Israel's Critical Security Requirements

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Israel's Critical Security Requirements Israel's Legal Case: A Guidebook A Jerusalem Center Anthology Published by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs at Smashwords Copyright 2012 Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs Other ebook titles by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs: Israel's Critical Security Requirements for Defensible Borders Israel's Rights as a Nation-State in International Diplomacy Iran: From Regional Challenge to Global Threat The "Al-Aksa Is in Danger" Libel: The History of a Lie Jerusalem: Correcting the International Discourse – How the West Gets Jerusalem Wrong What Israel Has Learned about Security: Nine IDF Officers Discuss Israel’s Security Challenges Israel's Right of Self-Defense: International Law and Gaza Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs 13 Tel Hai Street, Jerusalem, Israel Tel. 972-2-561-9281 Fax. 972-2-561-9112 Email: [email protected] - www.jcpa.org ISBN: 9781301868483 * * * * * Contents Foreword Occupation Why Is Israel's Presence in the Territories Still Called “Occupation”? Avinoam Sharon From “Occupied Territories” to “Disputed Territories” Dore Gold Israeli Settlements The Settlements Issue: Distorting the Geneva Convention and the Oslo Accords Alan Baker Diplomatic and Legal Aspects of the Settlement Issue Jeffrey Helmreich Colonialism The Myth of Israel as a Colonialist Entity Dore Gold Apartheid The Campaign to Delegitimize Israel with the False Charge of Apartheid Robbie Sabel The Security Fence Israel's Anti-Terror Fence: The World Court Case Laurence E. Rothenberg and Abraham Bell The ICJ Opinion on the Separation Barrier: Designating the Entire West Bank as "Palestinian Territory" Robbie Sabel Israel's Borders The Evolution of Israel's Boundaries Amb. Yehuda Z. Blum The Misleading Interpretation of UN Security Council Resolution 242 Ruth Lapidoth Notes About the Authors About the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs * * * * * Foreword When critics charge Israel with "occupation," "apartheid," and "colonialism," Israel has good answers. When they claim Israel is building "illegal settlements" and a "separation wall," astute legal scholars have formulated well-reasoned responses to these charges. As questions are raised over the legitimacy and morality of Israel's actions, the authors in this volume see Israel's actions as firmly rooted in international law. The discussions in this volume by recognized experts from Israel and abroad outline Israel's legal case on key issues of international law often raised by Israel's critics. Is Israel still an "occupier"? Lt.-Col. (res.) Avinoam Sharon, a former IDF Military Attorney for Judea, Samaria and Gaza, begins by asking, "Why Is Israel's Presence in the Territories Still Called “Occupation”? The term “occupation” is often employed politically, without regard for its legal meaning, as part of a general assault upon Israel's legitimacy. Iraq was occupied by the Coalition forces from the spring of 2003 until June 28, 2004, at which time authority was handed over to the Iraqi Interim Government. At that point, although Coalition forces remained in Iraq until December 18, 2011, Iraq was no longer deemed occupied. If handing over authority to a Coalition- appointed interim government ended the occupation of Iraq, would the same not hold true for the establishment of the Palestinian Authority and Israel? Amb. Dore Gold, who served as Israel's ambassador to the United Nations (1997-1999) and now heads the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, clarifies that the more correct term to describe the actual legal status of the territories is "disputed" rather than "occupied." He notes in "From 'Occupied Territories' to 'Disputed Territories'” that the politically-loaded term "occupation" seems to apply only to Israel and is hardly ever used when other territorial disputes are discussed. For example, the U.S. State Department refers to Kashmir as "disputed areas." Similarly, it describes the patch of Azerbaijan claimed as an independent republic by indigenous Armenian separatists as "the disputed area of Nagorno-Karabakh." In territorial disputes from northern Cyprus, to the Kurile Islands, to Abu Musa in the Persian Gulf – in which the land in question was under the previous sovereignty of another state – the term "occupied territory" has not been applied to the territory that had come under one side's military control as a result of armed conflict. Amb. Gold further notes that no internationally recognized sovereign control previously existed in the West Bank and Gaza; Israel took control of the West Bank as a result of a defensive war; under UN Security Council Resolution 242 Israel is not required to withdraw from "all the territories" captured in the Six-Day War of 1967; and that after the Oslo II Interim Agreement of September 1995, 98 percent of the Palestinian population in the West Bank and Gaza came under Palestinian jurisdiction. Amb. Alan Baker, former Legal Adviser to Israel's Foreign Ministry and former Ambassador of Israel to Canada, participated