanyahu/Trump Era, 2017–20

2020 ◽  
pp. 328-344
Author(s):  
Jerome Slater
Keyword(s):  
West Bank ◽  
River Valley ◽  
Jordan River ◽  
The West ◽  
Electoral Campaigns ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Trump Administration ◽  
Do So

In the last few years, especially in his April 2019, September 2019 and March 2020 electoral campaigns, Netanyahu said Israel would soon annex much of the West Bank, especially the Jordan River valley. However, there is strong Israeli opposition to annexation, especially from the security establishment, which fears it would precipitate a major Palestinian uprising. Moreover, many Israeli political analysts are doubtful that Netanyahu will proceed to outright annexation and instead settle for de facto “creeping” annexation over large portions of the West Bank, especially all the Jewish settlements. The Trump administration would almost certainly support that, as its “Trump Plan” continues its unconditional support for all of Netanyahu’s policies and goals. In Gaza, in practice Hamas has given up its goal of taking over all of historic Palestine, including Israel, and will settle for Israeli acquiescence in its continued rule over Gaza. There are increasing indications that Israel might do so, providing that Hamas ends all attacks on Israel from Gaza. Moreover, Israel has long wanted to separate Gaza from the West Bank, thus preventing the creation of a unified Palestinian state.

scholarly journals Human Rights Half Measures: Avoiding Accountability in Postwar Sri Lanka

2019 ◽  
Vol 72 (1) ◽  
pp. 121-163 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kate Cronin-Furman
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
The Political ◽  
The West ◽  
Academic Literature ◽  
International Pressure ◽  
Human Rights Council ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Veto Points ◽  
Do So

AbstractWhy do repressive states create human rights institutions that cost them money and political capital but fail to silence international criticism? The academic literature assumes that states engaging in disingenuous human rights behavior are hoping to persuade (or deceive) liberal Western states and international advocates. But if human rights promoters in the West are the target audience for the creation of these half measures institutions, the strategy appears puzzlingly miscalculated. It reveals that the repressive state is sensitive to international opinion, and often results in increased pressure. The author argues that states engaging in human rights half measures are playing to a different, previously overlooked audience: swing states that can act as veto points on multilateral efforts to enforce human rights. The article illustrates these dynamics with a case study of Sri Lanka’s response to international pressure for postwar justice. The author shows that although the creation of a series of weak investigative commissions was prompted by pressure from Western governments and ngos, it was not an attempt to satisfy or hoodwink these actors. Instead, it was part of a coalition-blocking strategy to convince fellow developing states on the UN Human Rights Council to oppose the creation of an international inquiry and to give them the political cover to do so.

scholarly journals U.S. Policy Toward the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict under the Trump Administration: Continuity or Change?

2020 ◽  
pp. 125-146
Author(s):  
Ayfer Erdogan ◽  
Lourdes Habash
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
West Bank ◽  
Large Fraction ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
The West ◽  
Oslo Accords ◽  
The Future ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Trump Administration

The 2017 inauguration of Donald Trump as the U.S. president opened a new chapter in U.S. policy making toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Several developments that have taken place under the Trump Administration mark a clear rupture from the Oslo Accords in favor of support for Israeli plans to annex a large fraction of the West Bank and design a new settlement of the conflict according to its interests. While the U.S. policy toward the Palestinian issue is not radically different under Trump, he does break from former presidents in that he overtly indicates a sharp pro-Israel tilt and has been more transparent about the U.S. position in the conflict. In this context, in light of the developments that have taken place in the last three years, this article aims to investigate the main pillars of the U.S. foreign policy toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and to analyze how far the Trump Administration’s policies toward the conflict indicate a shift from those of his predecessors. It also offers some insights into the future of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict by providing three prospective scenarios and discussing their repercussions.

scholarly journals The Hague International Court of Law and Israel The Jewish Settlements A Reflection to the Nearest Past

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 57
Author(s):  
Avi Bitzur
Keyword(s):  
West Bank ◽  
Geneva Convention ◽  
Public Affairs ◽  
State Solution ◽  
Jordan Valley ◽  
Jordan River ◽  
The West ◽  
International Court ◽  
Jewish Settlement ◽  
The Hague

