DOCSLIB.ORG

Sharon: Hardliner Who Ended Otherwise (Sort Of)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sharon: Hardliner Who Ended Otherwise (Sort Of) Sharon: Hardliner Who Ended Otherwise (Sort of) Ariel ‘Arik’ Sharon, 1928-2014: Hardliner Who Ended Otherwise By Thomas G. Mitchell and Ralph Seliger After almost exactly eight years in a coma, the former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon finally succumbed on Jan. 11, 2014. He was known for bold, even reckless moves, both as a career military officer and as a politician. Reviled by the Left as a hawk and worse, for most of his life, he ended up seen as a traitor by the extreme Right, while considered a moderate and potential peacemaker by many others. Over decades, he championed Israel’s extensive settlement of the West Bank and Gaza Strip (viewed by most of the world as illegal and counterproductive to peace), but also stunned the world by unilaterally evacuating settlers and soldiers from Gaza and part of the West Bank in August 2005. Sharon was born Ariel Scheinerman on February 27, 1928 in the cooperative farming village of Kfar Malal in the coastal plain of Palestine known as the Sharon, from which he would later take his name. He is said to have inherited a life-long distrust of Arabs from his father during their rough-hewn frontier existence. He joined the mainstream Hagana militia as a teenager in 1945 and fought in Israel’s War of Independence in 1948 as a platoon leader. Severely wounded during the battle of Latrun in May 1948, he barely made it off the battlefield. In 1953, he was chosen to lead Unit 101, commandos tasked with responding to Palestinian attacks on Israeli civilians. In October of that year, he led a reprisal raid on the West Bank Jordanian village of Kibya—following the slaying of a mother and her two children—in which 69 Palestinian civilians died when their homes were dynamited. Sharon claimed that they hid in cellars and ignored warnings to evacuate. Three years later, Sharon opened Israel’s Sinai Campaign by charging his brigade into the Mitla Pass, but was accused of exceeding his orders with an overly aggressive advance that resulted in massive casualties for his unit. In June 1967, he led an armored division back into the Sinai Peninsula in Israel’s victorious Six Day War [forging the critical breakthrough at Abu Agheila] making him a national hero. And in the early 1970s, as head of Israel’s Southern Command, he suppressed guerrilla activity with ruthless efficiency in the citrus orchards of the Gaza Strip. In the summer of 1973, having entered politics for the first time, Sharon engineered the creation of the Likud out of four smaller parties of the nationalist and economic Right. When war broke out on October 6, 1973, Sharon returned to the Sinai front as a reserve general. He maneuvered his armored division across the Suez Canal, to cutoff Egyptian forces and threaten Cairo. This again made him a national hero. Elected to the Knesset on Dec. 31, 1974, he quit less than a year later in a futile bid to pursue his dream of becoming chief of staff through a reserve command. During Yitzhak Rabin’s first term as prime minister in the mid 1970s, Sharon served as his personal anti-terrorism advisor for eight months. Barely elected to the Knesset on his own list in 1977, he served Menahem Begin as minister of agriculture and spent the next four years working closely with the National Religious Party to settle the West Bank. The NRP settled the West Bank for religious reasons; Sharon settled it to (in his view) ensure Israel’s security against Arab threats from the east. Sharon chose the sites for settlements and coordinated with other ministries to support them with infrastructure. Not atypically, Sharon also gave Begin the support he needed to give up settlements in the Sinai as part of the 1979 peace treaty with Egypt. Begin appointed Sharon as his defense minister after he was reelected in the summer of 1981. Sharon immediately began planning for an invasion of Lebanon to be carried out as soon as he had an excuse. He wanted to expel the Syrians from Lebanon, destroy Palestinian bases in southern Lebanon—known as Fatahland—staging areas for occasional attacks on Israel, and leave pro- Israel Christian allies in charge of the country. That excuse came in June 1982 when a renegade Fatah splinter group attempted to assassinate the Israeli ambassador in London. Sharon won cabinet support for a limited invasion of southern Lebanon, but exceeded this mandate to drive into Beirut. In September 