in the negotiation and drafting of the various agreements comprising the Oslo Accords. In "The Settlements Issue: Distorting the Geneva Convention and the Oslo Accords," he notes that some in the international community claim that Israeli settlements in the West Bank are a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention, but both the text of that convention, and the post-World War II circumstances under which it was drafted, clearly indicate that it was never intended to refer to situations like Israel's settlements. A special regime between Israel and the Palestinians is set out in a series of agreements negotiated between 1993 and 1999 that are still valid – that govern all issues between them, settlements included. In this framework there is no specific provision restricting continued construction by either party. Baker notes that the Palestinians cannot now invoke the Geneva Convention regime in order to bypass previous internationally acknowledged agreements. Jeffrey S. Helmreich, a graduate research fellow in the Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School and PhD candidate in philosophy and law at UCLA, discusses additional "Diplomatic and Legal Aspects of the Settlement Issue." Helmreich concludes that while one may legitimately support or challenge Israeli settlements in the disputed territories, they are not illegal, and they have neither the size, the population, nor the placement to seriously impact upon the future status of the disputed territories and their Palestinian population centers. Amb. Dore Gold takes on "The Myth of Israel as a Colonialist Entity," seeing it as an instrument of political warfare to delegitimize the Jewish state. Modern Israel's roots preceded the arrival of the British to the Middle East. In that sense Britain was not Israel's mother-country, like France was for Algeria. Indeed, the Jews were already re-establishing their presence independently in their land well before the British and French dismantled the Ottoman Empire. As time went on, the British Empire was the main obstacle to Israel's re-birth. Ironically, most of the Arab states owe their origins to the entry and domination of the European powers. Dr. Robbie Sabel, former Legal Adviser to the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, looks at "The Campaign to Delegitimize Israel with the False Charge of Apartheid," noting that the comparison of Israel to South Africa under white supremist rule has been utterly rejected by those with intimate understanding of the old Apartheid system. Israel is a multi-racial and multi-colored society, and the Arab minority actively participates in the political process. The accusation is made that the very fact that Israel is considered a Jewish state proves an “Apartheid-like” situation. Yet the accusers have not a word of criticism against the tens of liberal democratic states that have Christian crosses incorporated in their flags, nor against the Muslim states with the half crescent symbol of Islam. Israel's security fence in the West Bank, called by its detractors the "Apartheid Wall," is recognized as having saved countless lives as its construction helped break the back of the Palestinian suicide bombing campaign against Jewish civilians during the Second Intifada. Laurence E. Rothenberg, a fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C., and the former editor-in-chief of the Harvard International Law Journal, and Abraham Bell, a member of the Faculty of Law at Bar-Ilan University, discuss "Israel's Anti- Terror Fence: The World Court Case," noting that the security fence is a necessary and proportional response to a campaign of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes by Palestinians. They point out that it was at the insistence of Syria, Egypt, and Jordan that each of the armistice agreements of 1949 specified that the ceasefire lines from 1949 bounding the West Bank – the "green line" – were not borders. This is solely a defunct military line demarcating the extent of the Transjordanian invasion of Israel in 1948. Dr. Robbie Sabel follows with a critique of "The ICJ Opinion on the Separation Barrier: Designating the Entire West Bank as 'Palestinian Territory'." He notes that while the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague in its advisory opinion on the legality of Israel's separation barrier uncritically adopted the UN General Assembly phrase "Palestinian territories" as applying to all the territories, the General Assembly is not a global legislature that creates international law through its resolutions. Israel's basic legal rights in the Land of Israel under international law are the focus of Amb. Yehuda Z. Blum, Professor Emeritus of International Law at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, in his discussion of "The Evolution of Israel's Boundaries." He presents a legal foundation that begins with the League of Nations adoption of the Palestine Mandate on July 22, 1922, which in its preamble incorporated the Balfour Declaration of November 2, 1917. It further stated that “recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country.” Finally, Israel Prize recipient Prof.
