DOCSLIB.ORG

The Nazi-Regime, the Holocaust, and Germany's Relationship Towards the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict Krell, Gert

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Nazi-Regime, the Holocaust, and Germany's Relationship Towards the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict Krell, Gert www.ssoar.info Shadows from the Past: the Nazi-Regime, the Holocaust, and Germany's Relationship towards the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict Krell, Gert Veröffentlichungsversion / Published Version Arbeitspapier / working paper Zur Verfügung gestellt in Kooperation mit / provided in cooperation with: Hessische Stiftung Friedens- und Konfliktforschung (HSFK) Empfohlene Zitierung / Suggested Citation: Krell, G. (2015). Shadows from the Past: the Nazi-Regime, the Holocaust, and Germany's Relationship towards the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. (PRIF Working Papers, 26). Frankfurt am Main: Hessische Stiftung Friedens- und Konfliktforschung. https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-456272 Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Dieser Text wird unter einer Deposit-Lizenz (Keine This document is made available under Deposit Licence (No Weiterverbreitung - keine Bearbeitung) zur Verfügung gestellt. Redistribution - no modifications). We grant a non-exclusive, non- Gewährt wird ein nicht exklusives, nicht übertragbares, transferable, individual and limited right to using this document. persönliches und beschränktes Recht auf Nutzung dieses This document is solely intended for your personal, non- Dokuments. Dieses Dokument ist ausschließlich für commercial use. All of the copies of this documents must retain den persönlichen, nicht-kommerziellen Gebrauch bestimmt. all copyright information and other information regarding legal Auf sämtlichen Kopien dieses Dokuments müssen alle protection. You are not allowed to alter this document in any Urheberrechtshinweise und sonstigen Hinweise auf gesetzlichen way, to copy it for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the Schutz beibehalten werden. Sie dürfen dieses Dokument document in public, to perform, distribute or otherwise use the nicht in irgendeiner Weise abändern, noch dürfen Sie document in public. dieses Dokument für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke By using this particular document, you accept the above-stated vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, aufführen, vertreiben oder conditions of use. anderweitig nutzen. Mit der Verwendung dieses Dokuments erkennen Sie die Nutzungsbedingungen an. 1 Shadows from the Past: The Nazi‐Regime, the Holocaust, and Germany’s Relationship towards the Israeli‐Palestinian Conflict Gert Krell ABSTRACT As a consequence of the Holocaust, Israel’s security is officially regarded as part of Germany’s “reason of state”. Yet the criteria for a responsible relationship between Germany and Israel are by no means self-evident or without logical or practical contradictions. One of the complications is the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In order to better understand this complication, I examine two familiar national narratives, one from each side, about possible connections between the Nazi era, the Holocaust, and this conflict. I also put the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in a broader historical context. It turns out that the examined relationships are not as obvious as the familiar narratives describe them. The origins of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are older than the Nazi era and the Holocaust, and they also point to broader European responsibilities more generally, to Europe’s nationalism, anti-Semitism, colonialism and imperialism – with irresponsibilities towards both Jews and Arabs. In no way does such a comprehensive perspective affect Germany’s special histori- cal responsibilities resulting from the Holocaust. But it puts the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in a more complete and also more honest framework, with consequences for Germany’s moral and political position. 1 1. HISTORY AND RESPONSIBILITY IN GERMANY’S RELATIONSHIP WITH ISRAEL The terms “history” and “responsibility” are used heavily in connection with the relations between Germany and Israel, more than in any other inter-state relationship; yet neither of them is self- evident. On January 21st, 2009, quite a number of viewers of the established German TV talk-show “hart aber fair” (tough but fair) must have felt embarrassed, when Norbert Blüm, a high-ranking member of the Christian Democrats’ labour wing (he had been Minister for Labour and Social Security from 1982 to 1998) and almost everywhere considered a courageous and upright person, used the German experience of the Nazi crimes as a legitimizing basis for criticizing Israel’s human