One of the major problems that the hague international court of law is trying to deal with is the question about the legality of the jewish settelments at the west bank of the Jorden river-one of the outcomes from the 1967 war.   Throughout history, the treatment of non-combatant civilian populations has been examined from various angles, most prominently with respect to the issue of the displacement of those on the losing side of a conflict, while the victorious party often settles the seized land with "less desirable" elements within its own population.[1]This phenomenon is repeated in the exile of the Jewish people throughout history; the exile of criminals from England to Australia between 1788 and 1868; and in the appalling efforts of ethnic cleansing pursued by the Nazis in the Second World War, the Soviet Union's purge in Eastern Europe the 1950s, or the French rule of Algeria.[2]This has been the case in countless wars and conflicts worldwide, one of the most prominent of which is the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Here, the issue at heart is Jewish settlement in an area the Palestinians call the "West Bank" of the Jordan River and that Jews refer to as "Judea and Samaria" and see as an inextricable part of their ancestral homeland, of which they had been robbed and which they liberated.On November 18, 2019, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced an announcement that in this article I wish to examen as a reflection to the major problem that the hague court of law call that this is "a crime of war" and Israel call it "our legal right"-who is on the right side?   At first glance, this statement seems to contradict everything that has been said, done statement? Or is it that the concept of "illegal settlements" is a distortion of the Geneva Convention?[3]The first chapter of this essay focuses on international law and whether it is a doctrine set in stone or a mutable fabric of woven conventions, including some that may be politically motivated or biased with respect to a certain issue, namely, populating disputed areas with the people of a party perceived as an occupying force.The second chapter of this essay focuses on the dispute over the settlement enterprise in the Israeli-Palestinian case and how it is viewed from a number of completely different perspectives.The third chapter of this essay focuses on the circumstances and motives that drove the latest American administration to make such a controversial statement.the big question is are these circumstances still valid under a new American regime? how such statement affects the Hauge court decisions about investigate the so called war crimes made in Israel?The final chapter of this essay will summarize and attempt to predict the future results of this move: Whether Israel — as the Palestinians have already warned[4] — plans to exploit the court move in favor of annexing areas it perceives as a bulwark against threats to its sovereignty, such as the Jordan Valley; or whether this move will brace the parties' ability to, for example, explore a land swap, and will this render the two-state solution[5] upon which the Israeli-Palestinian peace process has been so far based invalid.This paper will try to outline the possibilities this decision of the court may herald, and delve into its implications, reasoning, and potential consequences. On this days that we make the scope on the Hague court to check Israel crime of war this essay will try to open another scope to events that occurred only three years ago.[1] Morgenthau, H. J. (1948). Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace, New York, Alfred A. Knopf, p.50[2] Barclay, F (2017). "Settler colonialism and French Algeria" in Settler Colonial Studies, Vol. 8, no.2, pp.115-130[3] Baker, Alan (2019). "The Legality of Israel’s Settlements: Flaws in the Carter-Era Hansell Memorandum," Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs[4] Kuttab, Daoud (2019). "Pompeo's gift to Netanyahu might bring about new Israeli annexation," Al-Monitor.com[5] The two-state solution to the Israeli–Palestinian conflict envisages an independent Palestinian state alongside the State of Israel, west of the Jordan River. It is at the core of the 1993 Oslo Accords signed between the parties.

Cultural heritage wars may affect Israeli-Arab ties

2020 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
United Arab Emirates ◽  
West Bank ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
The West ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Past ◽  
The Us ◽  
Peace Accords ◽  
Trump Administration

Significance The ‘Abraham Peace Accords’ between Israel and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), and between Israel and Bahrain, were signed in September, after being brokered by the US Trump administration. Deals with Sudan and Morocco have since followed. Impacts Palestinian complaints will become more pointed as other Arab-Israeli ties strengthen and tourism increases. The Biden administration could engage in more scrutiny of right-wing Israeli claims, especially over the West Bank settlements. As right-wing politicians entrench their dominance, archaeological finds will drive more nationalistic interpretations of the past.

scholarly journals Secretary of State Describes Israeli Settlements in the West Bank as “Not Per Se Inconsistent with International Law”

2020 ◽  
Vol 114 (2) ◽  
pp. 296-301
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Security Council ◽  
West Bank ◽  
State Department ◽  
The State ◽  
The West ◽  
Obama Administration ◽  
Secretary Of State ◽  
Per Se ◽  
Trump Administration

On November 18, 2019, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo stated that the “establishment of Israeli civilian settlements in the West Bank is not per se inconsistent with international law.” This announcement contrasts with the approach taken by the State Department late in the Obama administration. Although embraced by Israel, the position announced by Pompeo was criticized by Palestinians, Security Council members and other states, who maintain that Israeli settlements in the West Bank violate international law. In January of 2020, the Trump administration released its proposed peace plan for the Israelis and Palestinians, which met with approval from Israeli leaders and rejection from Palestinian leaders.