Recommended publications
  • HHRG-115-GO06-Wstate-Goldphdd
    Written Testimony Mr. Chairman, thank you for convening today’s hearing. A discussion about the Golan Heights today may seem baffling. Increasingly, in recent years, many Israelis have expressed a huge sigh of relief that previous rounds of Israeli-Syrian negotiations did not go anywhere and the Golan remains under Israeli control. They imagine that had these earlier talks been concluded, then in 2011, with the outbreak of the Syrian civil war, the forces of Jabhat al-Nusra, Da'ish (ISIS), not to mention Assad’s own ruthless forces, would have been be sitting along the coastline of the Sea of Galilee, with their weapons aimed at the city of Tiberius across the lake. What has changed today is that with the imminent victory of the forces of President Bashar Assad in the sector of South Syria, new diplomatic initiatives by outside actors cannot be ruled out. Already in March 2016, the U.N.'s Special Envoy on Syria, Staffan de Mistura, proposed a paper on "Essential Principles of a Political Solution in Syria." The first point of his paper specifically called for "the restoration of the occupied Golan Heights" to Syria. This past February at the Valdai Conference in Moscow, Vitaly Naumkin, the leading Russian authority on Syria insisted that Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights could not be accepted. He raised doubts about its very legality.1 Past US Assurances US recognition of Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights would constitute the fulfillment of a series of previous diplomatic assurances given to Israel by past administrations regarding the international status of Israel's position on that strategic plateau.
    [Show full text]
  • Israel's Rights As a Nation-State in International Diplomacy
    Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs Institute for Research and Policy המרכז הירושלמי לענייני ציבור ומדינה )ע"ר( ISRAEl’s RiGHTS as a Nation-State in International Diplomacy Israel’s Rights as a Nation-State in International Diplomacy © 2011 Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs – World Jewish Congress Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs 13 Tel Hai Street, Jerusalem, Israel Tel. 972-2-561-9281 Fax. 972-2-561-9112 Email: [email protected] www.jcpa.org World Jewish Congress 9A Diskin Street, 5th Floor Kiryat Wolfson, Jerusalem 96440 Phone : +972 2 633 3000 Fax: +972 2 659 8100 Email: [email protected] www.worldjewishcongress.com Academic Editor: Ambassador Alan Baker Production Director: Ahuva Volk Graphic Design: Studio Rami & Jaki • www.ramijaki.co.il Cover Photos: Results from the United Nations vote, with signatures, November 29, 1947 (Israel State Archive) UN General Assembly Proclaims Establishment of the State of Israel, November 29, 1947 (Israel National Photo Collection) ISBN: 978-965-218-100-8 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction and Overview Ambassador Alan Baker .......................................................................................................................................................................... 5 The National Rights of Jews Professor Ruth Gavison ........................................................................................................................................................................... 9 “An Overwhelmingly Jewish State” - From the Balfour Declaration to the Palestine Mandate
    [Show full text]
  • Has Israel Annexed East Jerusalem?
    HAS ISRAEL ANNEXED EASTJERUSALEM? IanS. Lustick Dr. Lustick hpro$ssor ofpolitical science at the University of Pennsyhania rI-1 he Israel-PLO agreement in Oslo government's repeated and categorical refusal permitted a delay before the parties to consider compromises on the fitture of would begin negotiations over expanded East Jerusalem suggests that he may 1 "permanent-statusissues"- wish to enjoy the benefits of appearing to take including settlements, boundaries, rehgees and the peace process seriously while insuring its Jerusalem. That delay, until the beginning of failure with an unyielding position on the key the third year of the "interim period," ended in issue of Jerusalem. May 1996 when the permanent-status Indeed on no issue has the Netanyahu negotiations were formally begun. Shortly government been more explicit about its afterward Benjamin Netanyahu was elected, opposition to compromise than with respect to replacing Shimon Peres as IsraeFs prime the fitm of expanded East Jmsalem. Its minister and putting those negotiations on official guidelines read as follows: hold. Many wonder whether the tangled dispute over details of Israeli redeployment Jerusalem, the capital of Israel, is one city, hmHebron and provocative Israeli moves in whole and united, and will remain forever East Jerusalem signal the new government's under Israel's soverei gnty....?he government determination to stonewall the pea& p"cess will thwart any artempt to undermine the while expanding settlements and de facto unity of Jerusalem, and will prevent any annexation. action which is counter to Israel's exclusive sovereignty ova the city. From this point of view, the Netanyahu-Likud government is doing to the In a study of the Jerusalem question published Oslo negotiating process what the Begin-Likud shortly before the 1996 election, top Netanyahu government did to the 1979-8 1 autonomy foreign-policy adviser Dore Gold argued that negotiations and what the Shamir-Lhd even if a compromise might be possible, government did the to post-Madrid talks.