rights violations in the Gaza war, which he called a Vernichtungskrieg (war of annihilation). When talk-master Frank Plasberg suggested that this was a dubious term in the debated case, Blüm insist- ed on it. Blüm’s doubly strange message was obvious, at least between the lines: We Germans had learned our lessons from the Holocaust; it was time that the Jews did that, too (see Krell 2009). In German discourse, perhaps inevitably, Israel and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict have always been objects not only of factual analysis, but also of projections resulting from guilt or the defense against it. Germany may have done better than other countries in addressing and working through their major historical crimes, but its self-image as a nation with an exemplary record has serious cracks. While, fortunately, Holocaust denial is no longer a significant position, embarrassing dis- tortions of “the past” or the present in view of “the past” continue or are discovered constantly, even 70 years after the end of World War II. They involve not only respected German politicians 1 This article is a revised and updated version of earlier writings in German (see in particular Krell 2004, 2008, 2009a and 2011). A similar paper will be published under the title “History and Responsibility: Germany’s Relationship towards the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict”, in: Alfred Wittstock (Ed.), Rapprochement, Change, Perceptions, and Shaping the Fu- ture. 50 Years of German-Israeli and Israeli-German Diplomatic Relations, Berlin 2016. I am grateful for suggestions and critical comments by Martin Altmeyer, Reiner Bernstein and Dieter Senghaas. PRIF Working Paper No. 26 2 but also great minds in philosophy or literature. On the basis of formerly unpublished material, we today know that Martin Heidegger, who is often regarded as one of Germany’s greatest philoso- phers of the 20th century, made some of the worst possible remarks about the Holocaust you may think of (Probst 2015). The recently deceased Günter Grass, one of Germany’s most famous writers and an active zoon politikon, gave Tom Segev a terrible interview in 2011 in which he suggested that the Russians had “liquidated” (his terminology) “six million” (his figure) German prisoners of war. Actually, only three million German soldiers had ever been Soviet prisoners, and of those one million died, most- ly from the catastrophic living conditions in a war-torn USSR, devastated by Germany’s aggression and war of annihilation (Heer 2014, p. 72). And in 2012, Grass wrote an infamous political poem about Israel’s conflict with Iran’s nuclear program in which he suggested that Israel was (the Jews were?) not only the major or even the single danger to peace in the region but also a major threat to world peace, and that it was willing to risk annihilation of the Iranians and with them even the whole world in a global nuclear war, and all that because it was taking a big-mouth seriously with- out evidence (see Krell 2012 and Krell/Müller 2012).2 My generation of the rebellious, anti-authoritarian, and anti-fascist 68ers, too young to have been involved in the Nazi crimes or born after the war, tried their own strategies of escape. We would be totally different from our parents and thus remain untarnished by unpleasant continuities. That turned out an illusion, as the aberrations and violent offenses, some against Jews or Israel, by the Red Army Faction and its supporters vividly demonstrate (Koenen 2011, pp. 331–335; Altmeyer 2007, 2007a). We did not regard our “late birth” as exculpation from responsibility, yet we prac- ticed our own kind of de-realization. Simply cutting the generational bond with our parents, who very often had been active Nazis or at least sympathized with the “Third Reich”, was ill suited to overcoming our own subtle and subconscious impregnation by an extremely nationalistic, racist and violent and yet, at its time, widely accepted and supported political tradition. In this respect, there had been no “zero hour” in Germany in 1945. Leaving the obvious and revealing misrepresentations or misdeeds aside, the criteria for an appro- priate German relationship with Israel are still not self-evident or without logical or practical con- tradictions. An important part of the official German solution to history and responsibility is the “non-negotiable support” of Israel’s security. The symbolical weight of such a commitment should not be underrated, particularly since it does have material substance; e.g. weapons deliveries al- ready in the late 1950s and early 1960s, when the US still held on to its arms embargo.3 Yet the question remains, how Israel’s security can be assured best and what solidarity with Israel actually means. In a poll of 2008, 53 percent of the respondents (65 percent in the group aged 30 to 39) saw “no special responsibility towards Israel”. 