1982, Christian militiamen carried out a massacre of hundreds of Palestinian civilians in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps in West Beirut after being allowed into the camps by Sharon. An Israeli commission of inquiry found Sharon “indirectly responsible” and forced his resignation as defense minister in February 1983. For the next fifteen years, Sharon was relegated to minor ministerial posts in Likud governments. Sharon’s comeback began in October 1998 when Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu appointed him as foreign minister. Following Netanyahu’s electoral defeat by Ehud Barak in 1999, Sharon was elected the new leader of Likud. On September 28, 2000, Sharon was unwisely permitted by Prime Minister Barak to tour the religiously sensitive area known to Jews as the Temple Mount and to Muslims as the Noble Sanctuary, escorted by hundreds of security personnel. This prompted Palestinian rock-throwers who were soon met by lethal force from Israeli police—and so began the Second or “Al-Aksa Intifada,” named after one of the two mosques on the Temple Mount. In February 2001, Sharon decisively beat Barak, by a greater margin than Barak had defeated Netanyahu two years earlier in the greatest electoral victory in Israeli history. Sharon then spent the next years suppressing the Intifada, most critically by reinvading the West Bank, following the March 27, 2002 bombing of a Passover seder at a hotel in Netanya, which killed 30 Israelis and wounded 140. He also approved construction of Israel’s separation barrier in the West Bank, known to its detractors as “the Wall” or “Apartheid Wall”—after initially resisting the idea. But instead of the purely defensive measure along the Green Line as envisioned by Israeli left- wingers who had proposed it, Sharon made the barrier into an instrument for further confiscations of Palestinian property and the division of its population, as it wended its way snake-like around the most thickly-populated settlement blocs. In February 2003, Sharon led the Likud to a decisive general election victory, but after failing to win majority Likud support in an internal referendum, he relied on backing from the Labor Party, Meretz and others to carry out the Gaza “Disengagement” in August 2005. Sharon began to consciously borrow the language of the Left, referring to Israeli rule in the West Bank as an occupation over another people. He then broke with his party and took thirteen members of the Knesset with him into his new Kadima (forward) party in November 2005, claiming the center of the political spectrum by recruiting prominent Laborites, including Shimon Peres. Sharon suffered a massive cerebral hemorrhage on January 3, 2006. Later that month, Hamas won legislative elections for the Palestinian Authority. Sharon’s most devoted followers felt betrayed by his forced evacuation of 8,000 settlers, yet he refused to negotiate or even coordinate this withdrawal with the leadership of the Palestinian Authority under Mahmoud Abbas. This handed Hamas a political victory by seeming to substantiate their claim that only “armed struggle,” rather than negotiations, could liberate Palestinian territory. Unlike his predecessors Rabin and Barak, he never made the tough decision to attempt to trade strategic real estate for a negotiated peace. Sharon was a brilliant military tactician, but a very flawed strategist, and a political maverick rather than a died-in-the-wool ideologue. That’s why he could change course at the end of his active life, famously explaining that “Things look different here [from his perch as prime minister] than there.” But his ruthless maneuverings—with no regard for the rules he broke, the authorities he disobeyed or the people he ran over in pursuit of his goals (fully earning his appellation as “the bulldozer”)—did much to poison relations between Jews and Arabs over the decades; a few months of a new direction, not even fully defined when he fell ill, could hardly begin to repair this damage. Finally, Sharon was probably the last Israeli politician with the gravitas to be able to enact a major reform of Israel’s dysfunctional electoral system (an extreme version of proportional representation that proliferates multiple parties in the Knesset and thereby overly empowers minorities), which has complicated peacemaking with the Palestinians at times. There is no sign that he even contemplated such a move. Still, it’s interesting to note that the true inheritors of his legacy are not Israel’s extreme Right, some of whom