DOCSLIB.ORG

Moshe Yaalon Vice Prime Minister and Minister of Strategic Affairs; Former IDF Chief of Staff Maj.-Gen

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Moshe Yaalon Vice Prime Minister and Minister of Strategic Affairs; Former IDF Chief of Staff Maj.-Gen ISRAEL’S CRITICAL SECURITY REQUIREMENTS FOR DEFENSIBLE BORDERS THE FOUNDATION FOR A VIABLE PEACE ISRAEL’S CRITICAL SECURITY REQUIREMENTS FOR CRITICAL ISRAEL’S Updated Edition While there has been significant public discussion about Palestinian demands in this diplomatic formula, there has been little in-depth analysis of Israel’s rights and requirements. This study is intended to fill that vacuum, presenting a comprehensive assessment of Israel’s critical security requirements, particularly the need for defensible borders that was enshrined in UN Security Council Resolution 242 and endorsed by past U.S. administrations. The study also details the key elements of a demilitarized Palestinian state, as was proposed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu shortly after taking office in 2009. The vital importance for the defense of Israel of control of the airspace over the West Bank is also carefully considered, as are the risks to Israel of deploying international forces in the West Bank. Historically, every peace accord the State of Israel has reached with its neighbors has been challenged by other Middle Eastern states across the region or by international terrorist organizations. Given that experience, the only peace that will last over time is a peace that Israel can defend. CENTRAL TEL AVIV AS SEEN FROM THE WEST BANK VILLAGE OF DEIR BALLUT Introduction by DEFENSIBLE BORDERS Lt.-Gen. (ret.) Moshe Yaalon Vice Prime Minister and Minister of Strategic Affairs; former IDF Chief of Staff Maj.-Gen. (res.) Uzi Dayan Maj.-Gen. (res.) Yaakov Amidror Former IDF Deputy Chief of Staff; former National Former Head of the Research and Assessment Division, IDF Security Adviser Intelligence; former military secretary to the Minister of Defense. Maj.-Gen. (res.) Aharon Ze’evi Farkash Brig.-Gen. (res.) Udi Dekel Former Head of IDF Intelligence Former Head of the IDF Strategic Planning Division; former Head of the Negotiation Unit, Office of Prime Minister Dr. Dore Gold Ehud Olmert President, Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs; former Permanent Representative of Israel to the Dan Diker United Nations Secretary General, World Jewish Congress; Foreign Policy Fellow, Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs; Adjunct Fellow, Hudson Institute Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs ISRAEL’S CRITICAL SECURITY REQUIREMENTS FOR DEFENSIBLE BORDERS THE FOUNDATION FOR A VIABLE PEACE Edited by Dan Diker Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs © 2011 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: 978-965-218-098-8 Production Director and Researcher: Adam Shay Publications Director: Mark Ami-El Associate Editors: Noah Pollak, Ruthie Blum Leibowitz Graphic Design: Studio Rami & Jaki Maps: Based on Google Earth ©2010 Photos: AP Photo, Hagai Nativ, Alexander Lysyi Cover Photo: Alexander Lysyi - Central Tel Aviv as seen from the West Bank village of Deir Ballut Contents Preface: Israel’s Continuing Requirements for Defensible Borders in a Rapidly Changing Middle East Dr. Dore Gold 6 Introduction: Restoring a Security-First Peace Policy Lt.-Gen. (ret.) Moshe Yaalon 12 Defensible Borders to Secure Israel’s Future Maj.-Gen. (res.) Uzi Dayan 22 Key Principles of a Demilitarized Palestinian State Maj.-Gen. (res.) Aharon Ze’evi Farkash 34 The U.S. and “Defensible Borders”: How Washington Has Understood UN Security Council Resolution 242 and Israel’s Security Needs Dr. Dore Gold 50 Control of Territorial Airspace and the Electromagnetic Spectrum Brig.-Gen. (res.) Udi Dekel 70 The Risks of Foreign Peacekeeping Forces in the West Bank Maj.-Gen. (res.) Yaakov Amidror 80 Israel’s Return to Security-Based Diplomacy Dan Diker 90 Appendix 1 - Address by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at Bar-Ilan University, June 14, 2009 102 Appendix 2 - Address by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to a Joint Session of the U.S. Congress, May 24, 2011 107 Maps 1. Israel within the 1949 Armistice Lines (pre-1967 Borders) 15 2. Israel’s Strategic Vulnerability from the West Bank 25 3. Israel’s Geographic and Topographic Vulnerabilities Opposite a Prospective Palestinian State 27 4. Israel's Defense Line: The Jordan Rift Valley with the Steep Eastern Slopes of the West Bank Mountain Ridge 29 5. Strategic Terrain Dominating Jerusalem: The Vulnerability of Jerusalem and the Jerusalem–Tel Aviv Highway 31 6. Rocket Threats to Israeli Population Centers from West Bank Terrain 39 7. Israel and the Middle East 41 8. Israel's Airspace Vulnerabilities: The Limited Time for Interdicting Hostile Aircraft 75 About the Authors 112 About the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs 114 Acknowledgments The Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs expresses its profound thanks and appreciation to Miriam and Sheldon Adelson, Steven A. Stern, Alvin Dworman, Roy H. Stern, Nina Rosenwald, Ken and Nira Abramowitz, and James S. Tisch for their vision and generosity in making this monograph possible. 