    [Show full text]
  • Ten Years with Netanyahu – Maintaining Israel, the Conflict
    INTERNATIONAL POLICY ANALYSIS Ten Years with Netanyahu Maintaining Israel, the Conflict – and Himself DAHLIA SCHEINDLIN January 2017 n Benjamin Netanyahu’s political success has been paved by the Israeli public’s per- ception of imminent existential destruction. Did his dichotomic worldview and his »fortress Israel« mentality create or merely leverage the public’s fears? n In the name of existential security, Netanyahu has justified the deterioration in the Palestinian-Israel conflict, which masquerades as stagnation. His fixation on Iran during two of his recent three terms as Prime Minister has distracted from a lack of policy on the local conflict. n Netanyahu has implemented a clear course of free market economics, which has generated some respectable macroeconomic indicators, but at the expense of mas- sive socio-economic gaps. n Since his re-election in 2015, Netanyahu has concentrated power and portfolios in his hands and has perpetuated earlier efforts to erode Israel’s civil society. He has targeted the press, his ideological opponents in the NGO sector, and Israel’s Arab-Palestinian minority. n In order to temper growing nationalism and democratic erosion, Israel should take genuine steps towards conflict resolution, place checks on unfettered free market principles, and end the aggression against independent civil society, opposition groups, and minorities. DAHLIA SCHEINDLIN | TEN YEARS WITH NETANYAHU Contents 1. Introduction ...........................................................3 2. Security and Foreign Policy: Searching
    [Show full text]
  • (The West Bank) and Gaza and the Settlements in International Law
    65 THE STATUS OF JUDEA & SAMARIA (THE WEST BANK) AND GAZA AND THE SETTLEMENTS IN INTERNATIONAL LAW TALIA EINHORN 1. INTRODUCTION 3 2. THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE STATE OF ISRAEL, THE JEWISH STATE 4 3. ERETZ ISRAEL IN INTERNATIONAL LAW – HISTORICAL OVERVIEW 6 3.1 The British Mandate 6 3.2 The United Nations Partition Resolution 8 3.3 The Green Line and the Armistice Agreements 10 3.4 Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338 11 3.5 Severing the Ties between Jordan and the West Bank 13 3.6 The Peace Agreements with Egypt and Jordan 13 3.7 The Agreements with the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) 14 3.8 Israel’s Unilateral Withdrawal from the Gaza Strip (the Disengagement 15 Program) 3.9 The Palestinian Authority’s Status in the United Nations 15 4. THE STATUS OF THE WEST BANK IN INTERNATIONAL LAW 4.1 The Israeli Position 19 4.2 The Security Council’s Position on Jerusalem 24 4.3 The ICJ Advisory Opinion on the Separation Barrier 25 4.4 Interim Summary 30 5. THE SETTLEMENTS IN INTERNATIONAL LAW 5.1 The West Bank Settlements 30 5.2 The Rules of International Law Regarding Occupied Territories 30 5.3 The Agreements with the PLO 31 5.4 Comparative Perspectives 33 6. THE ISSUE OF THE PALESTINIAN PEOPLE’S SELF-DETERMINATION 6.1 Defining the Palestinian People 37 6.2 Self-Determination for Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza Only 38 6.3 Self-Determination for Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza and for All 39 Palestinian Refugees since the War of Independence 6.4 Israeli Arabs within the Green Line 42 6.5 Implications of the Arab Spring and the Existing Status of Arab States 44 7.