actually believe that he was struck down as divine retribution for his forceful actions against the Gaza settlements (much as they see the hand of God in the murder of Yitzhak Rabin for his turn toward peacemaking). They were his direct successors as leaders of Kadima (now nearly defunct as a party), Ehud Olmert and Tzipi Livni, former Likud stalwarts who pursued a negotiated two-state solution, even as they also allowed themselves to be lured into bloody military confrontations with Arab hardliners in Lebanon and Gaza. A badly flawed legacy has produced an imperfect progeny, but far from the worst in Israel’s political spectrum today. Thomas G. Mitchell, Ph.D., is an independent scholar and blogger on a number of subjects, including Israel and its conflict with the Palestinians.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ian S. Lustick
    MIDDLE EAST POLICY, VOL. XV, NO. 3, FALL 2008 ABANDONING THE IRON WALL: ISRAEL AND “THE MIDDLE EASTERN MUCK” Ian S. Lustick Dr. Lustick is the Bess W. Heyman Chair of Political Science at the University of Pennsylvania and the author of Trapped in the War on Terror. ionists arrived in Palestine in the the question of whether Israel and Israelis 1880s, and within several de- can remain in the Middle East without cades the movement’s leadership becoming part of it. Zrealized it faced a terrible pre- At first, Zionist settlers, land buyers, dicament. To create a permanent Jewish propagandists and emissaries negotiating political presence in the Middle East, with the Great Powers sought to avoid the Zionism needed peace. But day-to-day intractable and demoralizing subject of experience and their own nationalist Arab opposition to Zionism. Publicly, ideology gave Zionist leaders no reason to movement representatives promulgated expect Muslim Middle Easterners, and false images of Arab acceptance of especially the inhabitants of Palestine, to Zionism or of Palestinian Arab opportuni- greet the building of the Jewish National ties to secure a better life thanks to the Home with anything but intransigent and creation of the Jewish National Home. violent opposition. The solution to this Privately, they recognized the unbridgeable predicament was the Iron Wall — the gulf between their image of the country’s systematic but calibrated use of force to future and the images and interests of the teach Arabs that Israel, the Jewish “state- overwhelming majority of its inhabitants.1 on-the-way,” was ineradicable, regardless With no solution of their own to the “Arab of whether it was perceived by them to be problem,” they demanded that Britain and just.
    [Show full text]
  • (Title of the Thesis)*
    WATCHING THE WAR AND KEEPING THE PEACE: THE UNITED NATIONS TRUCE SUPERVISION ORGANIZATION (UNTSO) IN THE MIDDLE EAST, 1949-1956 by Andrew Gregory Theobald A thesis submitted to the Department of History In conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Queen’s University Kingston, Ontario, Canada (May, 2009) Copyright ©Andrew Gregory Theobald, 2009 Abstract By virtue of their presence, observers alter what they are observing. Yet, the international soldiers of the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO) did much more than observe events. From August 1949 until the establishment of the United Nations Emergency Force in November 1956, the Western military officers assigned to UNTSO were compelled to take seriously the task of supervising the Arab-Israeli armistice, despite the unwillingness of all parties to accept an actual peace settlement. To the extent that a particular peacekeeping mission was successful – i.e., that peace was “kept” – what actually happened on the ground is usually considered far less important than broader politics. However, as efforts to forge a peace settlement failed one after another, UNTSO operations themselves became the most important mechanism for regional stability, particularly by providing a means by which otherwise implacable enemies could communicate with each other, thus helping to moderate the conflict. This communication played out against the backdrop of the dangerous early days of the Cold War, the crumbling of Western empires, and the emergence of the non- aligned movement. Analyses of the activities of the Mixed Armistice Commissions (MACs), the committees created to oversee the separate General Armistice Agreements signed between Israel and Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria, particularly those during the 1954 to 1956 tenure as UNTSO chief of staff of Canadian Major-General E.L.M.