5 Preface: ISRAEL’S CONTINUING REQUIREMENTS FOR DEFENSIBLE BORDERS IN A RAPIDLY CHANGING MIDDLE EAST President, Jerusalem Center Dr. Dore Gold for Public Affairs; former Permanent Representative of Israel to the United Nations Israel is entering an extremely dangerous This diplomatic assault is being waged period in the years ahead. What little strategic on several fronts, most notably at the certainty Israel enjoyed in the past can no United Nations General Assembly, where longer be taken for granted. Instead, a rapidly the Palestinians are seeking support for changing Middle East is emerging in which establishing a state on the 1967 lines. But neighboring Arab regimes have either been also, several European Union states, including overthrown, or their grip on power has been Britain, France, and Germany, have proposed badly shaken by mass uprisings. The loss of that the Middle East Quartet (consisting of the predictability about threats emanating from U.S., Russia, the EU and the UN Secretariat) surrounding states is being caused by other adopt a similar position. This was confirmed reasons as well. To Israel’s east, for example, by British Foreign Secretary William Hague the ultimate direction of Iraq remains unclear; in March 2011 during an address at Chatham it would be an error to rule out Iraq coming House in London, where he reiterated these under the hegemony of Iran and thereby terms.1 In Washington, there have been both adopting the kind of adversarial posture public and private efforts to press President against Israel that previous Iraqi regimes Barack Obama to join the Europeans and issue assumed in decades past. his own blueprint for Israel’s future borders, based on the same territorial parameters.2 Yet precisely as these developments are underway, Israel is also confronting a new Obama stunned many Israelis on May 19, diplomatic assault that could well strip it 2011, when he declared in an address at of the territorial defenses in the West Bank the State Department that "the borders that have provided for its security for over of Israel and Palestine should be based on forty years. This applies particularly to its the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, formidable eastern barrier in the Jordan so that secure and recognized borders are Valley, which, if lost, would leave Israel eight established for both states." Three days later or nine miles wide and in a very precarious he clarified that Israelis and Palestinians would position against a broad spectrum of military need to negotiate a border "that is different challenges that are likely to emerge to its from the one that existed on June 4, 1967." east in the years ahead. These new demands Nevertheless, his explicit reference to the of Israel, which would be problematic 1967 lines appeared to diverge from past U.S. in any event, are being proposed at the positions on this issue. worst possible time; that is, precisely when large parts of the Middle East appear to be Indeed, traditional U.S. policy recognized that engulfed in flames. Israel is not expected to withdraw from all the 6 Preface Anti-government protesters celebrate in Tahrir Square in Cairo, Egypt, Feb. 10, 2011. Dore Gold 7 territories it captured in the 1967 Six-Day War. to the Israeli view that defensible borders This was enshrined in the language of UN were still very relevant for guaranteeing Security Council Resolution 242, which was Israel's future. the basis of successive peace treaties between Israel and the Arab states. This principle, in fact, had already been underscored by the The New Strategic Uncertainty main author of Resolution 242, the British ambassador to the UN in 1967, Lord Caradon, Across the Middle East who admitted on PBS: “We didn’t say there should be a withdrawal to the ‘67 line....We all For decades Israeli policy planning has been knew – the boundaries of ‘67 were not drawn predicated upon certain constants. The as permanent frontiers.”3 This key element calculus of the risks Israel could assume if it of Resolution 242 also appeared in repeated decided upon certain