    [Show full text]
  • Jerusalem Viewpoints
    Jerusalem Viewpoints Dore Gold Ambassador Dore Gold is President of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. He was the eleventh Permanent Representative of Israel to the United Nations (1997-1999). Previously he served as Foreign Policy Advisor to the former Prime Minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu. He has served as an advisor to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, who asked him to accompany his entourage to Washington and the 2003 Aqaba Summit with President George W. Bush. Ambassador Gold was a member of the Israeli delegation at the 1998 Wye River negotiations between Israel and the PLO, outside of Washington. He negotiated the Note for the Record, which supplemented the 1997 Hebron Protocol, and in 1996 concluded the negotiations with the U.S., Lebanon, Syria, and France for the creation of the Monitoring Group for Southern Lebanon. In 1991, he served as an advisor to the Israeli delegation to the Madrid Peace Conference. From 1985 to 1996 he was a senior research associate at the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies, Tel Aviv University, where he was Director of the U.S. Foreign and Defense Policy Project. Dr. Gold received his BA ('75), MA ('76), and PhD ('84) from Columbia University. Ambassador Gold has written numerous books and articles on the Middle East, including U.S. Military Strategy in the Middle East (Tel Aviv: Ministry of Defense Publications, 1993), Hatred's Kingdom: How Saudi Arabia Supports the New Global Terrorism (Washington: Regnery, 2003), Tower of Babble: How the United Nations Has Fueled Global Chaos (NY: Crown Forum, 2004), The Fight for Jerusalem: Radical Islam, the West, and the Future of the Holy City (Regnery, 2007) and The Rise of Nuclear Iran: How Tehran Defies the West (Regnery, 2009).
    [Show full text]
  • Imagining a Likud Foreign Policy | the Washington Institute
    MENU Policy Analysis / PolicyWatch 304 Imagining a Likud Foreign Policy by Dore Gold Jan 29, 2001 ABOUT THE AUTHORS Dore Gold Dore Gold was Israel's ambassador to the United Nations from 1997-1999. Brief Analysis egional TrendsFebruary marks ten years since the end of the Gulf War. The situation in the Middle East today R is vastly more dangerous than in 1991. The favorable regional conditions in 1991 that allowed the current peace process to begin have been reversed. Three key trends are the following: After Iraqs defeat in the Gulf War, it was placed under UN monitoring and extensive sanctions, thereby removing a major threat from Israels calculus. Today, the situation is drastically different, with the absence of UN inspections for more than two years and the deterioration of sanctions against Iraq. In 1991, Iran was still recovering from its exhaustive war with Iraq and could not fully participate in regional, specifically ArabIsraeli, affairs. By contrast, Iran is currently testing intermediate-range missiles and is expressing its strategic weight in places like Lebanon, where it has increased its support to Hizballah. In 1991, the USSR was crumbling before its eventual collapse and was no longer in a position to offer strategic and military support to the enemies of Israel, while its successor the Russian Federation has more or less acquiesced to U.S. positions on the Middle East. Since 1996, however, Russia has taken a contrary approach to many U.S. policies and leadership in the region, in particular with regard to Iraqi sanctions and weapons inspections and the transfer of missile technology to Iran.