58 percent agreed that Germany should support Israel politically if it was attacked; 82 percent came out against financial support and 81 against support with soldiers (Jüdische Zeitung, June 2008, p.1). In a more recent poll, 58 percent of the Germans asked wanted to draw a “final line” under the history of the German persecution of the Jews, com- pared to 60 in a poll of 1991. On the other hand, the figure for those who considered the Shoah still relevant for the present rose from 20 percent in 1991 to 38 in 2014 (Süddeutsche Zeitung, January 15, 2015, p. 1). Israel should live within secure borders, is the obvious, often repeated, and widely shared German position, yet with the clear understanding that, in material geographical terms, such secure borders 2 Frank Schirrmacher, 1994–2014 one of the chief editors of the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, called Grass’ poem “a lousy work of resentment”, www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleton/eine-erlaeuterung-was-grass-uns-sagen-will, p.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • German Jewish Refugees in the United States and Relationships to Germany, 1938-1988
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO “Germany on Their Minds”? German Jewish Refugees in the United States and Relationships to Germany, 1938-1988 A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in History by Anne Clara Schenderlein Committee in charge: Professor Frank Biess, Co-Chair Professor Deborah Hertz, Co-Chair Professor Luis Alvarez Professor Hasia Diner Professor Amelia Glaser Professor Patrick H. Patterson 2014 Copyright Anne Clara Schenderlein, 2014 All rights reserved. The Dissertation of Anne Clara Schenderlein is approved, and it is acceptable in quality and form for publication on microfilm and electronically. _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ Co-Chair _____________________________________________________________________ Co-Chair University of California, San Diego 2014 iii Dedication To my Mother and the Memory of my Father iv Table of Contents Signature Page ..................................................................................................................iii Dedication ..........................................................................................................................iv Table of Contents ...............................................................................................................v
    [Show full text]
  • The Apartheid Smear Israel Is Not an Apartheid State the Allegation Damages the Peace Process
    The ApArTheid SmeAr Israel is not an apartheid state The allegation damages the peace process Professor Alan Johnson BRITAIN ISRAEL COMMUNICATIONS & RESEARCH CENTRE 2 The Apartheid Smear As a movement we recognise the legitimacy of Palestinian nationalism just as we recognise the legitimacy of Zionism as a Jewish nationalism. We insist on the right of the state of Israel to exist within secure borders, but with equal vigour support the Palestinian right to national self-determination. We are gratified to see that new possibilities of resolving the issue through negotiation have arisen since the election of a new government in Israel. We would wish to encourage that process, and if we have the opportunity, to assist.1 Nelson mandela, 1993 The whole world must see that Israel must exist and has the right to exist, and is one of the great outposts of democracy in the world … Peace for Israel means security and that security must be a reality.2 martin Luther King Jr, 1967 The charge that Israel is an apartheid state is a false and malicious one that precludes, rather than promotes, peace and harmony.3 Judge richard J. Goldstone (former Justice of the South African Constitutional Court, who led the United Nations 2008-9 fact-finding mission on the Gaza conflict), 2011 If Israel were an apartheid state, I, for example, would not be allowed to work for a Jewish newspaper or live in a Jewish neighbourhood or own a home. The real apartheid is in Lebanon, where there is a law that bans Palestinians from working in over 50 professions.
    [Show full text]
  • Germany Minds