territorial concessions letters of assurance to Israel by U.S. secretaries was based on a keen awareness of the policies of state from Henry Kissinger to Warren being pursued by surrounding states. Since Christopher. In 1988, Secretary of State George 1979, Egypt has been formally at peace with Shultz reiterated: “Israel will never negotiate Israel. Though it has refused to progress from or return to the lines of partition or to towards a full normalization of relations, it has the 1967 borders.”4 adhered to the military clauses of its peace treaty which kept the Sinai Peninsula for the The April 14, 2004, presidential letter to Prime most part demilitarized. While Syria joined Minister Ariel Sharon also spoke explicitly the radical bloc in the Middle East led by Iran, about Israel’s right to “defensible borders” and waged a proxy war with Israel through and to Israel’s need to defend itself by itself.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Supremacy of Social Media in the Hebron Shooting Incident
    Journalism and Mass Communication, March 2018, Vol. 8, No. 3, 165-173 doi: 10.17265/2160-6579/2018.03.005 D DAVID PUBLISHING Supremacy of Social Media in the Hebron Shooting Incident Yaron Katz Holon Institute of Technology, Holon, Israel The controversy in the case of Elor Azaria, an Israeli soldier who shot a Palestinian assailant in the Palestinian city of Hebron, after he was wounded and neutralized, led to a highly emotional public debate threatening a major crisis in the government and society. The incident divided the Israeli public and its leaders, with some expressing outrage over the killing of an incapacitated man, and others supporting even the most extreme response to a stabbing attack. The research argues that the role of governments in preventing exposure of security information was badly shaken following the inability to control information, as the incident was recorded on a mobile phone and uploaded to social media. As demonstrated in this case, local organizations have assumed a new prominence by providing information that previously had been limited by local authorities. The research is looking at the question of who was superior in the Hebron shooting incident: the army, the government, public opinion, traditional media or social media. The conclusions in this case are clear-cut: Social media dominated the entire process and determined its outcome, which was obvious once the video was uploaded on the Internet. Keywords: social media, Israel, Hebron, shooting, army, public opinion Introduction On March 24th, 2016, an Israeli soldier, Elor Azaria, serving in the Israeli Defense Force (IDF), shot a Palestinian assailant who had just stabbed an Israeli soldier, as he lay wounded on the ground (Levy, Zitun, & Kimon, 2016).
    [Show full text]
  • Defensible Borders to Secure Israel's Future
    DEFENSIBLE BORDERS TO SECURE ISRAEL’S FUTURE Former IDF Deputy Chief of Staff; Maj.-Gen. (res.) Uzi Dayan former National Security Advisor Israel’s 1949 Armistice Lines Were compelled to withdraw to the pre-1967 lines. As noted elsewhere in this policy study, Israel Indefensible is a tiny country of about 10,000 square miles, approximately the size of New Jersey in the Israel’s fundamental right to “defensible United States or slightly smaller than Belgium. borders” is grounded in the special legal Compounding Israel’s small size is the fact that and strategic circumstances it faced in the 70 percent of its population and 80 percent of aftermath of the 1967 Six-Day War, when the its industrial capacity are concentrated in the West Bank and other territories were captured. narrow coastal strip sandwiched between the The armistice line of 1949, from which Israel Mediterranean Sea and the West Bank. was attacked, had only been a military boundary between the Israeli and Jordanian To make matters worse, the adjacent hills armies, and not a permanent political border, of the West Bank topographically dominate according to the 1949 Armistice Agreement the coastal plain, which is a relatively flat itself. This provided the background for and exposed area. This provides distinct UN Security Council Resolution 242 of advantages to an attacker for observation, fire, November 1967, which did not call on the and defense from an Israeli ground response. Israel Defense Forces (IDF) to withdraw And there are many targets located along fully to that line. Instead, it concluded that Israel’s coastal plain: Ben-Gurion International Israel would need “secure and recognized Airport, the Trans-Israel Highway (Route 6) boundaries” which could be different from which runs north-south only tens of meters the indefensible pre-war lines.