scholarly journals The Double-occupation of Palestine

2011 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 100-108 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandy Marshall
Keyword(s):  
Present Status ◽  
West Bank ◽  
Status Quo ◽  
Palestinian Authority ◽  
The West ◽  
Disciplinary Power ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Creation ◽  
New Generation ◽  
Spatial Formations

This article argues that the recent calm the West Bank is currently experiencing results from the US-Israeli strategy of outsourcing the disciplinary power of the occupation to the Palestinian Authority (PA). It discusses recent security commitments that the US has made to the PA, and popular Palestinian perception of PA police and soldiers. In addition, the article considers how the US/Israel/PA governing strategy manifests itself in new spatial formations in the West Bank, from new roads and shopping festivals, to new prisons and Palestinian-maintained checkpoints. Finally considered is whether a new resistant politics can possibly emerge from the present status quo, whether yet another generation of Palestinians can be expected to struggle and sacrifice, or whether the post-political malaise currently pervasive in Palestine (and elsewhere) will be perpetuated with the creation of a new generation of apolitical young consumers in the West Bank?

The Adıyaman Survey: an interim report

1990 ◽  
Vol 40 ◽  
pp. 81-135 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. R. Blaylock ◽  
D. H. French ◽  
G. D. Summers
Keyword(s):  
West Bank ◽  
Focus Of Attention ◽  
Interim Report ◽  
Archaeological Remains ◽  
The West ◽  
Four Seasons ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Euphrates Valley ◽  
Tributary System

Some preliminary conclusions and individual discoveries from the first four seasons of a survey in the province of Adıyaman are presented here. Initial inspiration for this project grew out of the Institute's excavations at Tille Höyük and the realization that Tille and other excavations in the Lower Euphrates Rescue Project were beginning to provide the kind of precise ceramic sequence which had not hitherto existed for the region. An element of urgency was introduced by the imminence of flooding up to the 550 m. contour by the creation of a huge reservoir above the Atatürk Dam. Consequently a permit to carry out a survey of all archaeological remains in the province was applied for and granted by the Ministry of Culture and Tourism.During the four seasons, 1985–1988, which have taken place so far, our effort has been very largely directed towards a detailed investigation of that area on the west bank of the Euphrates which will be flooded (Fig. 1). At least one further season is required to complete this examination. To this end, part of the Euphrates valley and one tributary system were the focus of attention in the 1985–1987 seasons (Fig. 2).

Flavius constantius and affairs in Gaul between 411 and 417

2014 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 1-21
Author(s):  
Geoffrey D. Dunn
Keyword(s):  
Roman Empire ◽  
Church Leaders ◽  
Fifth Century ◽  
The West ◽  
Civic Leaders ◽  
Strong Interest ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Do So

In the second decade of the fifth century Flavius Constantius was the leading figure in the western Roman empire. After besieging Arles in 411 and defeating the usurper Constantine III, in 417 he married Galla Placidia, the half-sister to Honorius, emperor in the West from 395 to 423. This paper is interested in the years between those two events. David Frye has argued that Constantius maintained a strong interest in political and ecclesiastical appointments there during these years. The argument advanced here is that although Constantius was responsible for installing Patroclus as bishop of Arles, this was not on his own initiative. Further, Constantius was not in Gaul continuously and that when he was there he was too engaged in dealing with the Goths in Narbonne, who held Galla Placidia hostage, to take much interest in the creation of an episcopate in Gaul more sympathetic to him and the imperial regime than there had been under Constantine III. Although he had the opportunity to replace church leaders as he did with civic leaders, he did not do so.

Spatial Debilities

2021 ◽  
Vol 120 (2) ◽  
pp. 393-414
Author(s):  
Jasbir K. Puar
Keyword(s):  
West Bank ◽  
Border Crossings ◽  
Disability Rights ◽  
The West ◽  
Space And Time ◽  
The Creation

This article examines the production of mobility obstacles and restrictions in Palestine, highlighting dimensions of the logistics of border crossings and movement in the West Bank in relation to disability rights frameworks. It argues two things: that the creation of what Celeste Langan calls “mobility disabilities” through corporeal assault as well as infrastructural and bureaucratic means is not only central to the calculus of the occupation but also, importantly, linked logics of debilitation; and that these calibrations of various types of movement render specific stretchings of space and time, what is here called “slow life.”

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document