    SCHENDERLEIN GERMANY ON THEIR MINDS German Jewish Refugees in the United States and Their Relationships with Germany, 1938–1988 GERMANY ANNE C. SCHENDERLEIN ON THEIR is is a solid, comprehensive study of German Jewish refugees in the United States, especially in Los Angeles and New York. It is probing and judicious. Michael A. Meyer, Hebrew Union College – Jewish Institute of Religion MINDS THEIR ON GERMANY roughout the 1930s and early 1940s, approximately ninety thousand German MINDS Jews ed their homeland and settled in the United States, prior to that nation closing its borders to Jewish refugees. And even though many of them wanted little to do with Germany, the circumstances of World War II and the postwar era meant that engagement of some kind was unavoidable—whether direct or indirect, initiated within the community itself or by political actors and the broader German public. is book carefully traces these entangled histories on GERMAN JEWISH REFUGEES both sides of the Atlantic, demonstrating the remarkable extent to which German Jews and their former fellow citizens helped to shape developments from the IN THE UNITED STATES AND THEIR Allied war e ort to the course of West German democratization. RELATIONSHIPS WITH GERMANY, 19381988 Anne C. Schenderlein is the managing director of the Dahlem Humanities Cen- ter at Freie Universität Berlin. After receiving her doctorate in modern European history at the University of California, San Diego, she was a research fellow at the German Historical Institute from 2015 to 2019. Her research has been sup- ported by numerous fellowships, including the Leo Baeck Fellowship and, more recently, a grant from the American Jewish Archives, where she conducted research on American Jewish boycotts and consumption of German products.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction - Recent Events in Gaza Rose Mishaan
    Hastings International and Comparative Law Review Volume 32 Article 7 Number 2 Summer 2009 1-1-2009 Introduction - Recent Events in Gaza Rose Mishaan Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/ hastings_international_comparative_law_review Part of the Comparative and Foreign Law Commons, and the International Law Commons Recommended Citation Rose Mishaan, Introduction - Recent Events in Gaza, 32 Hastings Int'l & Comp.L. Rev. 639 (2009). Available at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_international_comparative_law_review/vol32/iss2/7 This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Hastings International and Comparative Law Review by an authorized editor of UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. Introduction - Recent Events in Gazat By ROSE MISHAAN* On December 27, 2008, Israeli air and naval forces attacked the Gaza Strip. Israel's justification for the attack was self-defense, citing rockets launched into southern Israel in recent months as the basis for this claim.' The stated aim of the assault in Gaza was to rid the area of the Hamas militants who have carried out these missile attacks against Israeli civilians.2 After a week of aerial bombardment, Israel began a ground invasion, sending soldiers and tanks into Gaza. On January 18, 2009, Israel and Hamas each declared unilateral cease-fires, ending the military assault.3 In the three-week conflict, over 1,300 Palestinians were killed, among them at least 288 children, and over 5,000 Palestinians were injured.4 Thirteen Israelis were killed, ten of them while serving in a military capacity.5 During the operation, Israel used its air force to bomb targets inside Gaza.
    [Show full text]
  • ISTUS Report
    Kylene De Angelis | Nadia Catenazzi | Melanie Graham | Michael Klebl | Viktorija Mažeikienė | Giedrė Valūnaitė Oleškevičienė | Kirsty Palfreyman | Kirsty Reid | Jolita Šliogerienė | Jarno Tolonen | Jeffrey van Zaalen ISTUS Report Institutional Strategies for the Uptake of Social Media in Adult Education Project Information and Imprint Institutional Strategies for the Uptake of Social Media in Adult Education (ISTUS) The ISTUS Project is a Grundtvig Learning Partnership for the Euro- pean Lifelong Learning Programme that focuses on Institutional Strategies Targeting the Uptake of Social Media in Adult Education. Duration: Autumn 2011 – Autumn 2013 Project Blog: http://istusproject.blogspot.de/ Project Partners WHL Wissenschaftliche Hochschule Lahr, Germany International Correspondence Schools Limited, UK Mykolas Romeris University, Lithuania Comune di Sant’Angelo in Vado, Italy NTI University of Applied Sciences, the Netherlands Scuola Universitaria Professionale della Svizzera Italiana, Switzerland Tampere University of Applied Sciences, Finland Project Coordinator WHL Wissenschaftliche Hochschule Lahr Prof. Dr Michael Klebl Hohbergweg 15–17; 77933 Lahr; Germany [email protected] Published 2013 by the ISTUS Project at MRU ebooks, Vilnius (Lithuania) ISBN 978-9955-19-583-2 | http://ebooks.mruni.eu Licence This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported Licence http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/ Disclaimer This publication was produced by the ISTUS Project with the financial support of the European Commission. The content of this report is the sole responsibil- ity of ISTUS and its project partners. Furthermore, the information contained in the report, including any expression of opinion and any projection or forecast, does not necessarily reflect the views of the European Commission and in no way anticipates any future policy plans in the areas addressed in this report.