    [Show full text]
  • The Second Palestinian Intifada a Chronicle of a People’S Struggle
    The Second Palestinian Intifada A Chronicle of a People’s Struggle RAMZY BAROUD Foreword by Kathleen and Bill Christison Introduction by Jennifer Loewenstein Photographs by Mahfouz Abu Turk and Matthew Cassel Pluto P Press LONDON • ANN ARBOR, MI BBaroudaroud 0000 pprere iiiiii 226/4/066/4/06 008:05:128:05:12 First published 2006 by Pluto Press 345 Archway Road, London N6 5AA and 839 Greene Street, Ann Arbor, MI 48106 www.plutobooks.com Copyright © Ramzy Baroud 2006 The right of Ramzy Baroud to be identifi ed as the author of this work has been asserted by him in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN 0 7453 2548 3 hardback ISBN 0 7453 2547 5 paperback Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data applied for 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Designed and produced for Pluto Press by Chase Publishing Services Ltd, Fortescue, Sidmouth, EX10 9QG, England Typeset from disk by Stanford DTP Services, Northampton, England Printed and bound in the United States of America by Maple-Vail Book Manufacturing Group BBaroudaroud 0000 pprere iivv 226/4/066/4/06 008:05:128:05:12 To Zarefah, Iman, and Sammy, my life’s inspiration BBaroudaroud 0000 pprere v 226/4/066/4/06 008:05:128:05:12 Contents Foreword by Kathleen and Bill Christison viii Preface xiii Acknowledgements xvii Introduction by Jennifer Loewenstein 1 1 The Intifada Takes Off (2000–01) 16 2 Intifada International (2002) 36 3 Calls for Reform (2003) 53 4 Profound
    [Show full text]
  • Les Notes De L'ifri N° 10 Armée Et Nation En Israël
    les notes de l’ifri n° 10 Armée et nation en Israël : pouvoir civil, pouvoir militaire The Israeli Changing Security Agenda: Army/Society Relations Amir Oren Yehuda Ben Meir Stuart A. Cohen Mark A. Heller Sous la direction de May Chartouni-Dubarry 1999 Institut français des relations internationales L’Ifri est un centre de recherche et un lieu de débats sur les grands enjeux politiques et économiques internationaux. Dirigé par Thierry de Montbrial depuis sa fondation en 1979, l’Ifri est né de la transformation du Centre d’études de politique étrangère créé en 1935. Il bénéficie du statut d’association reconnue d’utilité publique (loi de 1901). L’Ifri dispose d’une équipe de spécialistes qui mène des programmes de recherche sur des sujets politiques, stratégiques, économiques et régionaux, et assure un suivi des grandes questions internationales. _________________ © Droits exclusivement réservés, Ifri, Paris, 1999 ISBN 2-86592-071-2 ISSN 1272-9914 Ifri - 27, rue de la Procession - 75740 Paris Cedex 15 Tél. : 33 (0)1 40 61 60 00 - Fax : 33 (0)1 40 61 60 60 E-mail : [email protected] - Site Internet : http://www.ifri.org Sommaire ———— Avant-propos p. 7 May Chartouni-Dubarry Armée et nation en Israël : pouvoir civil, pouvoir militaire p. 9 (synthèse) Historique p. 11 L’interaction entre les sphères civile et militaire p. 15 La dimension « religieux-laïques » p. 18 L’impact des recompositions stratégiques extérieures p. 19 May Chartouni-Dubarry De BG à Bibi : les forces israéliennes de défense 50 ans après p. 23 Le modèle Ben Gourion : contrôle politique et unité de commandement p.