    [Show full text]
  • The 2014 Gaza War: the War Israel Did Not Want and the Disaster It Averted
    The Gaza War 2014: The War Israel Did Not Want and the Disaster It Averted Hirsh Goodman and Dore Gold, eds. with Lenny Ben-David, Alan Baker, David Benjamin, Jonathan D. Halevi, and Daniel Rubenstein Front Cover Photo: Hamas fires rockets from densely populated Gaza City into Israel on July 15, 2014. The power plant in the Israeli city of Ashkelon is visible in the background. (AFP/Thomas Coex) Back Cover Photo: Hamas terrorists deploy inside a tunnel under the Gaza City neighborhood of Shuja’iya on Aug. 17, 2014. (Anadolu Images/Mustafa Hassona) © 2015 Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs 13 Tel Hai Street, Jerusalem, Israel Tel. 972-2-561-9281 Fax. 972-2-561-9112 Email: [email protected] www.jcpa.org Graphic Design: Darren Goldstein ISBN: 978-965-218-125-1 Contents Executive Summary 4 Preface 5 Israel’s Narrative – An Overview 7 Hirsh Goodman Telling the Truth about the 2014 Gaza War 31 Ambassador Dore Gold Israel, Gaza and Humanitarian Law: Efforts to Limit Civilian Casualties 45 Lt. Col. (res.) David Benjamin The Legal War: Hamas’ Crimes against Humanity and Israel’s Right to Self-Defense 61 Ambassador Alan Baker The Limits of the Diplomatic Arena 77 Ambassador Dore Gold Hamas’ Strategy Revealed 89 Lt. Col. (ret.) Jonathan D. Halevi Hamas’ Order of Battle: Weapons, Training, and Targets 109 Lenny Ben-David Hamas’ Tunnel Network: A Massacre in the Making 119 Daniel Rubenstein Hamas’ Silent Partners 131 Lenny Ben-David Gazan Casualties: How Many and Who They Were 141 Lenny Ben-David Key Moments in a 50-Day War: A Timeline 153 Daniel Rubenstein About the Authors 167 About the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs 168 3 Executive Summary The Gaza War 2014: The War Israel Did Not Want and the Disaster It Averted is a researched and documented narrative that relates the truth as it happened.
    [Show full text]
  • Israel: Strategy for Peace and Security | the Washington Institute
    MENU Policy Analysis / PolicyWatch 141 Israel: Strategy for Peace and Security by Dore Gold Aug 15, 1997 ABOUT THE AUTHORS Dore Gold Dore Gold was Israel's ambassador to the United Nations from 1997-1999. Brief Analysis n May 1996, the peace process was not the dynamic, successful set of negotiations that many today I retrospectively claim it was. In fact, the Israeli-Palestinian track was on the verge of collapse. Had it been making real progress, Binyamin Netanyahu would not have been elected prime minister. Thus, when the current Likud government took office, Israel faced a dilemma over how to deal with a peace process that has many difficulties. From the time the Declaration of Principles was signed in September 1993 until May 1996, the Israeli people suffered approximately 250 fatalities resulting from terrorism. That is equal to the number of casualties Israel suffered from terrorism for the entire decade prior to 1993. Moreover, instead of facing the threat of terror in remote areas and areas under dispute (i.e. West Bank) as Israel had in the past, terror attacks were being conducted in Israeli cities like Afula, Hadera, Tel Aviv, and Jerusalem. Furthermore, the pattern of terrorism had changed as well. The mortality rate of terrorist attacks had greatly increased, as did the sophistication of explosives acquired by the terrorists. The evolution of events over these three years deeply disappointed even those Israelis who had expected the peace process to deliver the bare minimum of results—greater security. Violence: An Unacceptable Means of Negotiation The problems Israel faces on the Palestinian track are not unique.
    [Show full text]
  • The UAE-Israel Breakthrough: Bilateral and Regional Implications and U.S
    MENU Policy Analysis / PolicyWatch 3377 The UAE-Israel Breakthrough: Bilateral and Regional Implications and U.S. Policy by Ebtesam al-Ketbi, Dore Gold, Barbara A. Leaf, David Makovsky Sep 14, 2020 Also available in Arabic / Farsi ABOUT THE AUTHORS Ebtesam al-Ketbi Ebtesam al-Ketbi, founder and president of the Emirates Policy Center, the UAE's leading foreign policy and security think tank; professor of political science at United Arab Emirates University; and a member of the Gulf Cooperation Council's Consultative Commission. Dore Gold Dore Gold was Israel's ambassador to the United Nations from 1997-1999. Barbara A. Leaf Ambassador Barbara A. Leaf was the Ruth and Sid Lapidus Fellow at The Washington Institute and director of the Geduld Program on Arab Politics from 2018-2021. David Makovsky David Makovsky is the Ziegler distinguished fellow at The Washington Institute and director of the Koret Project on Arab-Israel Relations. Brief Analysis Former diplomats and experts discuss what steps each party should take after the historic White House signing ceremony, and how to bring the Palestinians and other actors into the fold. n September 14, The Washington Institute held a virtual Policy Forum with Ebtesam al-Ketbi, Dore Gold, O Barbara Leaf, and David Makovsky. Ketbi is founder and president of the Emirates Policy Center, the UAE’s leading foreign policy and security think tank. Gold is president of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs and former Israeli permanent representative to the UN. Leaf is the Institute’s Lapidus Fellow and former U.S. ambassador to the UAE. Makovsky is the Institute’s Ziegler Distinguished Fellow and former senior advisor to the State Department’s special envoy for Israeli-Palestinian negotiations.