    [Show full text]
  • Challenges for the New US Administration
    Volume 11 | No. 3 | January 2009 Operation Cast Lead: An Interim Assessment / Shlomo Brom Challenges for the New US Administration Memorandum to the Prime Minister / Oded Eran Looking Ahead to Direct Talks between the US and Iran / Ephraim Kam Sino-American Relations and the New Administration / Yoram Evron NATO’s Regional Security Dialogue and Iran's Power Projection / Emanuel Adler The Annapolis Process: A Profit-Loss Balance Sheet /Shlomo Brom Syria and the Global Jihad: A Dangerous Double Game / Amir Kulick and Yoram Schweitzer The Future of the IAEA Safeguards System / Ephraim Asculai The New National Security1 Staff Law / Shmuel Even 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‡· Strategic ASSESSMENT Volume 11 | No. 3 | January 2009 Contents Abstracts | 3 Operation Cast Lead, January 2009: An Interim Assessment | 7 Shlomo Brom Memorandum to the Prime Minister | 11 Oded Eran Looking Ahead to Direct Talks between the United States and Iran | 21 Ephraim Kam Sino-American Relations and the New Administration | 33 Yoram Evron The House is on Fire: NATO’s Regional Security Dialogue and Iran’s Power Projection | 45 Emanuel Adler The Annapolis Process: A Profit-Loss Balance Sheet | 53 Shlomo Brom Syria and the Global Jihad: A Dangerous Double Game | 65 Amir Kulick and Yoram Schweitzer The Future of the IAEA Safeguards System | 77 Ephraim Asculai The National Security Staff: Will the New Law Bring About Change? | 85 Shmuel Even The purpose of Strategic Assessment is to stimulate and Strategic enrich the public debate on issues that are, or should be, ASSESSMENT on Israel’s national security agenda.
    [Show full text]
  • รายงานการศึกษาส วนบุคคล (Individual Study) เรื่องการทูตสาธารณะอิสราเอล
    รายงานการศึกษาสวนบุคคล (Individual Study) เรื่อง การทูตสาธารณะอิสราเอล: ขอคิดสําหรับประเทศไทย จัดทําโดย นายพรภพ อวมพิทยา รหัส 2009 รายงานนี้เปนสวนหนึ่งของการฝกอบรม หลักสูตรนักบริหารการทูต รุนที่ 2 ป 2553 สถาบันการตางประเทศเทวะวงศวโรปการ กระทรวงการตางประเทศ ลิขสิทธิ์ของกระทรวงการตางประเทศ รายงานการศึกษาสวนบุคคล (Individual Study) เรื่อง การทูตสาธารณะอิสราเอล: ขอคิดสําหรับประเทศไทย จัดทําโดย นายพรภพ อวมพิทยา รหัส 2009 หลักสูตรนักบริหารการทูต รุนที่ 2 ป2553 สถาบันการตางประเทศเทวะวงศวโรปการ กระทรวงการตางประเทศ รายงานนี้เปนความคิดเห็นเฉพาะบุคคลของผูศึกษา ง บทสรุปสําหรับผูบริหาร รายงานศึกษาวิจัยสวนบุคคลฉบับนี้ไดหยิบยกการทูตสาธารณะของอิสราเอลขึ้นมาศึกษาเพื่อ หาขอคิดสําหรับประเทศไทย เนื่องจากผูเขียนรับราชการประจําการอยูที่สถานเอกอัครราชทูต ณ กรุง เทลอาวีฟ และเห็นวาอิสราเอลเปนประเทศที่ประสบปญหาภาพลักษณเชิงลบมากที่สุดในลําดับตน ๆ ของโลกอยางตอเนื่อง อันเนื่องมาจากความขัดแยงเรื่องดินแดนกับปาเลสไตน และการยึดครอง ดินแดนที่ไดมาจากการทําสงครามหกวันในป ค.ศ. 1967 นับตั้งแตสงครามเลบานอนครั้งที่สองกับกลุม Hezbollah เมื่อกลางป ค.ศ. 2006 เปนตนมา อิสราเอลไดใหความสําคัญยิ่งขึ้นกับการปรับปรุงการทูตสาธารณะ โดยสถาบัน Samuel Neaman Institute เปนหนวยงานหลักรวมกับกระทรวงการตางประเทศอิสราเอลไดศึกษาวิจัยการทูตสาธารณะ ของอิสราเอล ในรายงานฉบับนี้ ผูเขียนไดศึกษาผลการวิจัยของสถาบันดังกลาวเกี่ยวกับกระบวนการ ปรับปรุงการทูตสาธารณะ จากนั้นจะไดพิจารณาการดําเนินการทูตสาธารณะของอิสราเอลวาประสบ ผลสําเร็จหรือไม เพียงใด เพื่อที่จะนํามาเปนขอคิดสําหรับการทูตสาธารณะของประเทศไทย ผูเขียนไดนําแนวความคิดเรื่อง Soft Power ของศาสตราจารย Joseph S. Nye, Jr. มหาวิทยาลัยฮารวารด สหรัฐอเมริกา มาใชในการศึกษาหัวเรื่องนี้
    [Show full text]
  • Download Publication