    [Show full text]
  • The Israeli Military and Israel's Palestinian Policy
    The Israeli Military and Israel’s Palestinian Policy From Oslo to the Al Aqsa Intifada Yo r am Peri United States Institute of Peace Peaceworks No. 47. First published November 2002. The views expressed in this report are those of the author alone. They do not necessarily reflect views of the United States Institute of Peace. UNITED STATES INSTITUTE OF PEACE 1200 17th Street NW, Suite 200 Washington, DC 20036-3011 Phone: 202-457-1700 Fax: 202-429-6063 E-mail: [email protected] Web: www.usip.org Contents Key Points 5 Foreword by Samuel W. Lewis 9 1. The Israeli Pattern of Political-Military Partnership 11 2. The Geostrategic Transformation of the 1990s 14 3. The Political Arm of the Israeli Defense Forces 20 4. The Modus Operandi of the Military 26 5. The Second About-Face: The Al Aqsa Intifada 30 6. The Sharon Government: The Tail Wagging the Dog? 36 7. Discussion: Peace from a Realpolitik Perspective 45 8. Conclusions: Civil Supremacy in a Low-Intensity Conflict 52 9. Moving Forward: Recommendations for Improving Civil-Military Relations in Israel 55 Notes 58 References 60 About the Author 63 About the Institute 65 Key Points ◗ Far from being a passive implementer of policy, the Israeli military has been a major catalyst in embarking on the road to peace as well as the path to war. Such a high level of policy influence is uncharacteristic of the military in advanced democracies. However, it has been typical of political-military relations in Israel and has become even more pronounced in the past decade.
    [Show full text]
  • Best Line of Defense: the Case for Israeli Sovereignty in the Jordan Valley
    Best Line of Defense: The Case for Israeli Sovereignty in the Jordan Valley JINSA’s Gemunder Center for Defense and Strategy June 2020 DISCLAIMER This report is a product of JINSA’s Gemunder Center for Defense & Strategy. The report does not necessarily represent the views or opinions of JINSA, its founders or its board of directors. Cover image credit: Getty Images Policy Project Staff, Contributors and Advisors JINSA Staff & Contributors Michael Makovsky, PhD President & CEO Gen Charles “Chuck” Wald, USAF (ret.) Distinguished Fellow/Senior Advisor, Gemunder Center for Defense & Strategy; Former Deputy Commander of U.S. European Command Sander Gerber Distinguished Fellow, Gemunder Center for Defense & Strategy Steven Rosen Senior Fellow, Gemunder Center for Defense & Strategy Charles B. Perkins Director for U.S.-Israel Security Policy Abraham Katsman Fellow, Gemunder Center for Defense & Strategy Advisors IDF MG (ret.) Yaakov Amidror Distinguished Fellow, Gemunder Center for Defense & Strategy IDF MG (ret.) Yaacov Ayish Senior Vice President for Israeli Affairs Table of Contents I. Executive Summary 7 II. Geostrategic Importance of the Jordan Valley 10 III. Israeli Control Requires Israeli Sovereignty 16 IV. Legal Basis for Extending Israeli Sovereignty 20 V. Potential Risks, But Manageable 21 Endnotes 26 I. Executive Summary Israel’s recently declared intent to extend sovereignty to parts of the West Bank beginning in July, based on the Trump peace plan, has sparked passionate discussion. Often overlooked is the distinction between Israel extending its sovereignty to all proposed areas of the West Bank, versus just to the Jordan Valley. The former encompasses 29 percent of heavily populated areas in the West Bank, while the sparsely populated Jordan Valley comprises just 15 percent of the West Bank’s landmass.* And the Jordan Valley is a critical slice of strategic territory that holds the key to Israel’s security.
    [Show full text]
  • Israel's Critical Security Requirements for Defensible Borders: the Foundation for a Viable Peace
    Israel's Critical Security Requirements for Defensible Borders: The Foundation for a Viable Peace Lt.-Gen. (ret.) Moshe Yaalon Maj.-Gen. (res.) Uzi Dayan Maj.-Gen. (res.) Yaakov Amidror Maj.-Gen. (res.) Aharon Ze'evi Farkash Brig.-Gen. (res.) Udi Dekel Dr. Dore Gold Dan Diker View Video: Israel's Critical Security Needs for a Viable Peace Published by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs at Smashwords Copyright 2011 Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs Other ebook titles by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs: 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 13 Tel Hai Street, Jerusalem, Israel Tel. 972-2-561-9281 Fax. 972-2-561-9112 Email: [email protected] - www.jcpa.org ISBN: 978-965-218-098-8 Production Director and Researcher: Adam Shay Publications Director: Mark Ami-El Associate Editors: Noah Pollak, Ruthie Blum Leibowitz Graphic Design: Studio Rami & Jaki Maps: Based on Google Earth Copyright 2010 Photos: AP Photo, Hagai Nativ, Alexander Lysyi Cover Photo: Alexander Lysyi - Central Tel Aviv as seen from the West Bank village of Deir Ballut * * * * * Contents Preface: Israel's Continuing Requirements for Defensible Borders in a Rapidly Changing Middle East Dr. Dore Gold Introduction: Restoring a Security-First Peace Policy Lt.-Gen. (ret.) Moshe Yaalon Defensible Borders to Secure Israel's Future Maj.-Gen. (res.) Uzi Dayan Key Principles of a Demilitarized Palestinian State Maj.-Gen. (res.) Aharon Ze'evi Farkash The U.S. and "Defensible Borders": How Washington Has Understood UN Security Council Resolution 242 and Israel's Security Needs Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Social Covenants: the Solution to the Crisis of Religion and State in Israel?