    [Show full text]
  • Survey of Palestinian Refugees and Internally Displaced Persons 2004 - 2005
    Survey of Palestinian Refugees and Internally Displaced Persons 2004 - 2005 BADIL Resource Center for Palestinian Residency & Refugee Rights i BADIL is a member of the Global Palestine Right of Return Coalition Preface The Survey of Palestinian Refugees and Internally Displaced Persons is published annually by BADIL Resource Center. The Survey provides an overview of one of the largest and longest-standing unresolved refugee and displaced populations in the world today. It is estimated that two out of every five of today’s refugees are Palestinian. The Survey has several objectives: (1) It aims to provide basic information about Palestinian displacement – i.e., the circumstances of displacement, the size and characteristics of the refugee and displaced population, as well as the living conditions of Palestinian refugees and internally displaced persons; (2) It aims to clarify the framework governing protection and assistance for this displaced population; and (3) It sets out the basic principles for crafting durable solutions for Palestinian refugees and internally displaced persons, consistent with international law, relevant United Nations Resolutions and best practice. In short, the Survey endeavors to address the lack of information or misinformation about Palestinian refugees and internally displaced persons, and to counter political arguments that suggest that the issue of Palestinian refugees and internally displaced persons can be resolved outside the realm of international law and practice applicable to all other refugee and displaced populations. The Survey examines the status of Palestinian refugees and internally displaced persons on a thematic basis. Chapter One provides a short historical background to the root causes of Palestinian mass displacement.
    [Show full text]
  • Taking the Initiative: Reflections on Ariel Sharon Parashat Bo January 4, 2014 Rabbi Carl M
    Taking the Initiative: Reflections on Ariel Sharon Parashat Bo January 4, 2014 Rabbi Carl M. Perkins Temple Aliyah, Needham In today’s parashah, we read of the increasingly tense standoff between Pharoah and Moses. Last week, and again this week, we read about plague after plague, as the struggle continues. And yet we know that this conflict will eventually come to an end, with the Israelites victorious as they depart Egypt defiantly, b’yad ramah. The Israelites will defeat their foes in a manner that is almost impossible to conceive of today: without lifting a finger to defend themselves; in fact, without at all fighting their enemies. They’ll be free because God is on their side. Throughout the Exodus story, the use of physical force by humans is disparaged. We do have that story of the Egyptian taskmaster beating the Israelite. Moses intervenes, but is then not fully appreciated, and is even condemned the next day. The bottom line is that the entire people is rescued in a cosmic, mythic, epic scene that is far different from the battlefields of modern warfare. For generations, this model worked very well. For two thousand years, in fact. But although the story inspired liberation struggles all over the world among the powerless against the powerful, although the story bought hope to millions, it had nothing to offer those who were actively fighting for their freedom. It was of limited value to those actually fighting for their freedom. In fact, it was ultimately rejected by those who believed that it was necessary to fight, and not only to pray, for freedom.
    [Show full text]
  • Military and Strategic Affairs Strategic Affairs Volume 1 | No
    Military Military and Military and Strategic Affairs Strategic Strategic Affairs Volume 1 | No. 3 | December 2009 Volume 1 Volume Hizbollah’s Force Buildup of 2006-2009: Foundations and Future Trends Guy Aviad | No. 3 No. Intelligence and the Challenges of High Trajectory Fire | December 2009 Amir Kulick War and Victory Gabriel Siboni The IDF and the Road to a More Professional Military Yuval Bazak The US Military in Iraq and the IDF in Judea and Samaria Giora Segal Warfare against Insurgencies: 1 The Theory behind the Practice Tal Tovy ÈÓ‡φÔÂÁËÈ·†È¯˜ÁÓφÔÂÎÓ‰ THE INSTITUTE FOR NATIONAL SECURITY STUDIES INCORPORATING THE JAFFEE CENTER FOR STRATEGIC STUDIES AT TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY ·È·‡≠Ï˙†˙ËÈÒ¯·È‡ ÈÓ‡φÔÂÁËÈ·†È¯˜ÁÓφÔÂÎÓ‰ THE INSTITUTE FOR NATIONAL SECURITY STUDIES INCORPORATING THE JAFFEE CENTER FOR STRATEGIC STUDIES AT TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY ·È·‡≠Ï˙†˙ËÈÒ¯·È‡· Military and Strategic Affairs Volume 1 | No. 3 | December 2009 CONTENTS Hizbollah’s Force Buildup of 2006-2009: Foundations and Future Trends | 3 Guy Aviad Intelligence and the Challenges of High Trajectory Fire | 23 Amir Kulick War and Victory | 39 Gabriel Siboni The IDF and the Road to a More Professional Military | 51 Yuval Bazak The US Military in Iraq and the IDF in Judea and Samaria | 69 Giora Segal Warfare against Insurgencies: The Theory behind the Practice | 83 Tal Tovy Military and The purpose of Military and Strategic Affairs is to stimulate Strategic Affairs and enrich the public debate on military issues relating to Israel’s national security. Military and Strategic Affairs is published three times a year within the framework of the Military and Strategic Affairs Program at the Institute for National Security Studies.