    1 Shadows from the Past: The Nazi‐Regime, the Holocaust, and Germany’s Relationship towards the Israeli‐Palestinian Conflict Gert Krell ABSTRACT As a consequence of the Holocaust, Israel’s security is officially regarded as part of Germany’s “reason of state”. Yet the criteria for a responsible relationship between Germany and Israel are by no means self-evident or without logical or practical contradictions. One of the complications is the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In order to better understand this complication, I examine two familiar national narratives, one from each side, about possible connections between the Nazi era, the Holocaust, and this conflict. I also put the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in a broader historical context. It turns out that the examined relationships are not as obvious as the familiar narratives describe them. The origins of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are older than the Nazi era and the Holocaust, and they also point to broader European responsibilities more generally, to Europe’s nationalism, anti-Semitism, colonialism and imperialism – with irresponsibilities towards both Jews and Arabs. In no way does such a comprehensive perspective affect Germany’s special histori- cal responsibilities resulting from the Holocaust. But it puts the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in a more complete and also more honest framework, with consequences for Germany’s moral and political position. 1 1. HISTORY AND RESPONSIBILITY IN GERMANY’S RELATIONSHIP WITH ISRAEL The terms “history” and “responsibility” are used heavily in connection with the relations between Germany and Israel, more than in any other inter-state relationship; yet neither of them is self- evident.
    [Show full text]
  • Die Außen- Und Sicherheitspolitik Der USA Unter Präsident Trump
    HSFK-Report Nr. 1/2017 „America first“: Die Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik der USA unter Präsident Trump Caroline Fehl/Marco Fey (Hg.) Leibniz-Institut Hessische Stiftung Friedens- und Konfliktforschung (HSFK) Adresse der Herausgeber: HSFK Baseler Straße 27–31 D-60329 Frankfurt am Main Telefon: +49 69 95 91 04-0 Fax: +49 69 55 84 81 E-Mail: [email protected] [email protected] www.hsfk.de ISBN: 978-3-946459-13-2 € 6 Inhalt 1. Einleitung: Parameter der US-Außenpolitik unter Präsident Trump Caroline Fehl/Marco Fey 1 2. Kongress: Kein Gegengewicht zu Trumps Außenpolitik Dirk Peters 8 3. Das Militär als Mittel der Außenpolitik: Mehr Kontinuität als Wandel Marco Fey/Niklas Schörnig 10 4. Terrorismusbekämpfung: Zurück in die Zukunft? Christopher Daase 13 5. Rüstungskontrolle: „Let it be an arms race“ Giorgio Franceschini 15 6. Multilaterale Institutionen: Die Zeichen stehen auf Konfrontation Caroline Fehl 17 7. UN-Peacekeeping: Zwischen Routine und Repolitisierung Julian Junk 19 8. Demokratieförderpolitik: Rhetorische Wende bei gleichbleibender Politik? Annika Elena Poppe 21 9. Transatlantische Beziehungen: Nationale Interessen statt gemeinsamer Werte? Matthias Dembinski 23 10. Russland: Reset revisited? Hans-Joachim Spanger 26 11. China: Trumps Gegenspieler in Ostasien Peter Kreuzer 29 12. Nordkorea: Kim Jong-un testet Donald Trump Hans-Joachim Schmidt 32 13. Arabische Welt und Iran: Mehr alter Wein als gedacht Daniel Müller/Irene Weipert-Fenner 34 14. Israel und der Friedensprozess: Trumps Abkehr vom Washingtoner Konsens Aviv Melamud 37 15. Afghanistan und Irak: Internationalisierte Bürgerkriege und regionale Allianzen Arvid Bell 39 16. Lateinamerika: Weiterer Bedeutungsverlust der USA absehbar Jonas Wolff/Lisbeth Zimmermann 41 17.