    Social Covenants: The Solution to the Crisis of Religion and State in Israel? ASHER COHEN AND JONATHAN RYNHOLD INTRODUCTION For the last twenty years the relationship between religion and state in Israel bas been in a state of worsening crisis. Tbere has always been a deep ideological and social divide between religions and seeular Jews, with the potential to threaten tbe stability of Israeli democracy. Yet, from the creation of the state in 1948 until tbe early 198()s, compromises stmck between pragmatic political elites were able; to contain this conOict successfully. According to Eliezer Don-Yeliiya, this situation reflected the "politic-s of acconiniodation" characteristic of Lijpbart's model of consociatioiuil democracy.' However by the mid- 1990s, 47 percent of Jewisli Israelis believed that tbe Kulturkampf between religions and .secular jews would end in a violent stnigde or a civil war.^ Subsequently in 2000, 82 percent thought that religious- •ASHER COHEN (B,A,. M.A., Ph.D., Bar-Ilaii UniversiU, Bar-Ilaii, Israel) is a senior lecturer in political science, Bar-Ilan University, fie is author of Israeli Assiinilation: The Assimilation of Noii-Jew.s in hraeli-jewlsh Society ami Its Impliratious for Israel's Collective Identity, and is co-author of Israel find the Politics of Jewish Identittf. The Serular-Religiouf: Impasse- His articles have appeared in CAtil Warn. Harvard Inteniational Review. ](mmal ofChureh and State, mid Poliiika [Hehrew]. Special interests include religion, state, and politics in Israel, and the politics of Israel's collective idt-ntity. JONATHAN RYNHOLD (B,A., University of Leeds. United Kingdom; Msc. Ph.D., Ix^ndon School of Economics and Political Science) is lecturer in political .science, Bar-Ikn University.
    [Show full text]
  • The Brookings Institution the Saban Center For
    1 THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION THE SABAN CENTER FOR MIDDLE EAST POLICY A SABAN CENTER FORUM THE NEXT DISENGAGEMENT PRESENTATION BY MAJOR GENERAL (RET.) UZI DAYAN Monday, October 31, 2005 Falk Auditorium 1775 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. [TRANSCRIPT PREPARED FROM A TAPE RECORDING.] MILLER REPORTING CO., INC. 735 8th STREET, S.E. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20003-2802 (202) 546-6666 2 P R O C E E D I N G S MR. INDYK: Good afternoon, friends. Thank you for joining us at the Saban Center at Brookings. Please start your lunch and we will eat through the presentation in more ways than one. I'm very glad to have the opportunity to have General Dayan speak to us today. He is a man who has very deep experience on national security issues in Israel- first through a very distinguished career in the Israel Defense Forces where he held a number of critical positions from the Commanding Officer of Central Command - which deals with the West Bank and beyond - to the Head of Military Planning, to Deputy Chief of Staff. And then when he left the armed forces, he took on the role of National Security Adviser, which was not an easy task I think in terms of defining that role. Were you the first National Security Adviser? MR. DAYAN: The second. MR. INDYK: In that role he played a very important part in developing the ideas behind the concept of separation, the building of the fence barrier in the West Bank, and the concept of MILLER REPORTING CO., INC.
