scholarly journals WAR AND PEACE- AN ISRAELI PERSPECTIVE

2011 ◽  
Vol 14 (2 & 3) ◽  
pp. 2005 ◽  
Author(s):  
Asher Maoz

The State of Israel was born in the storm of war and has been in a state of military confrontation ever since, which continues even as these lines are being written. Israel has fought six full-scale wars since its establishment: the War of Independence (1948), the Sinai War (1956), the Six Day War (1967), the War of Attrition (1970s), the Yom Kippur – or October – War (1973), and the Lebanon War (1982). Furthermore, the periods between the wars were not without military unrest. Israel has found itself in unabated military confrontations, most recently capped by the uprising (known in Arabic as the Intifada) being waged against it by the Palestinian Authority since September 2000.

Author(s):  
Robert Eisen

R. Herzog (1888–1959) was the first Chief Ashkenazi Rabbi of Israel when the state of Israel was established in 1948. R. Herzog therefore had to deal with Israel’s first war, its War of Independence. R. Herzog’s formulates halakhic positions on war that build on those of R. Kook, adopting the latter’s position that the laws governing war are different from those governing the everyday, and that for this reason conscription is permitted. However, R. Herzog moves in original directions on some issues, adopting, for example, Nahmanides’ view that the state of Israel can wage war to conquer the land God promised to the Israelites in the Bible. The chapter concludes with an argument that R. Herzog’s views on war may have influenced those of R. Tsevi Yehudah Kook, the son of R. Abraham Isaac Kook, who was a major figure in religious Zionism after the Six Day War.


Author(s):  
Gareth Stansfield

This chapter examines the Yom Kippur War of 1973 from a foreign policy perspective. It first provides a background on the Arab–Israeli Conflict that began in 1948 with the War of Independence, followed by the Suez Conflict in 1956 and the Six-Day War in 1967, and culminated in the Yom Kippur War. It then considers the Egyptian build-up to war in 1973 and why Egypt attacked Israel, as well as the peace process that eventually settled the conflict between the two countries via the Camp David Accords. It also analyses the relative normalization of the Egyptian–Israeli relations and the effective breaking of Egypt’s alliance with other Arab states opposed to the existence of Israel. It concludes with an assessment of the aftermath of the Yom Kippur War and the rapprochement between Egypt and Israel.


2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 37-47
Author(s):  
Sahira ABD ALRHMAN ◽  
Stefan COJOCARU

This paper discusses issues of identity associated with Palestinian students’ integration in an Israeli-Arab high school. These students were born to Palestinian families that are considered as ‘traitors’ by Arabs living in the Palestinian Authority and in the State of Israel. Their parents have working relations with the State of Israel and are therefore living in a large city at the north of the country. The students experience some kind of identity conflict between them and the Israeli-Arab students learning in the same school. The students who came with their parents from the Palestinian Authority, have difficulties to define themselves and they constantly try avoiding the question: Where are you from? They usually say they are from Jerusalem and they hold a blue identity card. Moreover, these students deal with language difficulties. School today constitutes an educational framework for a variety of students, characterized by different abilities and needs. This sets a rather complicated challenge to the school management and staff that have to open the school doors and provide a response to the students. This paper is grounded in theories of high school education, self-identity, conflict between identities of minorities and adolescence. It reviews the identity issues associated with the Palestinian children’s national and self-identity, as well as the steps that school and the education system can take in order to promote their integration.


2010 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 590-610
Author(s):  
Haim Sandberg

A fairly common premise in academic research about Israel is that the State of Israel has expropriated large tracts of land from Arabs, whether citizens or Palestinian refugees. This premise does not distinguish between the taking of property, which was expropriated from Arab refugees during the War of Independence, and the expropriation of land during the State's “regular course of business.” Blurring the distinction between land belonging to refugees and land belonging to citizens creates the impression that the State of Israel has expropriated large tracts of land as a regular “course of business.” This research isolates and clarifies the extent of “regular” expropriations on the national level according to the Lands (Acquisition for Public Purposes) Ordinance 1943—the main and permanent tool for large scale expropriations in Israel It shows that the common premise about expropriation of Arab citizens ‘land is highly exaggerated. The Arab population's share in the burden of expropriation was fairly small in absolute terms and is not significantly greater than the Jewish population's share.While a quantitative analysis of the expropriations cannot in itself produce a conclusion about harmful and unjustified influences of the expropriations on Arab citizens, a quantitative analysis of each expropriation may produce information on which to make such a conclusion. Moreover, arguing against all expropriation of lands—which actually results in the transfer of resources from Arabs to Jews, irrespective of its scope and circumstances—may entail an a priori negation of Israel's right to use land resources and police powers to answer real public needs of the Jewish majority and can entail an a priori negation of the nature of Israel as a Jewish and democratic State—rather than a legitimate criticism on the merits of each expropriation.


2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Zipora Yablonka-Reuveni ◽  
Frank Stockdale ◽  
Uri Nudel ◽  
David Israeli ◽  
Helen M. Blau ◽  
...  