    [Show full text]
  • Foreign Policy of Turkey and Spain Versus Middle East, After 2002
    FOREIGN POLICY OF TURKEY AND SPAIN VERSUS MIDDLE EAST, AFTER 2002. TRANSITION TO DEMOCRACY AND NEW INTERNATIONAL AGENTS Gozde Demirel Dipòsit Legal: T 957-2014 ADVERTIMENT. L'accés als continguts d'aquesta tesi doctoral i la seva utilització ha de respectar els drets de la persona autora. Pot ser utilitzada per a consulta o estudi personal, així com en activitats o materials d'investigació i docència en els termes establerts a l'art. 32 del Text Refós de la Llei de Propietat Intel·lectual (RDL 1/1996). Per altres utilitzacions es requereix l'autorització prèvia i expressa de la persona autora. En qualsevol cas, en la utilització dels seus continguts caldrà indicar de forma clara el nom i cognoms de la persona autora i el títol de la tesi doctoral. No s'autoritza la seva reproducció o altres formes d'explotació efectuades amb finalitats de lucre ni la seva comunicació pública des d'un lloc aliè al servei TDX. Tampoc s'autoritza la presentació del seu contingut en una finestra o marc aliè a TDX (framing). Aquesta reserva de drets afecta tant als continguts de la tesi com als seus resums i índexs. ADVERTENCIA. El acceso a los contenidos de esta tesis doctoral y su utilización debe respetar los derechos de la persona autora. Puede ser utilizada para consulta o estudio personal, así como en actividades o materiales de investigación y docencia en los términos establecidos en el art. 32 del Texto Refundido de la Ley de Propiedad Intelectual (RDL 1/1996). Para otros usos se requiere la autorización previa y expresa de la persona autora.
    [Show full text]
  • Operation Cast Lead, Part 2 Fall 2009
    Volume 36 Rutgers Law Record Fall 2009 RUTGERS LAW RECORD The Internet Journal of Rutgers School of Law | Newark www.lawrecord.com Volume 36 Legal Implications of Operation Cast Lead, Part 2 Fall 2009 Operation Cast Lead: The Elusive Quest for Self Defense under International Law Noura Erakat* On December 27, 2008, Israel launched a 22-day military offensive against Gaza called “Operation Cast Lead.”1 Israeli forces killed some 1,300 Palestinians, including 280 children, and injured approximately 4,300 others, including 1,100 children.2 Civilians comprised nearly 70 percent of the Palestinian death toll.3 The aerial and ground offensive also destroyed 2,400 homes, 29 schools, 121 commercial and industrial workshops, 60 police stations, and 30 mosques.4 During the Operation, thirteen Israelis were killed including three civilians and four soldiers killed by friendly fire.5 * Noura Erakat is currently an adjunct professor of International Human Rights Law in the Middle East at Georgetown University. Most recently, she served as Legal Counsel for a Congressional Subcommittee in the House of Representatives. Noura writes regularly on international law and the Palestinian-Israel conflict. She was a Visiting Scholar at Georgetown's Center for Contemporary Arab Studies. After law school the Academy for Educational Development awarded Noura a New Voices fellowship to do legal and grassroots advocacy on behalf Palestinian human rights. Noura earned her undergraduate degree and juris doctorate from the University of California at Berkeley. Noura would like to thank her husband Bassam, her inspiration and partner in all things including writing. In February, Noura participated in the National Lawyers Guild fact-finding mission to Gaza.
    [Show full text]
  • Of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)
    “Breaking Down the Walls” Cover art (Lilies of the Field II [2003], 24” by 36” acrylic, by Lucy Janjigian); submitted for use on this cover by Lucy Janjigian. Report of the Middle East Study Committee to the 219th General Assembly (2010) of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) Breaking Down the Walls Report of the MIDDLE EAST STUDY COMMITTEE to the 219TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY (2010) of the PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH (U.S.A.) Published by the Office of the General Assembly Copyright © 2010 The Office of the General Assembly Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) Printed in the United States of America Cover design by the Middle East Study Committee No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronically, mechanically, photocopying, recording, or otherwise (brief quotations used in magazine or newspaper reviews excepted), without the prior permission of the publisher. The sessions, presbyteries, and synods of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) may use sections of this publication without receiving prior written permission of the publisher. Copies are available by calling PDS, 1-800-524-2612 Please specify PDS order # OGA-10-094. Contents Part One: We Bear Witness..............................................................................................1 A. Introduction..............................................................................................................1 B. Letters to Our Church, Partners, and Engaged Parties.............................................3 C. Witness
    [Show full text]