    [Show full text]
  • Visit to Israel
    Visit to Israel Joseph B. Gildenhorn United States Ambassador to Switzerland, 1989-1993 and thirty Board members of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) spent one week in Israel, January 15-23, 2002. We found the country Ifacing daily terror attacks and an ongoing battle against the terrorist infrastructure that perpetrates these attacks. The mood we encountered was both sober and determined, with a striking sense of unity among Israelis. We were there only two weeks after the Israeli Navy’s dramatic interception of the Karine A ship—the finding of extensive weapons aboard the ship as well as the related intelligence assessments were raised in almost every meeting. The resilience and determination of the Israeli public were palpable. We witnessed the unity not only on the public level, but also as expressed by leading Israeli officials as to the unity which exists along the political spectrum. We heard from a leading journalist, David Horovitz, that the Israeli official and public attitude toward Arafat was hardening. Despite policy differences between Likud and Labor on how to deal with the Palestinian Authority (PA) Chairman, there was no dissension concerning his role in terrorism. The three leaders of the unity government—Prime Minister Sharon, Foreign Minister Peres and Defense Minister Ben Eliezer—met with our group and laid out for us the situation and the range of options facing the leadership. They were each engaged in the conversation with us and went to great lengths to explain the current situation. We also discussed with senior leaders some of the problems that persist concerning Israel’s negative image in the media, and what might be done on the public relations front to correct this problem.
    [Show full text]
  • Shimon Naveh
    UNCLASSIFIED A project of the Combat Studies Institute, the Operational Leadership Experiences interview collection archives firsthand, multi-service accounts from military personnel who planned, participated in and supported operations in the Global War on Terrorism. Interview with BG (Ret.) Shimon Naveh Combat Studies Institute Fort Leavenworth, Kansas UNCLASSIFIED Abstract As part of his research for a Global War on Terrorism Occasional Paper on the so-called Second Lebanon War of 2006 – a 34-day conflict fought principally between Israel and the paramilitary forces of Hezbollah – historian Matt Matthews of Fort Leavenworth’s Combat Studies Institute interviewed Brigadier General (Ret.) Shimon Naveh, the founder and former head of the Israel Defense Forces’ (IDF) Operational Theory Research Institute (OTRI). Moreover, Naveh is the man most associated, often controversially so, with what has been described as a major intellectual transformation of the IDF in terms of how it thinks about, prepares for and ultimately wages war. “I read a comment made by an analyst that it was very hard to learn,” said Naveh, who also holds a PhD in war studies from King’s College, London. “You know,” he added, “wars are very hard to fight and yet we go and fight them. If indeed this is crucial and important, it is not an option. We should go and do it…. All you need is some intellectual stamina, some energy. If you’re serious about your profession, then you’ll go through it.” Indeed, Naveh singles out the IDF Chief of Staff, Lieutenant General Dan Halutz, for significant criticism for his alleged lack of understanding of the doctrine he signed which, as Naveh contends, contributed mightily to what is widely considered a defeat of the IDF by Hezbollah, as did a similar ignorance among the vast majority of the IDF General Staff.
    [Show full text]
  • Peace to Prosperity” Vision?
    REPORT 05.11.20 Is There a Practical Roadmap for Trump’s “Peace to Prosperity” Vision? Gilead Sher, Isaac and Mildred Brochstein Fellow in Middle East Peace and Security in Honor of Yitzhak Rabin Daniel Cohen, Intern, Center for the Middle East concessions for Palestinian sovereignty over 1. INTRODUCTION any part of the Old City or the Temple Mount, As a potential “Deal of the Century,” eliciting further Palestinian scorn for the plan. President Donald Trump’s “Peace to Both stipulations disregard carefully crafted Prosperity” plan does not live up to its compromises from former negotiations—the name. It falls well short of an ultimate Oslo process, Camp David, and Annapolis— deal that will break the Israeli-Palestinian which offered detailed sovereignty-sharing gridlock and equitably resolve the conflict. proposals and special security arrangements. It is more accurately a continuation of Even worse, while the Trump plan licenses previous interim agreements—essentially, Israel to initiate annexation without any an Oslo C—but with a significant departure preconditions, Palestinian statehood from past negotiation understandings.1 is conditioned upon a compilation of While the Trump plan The truly innovative components of the unreasonable and impractical thresholds— licenses Israel to initiate deal bend unabashedly toward Israeli all but assuring Palestinian failure. desires, without compensatory elements It is worth noting that while the plan annexation without for Palestinian aspirations. The distortion of has not received strong Arab support, any preconditions, internal balances previously established in neither has it been rejected as strongly Palestinian statehood other U.S. frameworks seems detrimental to as the Palestinians might wish.
    [Show full text]