    [Show full text]
  • Obituaries, Subjectivities, and Perceptions of Ariel Sharon
    History in the Making Volume 7 Article 14 January 2014 Obituaries, Subjectivities, and Perceptions of Ariel Sharon Sean Switzer CSUSB Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/history-in-the-making Part of the Islamic World and Near East History Commons Recommended Citation Switzer, Sean (2014) "Obituaries, Subjectivities, and Perceptions of Ariel Sharon," History in the Making: Vol. 7 , Article 14. Available at: https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/history-in-the-making/vol7/iss1/14 This In Memoriam is brought to you for free and open access by the History at CSUSB ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in History in the Making by an authorized editor of CSUSB ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. In Memoriam In Memoriam Obituaries, Subjectivities, and Perceptions of Ariel Sharon By Sean Switzer Introduction The day after his brother’s death in April, 1888, Alfred Nobel opened a Parisian newspaper only to discover his own obituary. The erroneous obituary, which confused Alfred for his late brother, Ludvig, disheartened him as he realized the gloomy state of his legacy. The article’s headline read, “Le Marchand de la Mort est Mort!” (“The Merchant of Death is Dead!”). Nobel was dumbfounded. His invention of dynamite had backfired on him. He had never intended for dynamite to kill human beings; yet, brutal assertions such as, “Dr. Alfred Nobel, who became rich by finding ways to kill more people, faster than ever before, died yesterday,” highlighted this obituary. Those words condemned Nobel by proclaiming him to be the liaison between dynamite and its victims.
    [Show full text]
  • Israel's War on Terrorism
    Israel Studies: An Anthology - Israel's War on Terrorism Israel's War on Terrorism: A Historical and Political Perspective By Arie Perliger (April 2009) Introduction March 2002 was a devastating month for the citizens of Israel. The country was in the midst of the Al-Aqsa intifada and the suicide attack campaigns of the Palestinian organizations had reached their peak. Eleven times during this month, suicide bombers blew themselves up in the streets of Israel’s cities, causing more than 579 casualties including 81 fatalities. [1] On another six occasions that same month, the Israeli security forces thwarted attacks before the suicide bombers were able to complete their missions. The Israeli political leadership, however, was not ready to increase its response to the Palestinian attacks. The Israel Defense Forces were instructed to continue limited raids on the infrastructure of the Palestinian organizations in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, actions which included mainly arrests and intelligence gathering operations. This policy of restraint changed after the night of March 27. In the evening hours of that day, 250 guests were sitting in the festive Park Hotel dining room, cheerfully celebrating the Passover holiday seder. Around 8:00 pm the celebration was halted. A Hamas operative by the name of Abd al-Basset Muhammad Odeh walked into the room and detonated an explosive device that was attached to his upper body. The aftermath was appalling. Twenty-nine Jews were killed and another 144 were injured. [2] The particular horrors of the attack and the fact that it was carried out on the Jewish holiday that celebrates the freedom of the People of Israel created a public and political environment that essentially left Israeli policy makers with no option but to respond with force.