    [Show full text]
  • Rescuing Israeli-Palestinian Peace the Fathom Essays 2016-2020
    Rescuing Israeli-Palestinian Peace The Fathom Essays 2016-2020 DENNIS ROSS DAHLIA SCHEINDLIN HUSAM ZOMLOT SARAI AHARONI HUDA ABU ARQOUB TIZRA KELMAN HUSSEIN AGHA ALI ABU AWAD KHALED ELGINDY AMOS GILEAD YAIR HIRSCHFELD JOEL SINGER EINAT WILF YOSSI KLEIN HALEVI ZIAD DARWISH YOSSI KUPERWASSER ORNA MIZRAHI TOBY GREENE KOBY HUBERMAN SETH ANZISKA LAUREN MELLINGER SARA HIRSCHHORN ALEX RYVCHIN GRANT RUMLEY MOHAMMED DAJANI MICHAEL HERZOG AMIR TIBON DORE GOLD TONY KLUG ILAN GOLDENBERG JOHN LYNDON AZIZ ABU SARAH MEIR KRAUSS AYMAN ODEH MICAH GOODMAN SHANY MOR CALEV BEN-DOR SHALOM LIPNER DAVID MAKOVSKY ASHER SUSSER GILEAD SHER NED LAZARUS MICHAEL KOPLOW MICHAEL MELCHIOR ORNI PETRUSHKA NAFTALI BENNETT KRIS BAUMAN ODED HAKLAI JACK OMER-JACKAMAN DORON MATZA GERSHON HACOHEN SHAUL JUDELMAN NAVA SONNENSCHEIN NOAM SCHUSTER-ELIASSI Edited by Alan Johnson, Calev Ben-Dor and Samuel Nurding 1 ENDORSEMENTS For those convinced of the continuing relevance to global peace and security of a resolution to the issues between the Palestinian people and Israel, Fathom provides an invaluable and widely drawn set of essays at just the right time. With a focus and interest recently enhanced by dramatic and significant events, these differing points of view and suggestions for progress make a great and thoughtful contribution. Rt Hon Alistair Burt, UK Minister for the Middle East and North Africa 2010-13, and 2017-19; Distinguished Fellow, RUSI Israelis and Palestinians are not going anywhere and neither can wish the other away. That, alone, makes a powerful argument for a two states for two peoples outcome to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In Rescuing Israeli-Palestinian Peace 2016-2020, one can read 60 essays looking at every aspect of two states and how they might be achieved.
    [Show full text]
  • Palestinian Arab Self-Determination and Israeli Settlements on the West Bank: an Analysis of Their Legality Under International Law
    Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review Volume 8 Number 3 Article 4 6-1-1986 Palestinian Arab Self-Determination and Israeli Settlements on the West Bank: An Analysis of Their Legality under International Law Marilyn J. Berliner Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/ilr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Marilyn J. Berliner, Palestinian Arab Self-Determination and Israeli Settlements on the West Bank: An Analysis of Their Legality under International Law, 8 Loy. L.A. Int'l & Comp. L. Rev. 551 (1986). Available at: https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/ilr/vol8/iss3/4 This Notes and Comments is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews at Digital Commons @ Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons@Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Palestinian Arab Self-Determination and Israeli Settlements on the West Bank: An Analysis of Their Legality Under International Law I. INTRODUCTION The "right of self-determination,"' which has played a pivotal role in reshaping the map of the post-World War II world, is repeat- edly asserted on behalf of the Palestinian 2 Arabs in the West Bank 3 and Gaza Strip (Gaza). This comment focuses on the development of the concept of self-determination, its interpretation by the United Na- 1. Defined as "the right of a nation to constitute an independent state and determine its own government for itself." A.
    [Show full text]