It is with great sadness that we have learned about the passing of Professor David Yaffe (1929-2020, Israel). Yehi Zichro Baruch - May his memory be a blessing. David was a man of family, science and nature. A native of Israel, David grew up in the historic years that preceded the birth of the State of Israel. He was a member of the group that established Kibbutz Revivim in the Negev desert, and in 1948 participated in Israel’s War of Independence. David and Ruth eventually joined Kibbutz Givat Brenner by Rehovot, permitting David to be both a kibbutz member and a life-long researcher at the Weizmann Institute of Science, where David received his PhD in 1959. David returned to the Institute after his postdoc at Stanford. Here, after several years of researching a number of tissues as models for studying the process of differentiation, David entered the myogenesis field and stayed with it to his last day. With his dedication to the field of myogenesis and his commitment to furthering the understanding of the People and the Land of Israel throughout the international scientific community, David organized the first ever myogenesis meeting that took place in Shoresh, Israel in 1975. This was followed by the 1980 myogenesis meeting at the same place and many more outstanding meetings, all of which brought together myogenesis, nature and scenery. Herein, through the preparation and publication of this current manuscript, we are meeting once again at a “David Yaffe myogenesis meeting". Some of us have been members of the Yaffe lab, some of us have known David as his national and international colleagues in the myology field. One of our contributors has also known (and communicates here) about David Yaffe’s earlier years as a kibbutznick in the Negev. Our collective reflections are a tribute to Professor David Yaffe. We are fortunate that the European Journal of Translational Myology has provided us with tremendous input and a platform for holding this 2020 distance meeting "Farwell to Professor David Yaffe - A Pillar of the Myogenesis Field".


2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 42-54
Author(s):  
Emmanuel Nicolás Kahan

Since the 1947 United Nations resolution on the partition of Palestine and, subsequently, the Israeli Declaration of Independence in 1948, the Israeli-Palestinian issue has played a powerful role in Argentine public space that has not found a concomitant response in academia. The stance with regard to the 1967 Six-Day War taken by an institution that promotes itself as representative of progressive Argentine Jews, the Idisher Cultur Farband (Argentine Federation of Jewish Cultural Institutions—ICUF), undermined certain meanings, ties of solidarity, and modes of representation held by a diversity of actors regarding the existence and legitimacy of the State of Israel. Desde la resolución de 1947 de las Naciones Unidas sobre la partición de Palestina y, posteriormente, la Declaración de Independencia de Israel en 1948, el problema israelí-palestino ha desempeñado un papel importante en el espacio público argentino que no ha encontrado una respuesta concomitante en el mundo académico. La postura con respecto a la Guerra de los Seis Días de 1967 tomada por una institución que se promueve a sí misma como representante de los judíos progresistas argentinos, el Idisher Cultur Farband (Federación Argentina de Instituciones Culturales Judías—ICUF), socavó ciertos significados, vínculos de solidaridad y modos de representación de una diversidad de actores con respecto a la existencia y legitimidad del Estado de Israel.


Hadassah ◽  
2011 ◽  
pp. 159-173
Author(s):  
Mira Katzburg-Yungman

This chapter turns to Hadassah's activities during Israel's war of independence. The war began in 1947. It began as ‘“riots,” which quickly developed into the conflagration of battles’. In the first phase of the war, Arab gangs assisted by volunteers from neighbouring countries attacked essential transportation routes, concentrations of Jews in mixed (Jewish and Arab) cities, and isolated settlements. At this stage, resistance was mounted by underground organizations of the Yishuv, particularly the Haganah. When the British left, the regular armies of Egypt, Transjordan, Syria, Iraq, and Lebanon, as well as volunteer units from Saudi Arabia, Libya, and Yemen invaded, with the aim of destroying the State of Israel in its infancy. They were met by Israel's army, known since 1948 as the Israel Defence Forces (IDF).


Significance This came after US Special Envoy Jason Greenblatt set conditions for the engagement of a future Palestinian unity government in peace negotiations that closely echoed Israeli demands, including acceptance of non-violence, recognition of the state of Israel and disarmament. Hamas, which has ruled Gaza since 2007, on October 12 signed a reconciliation agreement in Cairo with the Fatah party, which controls the Palestinian Authority (PA) in the West Bank. Impacts Israel will never allow Hamas to play any significant role in the West Bank, whatever the terms of the deal. Easing the blockade on Gaza could bring a construction boom that would boost Egypt’s economy as well. Even if the agreement breaks down, another round of fighting with Israel in Gaza is unlikely, as it would benefit no party.


2001 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 458-460 ◽  
Author(s):  
BRUCE MADDY-WEITZMAN

For more than a decade, scholars and writers of various stripes have been revisiting the events surrounding the first Arab–Israeli war of 1948, whose outcome heavily shaped subsequent Middle East politics. Basing their work primarily on newly available Israeli, British, and American archival materials, they have shed considerable light and generated much heat regarding the origins, consequences, and degrees of responsibility for the events surrounding the birth of the State of Israel, the uprooting of two-thirds of the Palestinian Arab community, and the defeat of neighboring Arab armies.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document