    [Show full text]
  • Continuity and Change in Israel's Strategic Culture
    CONTINUITY AND CHANGE IN ISRAEL’S STRATEGIC CULTURE Gregory F. Giles Prepared for: Defense Threat Reduction Agency Advanced Systems and Concepts Office Comparative Strategic Cultures Curriculum Contract No: DTRA01-03-D-0017, Technical Instruction 18-06-02 This report represents the views of its author, not necessarily those of SAIC, its sponsors, or any United States Government Agency Continuity and Change in Israel’s Strategic Culture Gregory Giles STRATEGIC CULTURE DEFINED For the purposes of this project, strategic culture is defined as: Shared beliefs, assumptions, and modes of behavior derived from common experiences and accepted narratives (both oral and written), that shape collective identity and relationships to other groups, and which determine appropriate ends and means for achieving security objectives. This definition is well-suited to consideration of the Israeli case. As explained below, Israel has cultivated—some would say imposed—a set of beliefs and assumptions on its citizenry as a means of simultaneously building and defending the fledgling Jewish state in the face of deep Islamic hostility. This belief system is rooted, in part, in such ancient texts as the Bible but is under considerable pressure from contemporary demographic, ideological, and religious changes in Israeli society. As a result, there is both continuity and change in what passes for “appropriate” ends and means of achieving security in Israeli terms. Indeed, the strategic culture framework could provide a useful tool for anticipating how the Jewish state might come to grips with its ongoing internal, as well as external, security challenges. STRATEGIC CULTURE PROFILE Summary Description Israel’s is a strategic culture in transition.
    [Show full text]
  • Obituaries, Subjectivities, and Perceptions of Ariel Sharon
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by CSUSB ScholarWorks History in the Making Volume 7 Article 14 January 2014 Obituaries, Subjectivities, and Perceptions of Ariel Sharon Sean Switzer CSUSB Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/history-in-the-making Recommended Citation Switzer, Sean (2014) "Obituaries, Subjectivities, and Perceptions of Ariel Sharon," History in the Making: Vol. 7 , Article 14. Available at: https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/history-in-the-making/vol7/iss1/14 This In Memoriam is brought to you for free and open access by the History at CSUSB ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in History in the Making by an authorized editor of CSUSB ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. In Memoriam In Memoriam Obituaries, Subjectivities, and Perceptions of Ariel Sharon By Sean Switzer Introduction The day after his brother’s death in April, 1888, Alfred Nobel opened a Parisian newspaper only to discover his own obituary. The erroneous obituary, which confused Alfred for his late brother, Ludvig, disheartened him as he realized the gloomy state of his legacy. The article’s headline read, “Le Marchand de la Mort est Mort!” (“The Merchant of Death is Dead!”). Nobel was dumbfounded. His invention of dynamite had backfired on him. He had never intended for dynamite to kill human beings; yet, brutal assertions such as, “Dr. Alfred Nobel, who became rich by finding ways to kill more people, faster than ever before, died yesterday,” highlighted this obituary. Those words condemned Nobel by proclaiming him to be the liaison between dynamite and its victims.
    [Show full text]
  • In Pursuit of Mobility
    Joonas Sipilä & Tommi Koivula Joonas Sipilä & Tommi National Defence College Department of War History Publication series 1 Tänä päivänä strategian käsitettä käytetään monin eri tavoin niin siviili- kuin sotilasyhteyk- sissäkin. Maanpuolustuskorkeakoulussa stra- tegia katsotaan yhdessä sotahistorian sekä operaatiotaidon ja taktiikan kanssa sotataidon keskeiseksi osa-alueeksi. Oppiaineena strategi- alle on ominaista korkea yleisyyden aste sekä teoreettinen ja menetelmällinen moninaisuus. Tässä teoksessa pitkäaikaiset strategian tutki- jat ja opettajat, professori Joonas Sipilä ja YTT KUINKA STRATEGIAA TUTKITAAN KUINKA STRATEGIAA Kalle Kirjailija Tommi Koivula, valottavat kokonaisvaltaisesti strategian tutkielman kirjoittamiseen liittyviä In Pursuit of Mobility ulottuvuuksia edeten alan tieteenfilosofiasta aina tutkimusasetelman rakentamiseen, tutki- musmenetelmiin sekä konkreettiseen kirjoitta- The Birth and Development of Israeli mistekniikkaan ja tutkielman viimeistelyohjei- siin. Operational Art. Julkaisu on tarkoitettu avuksi erityisesti pro From Theory to Practice. gradun tai diplomityön kirjoittamisessa vas- (2. uud. painos) taan tuleviin haasteisiin, mutta teoksesta on hyötyä myös muille strategian tutkimuksesta Pasi Kesseli kiinnostuneille. Julkaisusarja 2 No 52, 2014 Maanpuolustuskorkeakoulu Tel. +358 299 800 ISBN: 978-951-25-2614-7 (nid.) Strategian laitos www.mpkk.fi ISBN: 978-951-25-2615-4 (PDF) PL 7, 00861 HELSINKI ISSN: 1455-2108 Suomi Finland Pasi Kesseli IN PURSUIT OF MOBILITY The Birth and Development of Israeli Operational Art. From Theory to Practice. Academic dissertation to be publicly discussed, by due permission of the Faculty of Arts at the University of Helsinki in lecture room 13, on the 25th of January, 2002 at 12 o'clock. Pasi Kesseli IN PURSUIT OF MOBILITY The Birth and Development of Israeli Operational Art. From Theory to Practice. National Defence College of Finland, Publication series 1 N:o 6 Cover: Israeli tanks ready for action during the May crisis before the Six Day War.
    [Show full text]
  • Modern Hebrew Conflict and Military Terminology
    Modern Hebrew Conflict and Military Terminology The Language of the Israel Defense Forces Cato Hemmingby Master’s thesis Department of Culture Studies and Oriental Languages University of Oslo Autumn 2011 II Modern Hebrew Conflict and Military Terminology The Language of the Israel Defense Forces Cato Hemmingby III © Cato Hemmingby 2011 Modern Hebrew Conflict and Military Terminology Cato Hemmingby http://www.duo.uio.no/ Print: Reprosentralen, University of Oslo IV Acknowledgements I would like to express gratitude to a number of persons and institutions, for their help and assistance during my work with this subject. First of all, I would like to extend the most sincere thanks to my supervisor at the University of Oslo, professor Lutz Eberhard Edzard, for his skillful, dedicated and motivating approach to this thesis. Many thanks also to Espen Arnesen, who is a patient and inspiring teacher of Hebrew. Additionally, Lars Haugom has been a helpful and motivating mentor, contributing with general guidance, as well as outstanding regional knowledge. Thanks also to Yair and Judit Moy in Avnei Eitan, and my teacher Dalit Eizenkraft at The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. I am grateful for important assistance from different parts of the Norwegian defense community, and in particular Lt. Col. Palle Ydstebø at the Norwegian Defense Command and Staff College, and former Chief of Defense Sverre Diesen at SEFOSS. I have on several occasions visited The Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) in Tel Aviv, and special thanks to the Information Center manager Yoel Kozak and the experts Yehuda Ben-Meir and Shlomo Gazit. Likewise, I am very grateful to Professor Stuart A.
    [Show full text]
  • Hamas, the IRA, and the Politics of Radicalization in Palestine and Northern Ireland
    Colby College Digital Commons @ Colby Honors Theses Student Research 2009 The Long Game: Hamas, The IRA, and the Politics of Radicalization in Palestine and Northern Ireland Dan O'Sullivan Colby College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.colby.edu/honorstheses Part of the Political Science Commons Colby College theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed or downloaded from this site for the purposes of research and scholarship. Reproduction or distribution for commercial purposes is prohibited without written permission of the author. Recommended Citation O'Sullivan, Dan, "The Long Game: Hamas, The IRA, and the Politics of Radicalization in Palestine and Northern Ireland" (2009). Honors Theses. Paper 460. https://digitalcommons.colby.edu/honorstheses/460 This Honors Thesis (Open Access) is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Research at Digital Commons @ Colby. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors Theses by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Colby. The Long Game: Hamas, The IRA, and the Politics of Radicalization in Palestine and Northern Ireland By Dan O’Sullivan Under the supervision of: Professor Guilain Denoeux Professor Walter Hatch Spring 2009 Government Department Senior Thesis Colby College Table of Contents Introduction: A Tale of Two Cities Political Grievance and Radicalization in Northern Ireland and Palestine Page One Chapter One: Vicious Cycles The Origins and Dynamics of the Northern Irish Troubles and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict Page Thirty-Two
    [Show full text]