Political Science 477

[dril9-blog]

Reflection

This class is the last political science class I will take as an undergraduate, and my future course of study does not really include material on Israel and Palestine, so it played a unique role for me. I had relatively little knowledge about the Israel-Palestine conflict and the related issues before beginning this class and I think that taking the course helped me be a more informed person on the subject. In that way, it plugged some important gaps in my knowledge- I think I will graduate as a more knowledgeable political science major because of the class. Because much of the material was so new to me, I really enjoyed getting to learn about the topics presented in the course. I thought the simulations did a good job of demonstrating why peace in the region is so difficult to achieve and I got a lot out of learning in depth about the groups I represented. The blogging assignment also fit in well with the role the class served for me- it motivated me to keep up on current issues in the region more and led to me learning more about the subject than I would have for a term paper because I read the news along the way instead of doing big blocks of research over a week or so while writing a paper. The class wasn’t always easy, but I think there was a lot of reward for the work.

[iandme1-blog]

Young Palestinian Prisoner is Released.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/04/25/israel-frees-12-year-old-palestinian-girl-held-prisoner.html

Anytime a young person is involved in a crime I find it interesting. This case is particularly interesting because it is both similar and different than murder attempts committed American youths. When I think of young people in America committing murders, the first thing that comes to my mind is school shootings, in which one (or a few) students have built up anger and animosity towards their peers, and choose to attempt to kill them. I also think of common social divides based off of race, orientation, or another aspect of personal identity. This situation is obviously much different than an American school shooting, but there are some similarities. For one, the Palestinian girl has grown up her entire life probably hearing negative things about Israel, and developing a personal bias against Israeli people. Second, she feels that she is being oppressed, and views violence as a means of handling it. I by no means am trying to justify her actions, but I can empathize why she feels anger towards Israel. I know this may seem like an impossible solution, but going forward if Israel and Palestine want to co-exist peacefully, both sides will need to start doing more to prevent hatred of the opposing groups, and instead strive for respect and tolerance.

[dril9-blog]

The social dynamics at play with the stabbing that iandme1 describes are particularly interesting because I think they hold interesting implications for how to react to violence of this sort perpetrated by Palestinian youth. In my opinion, Israel made an effective choice in releasing her, as they could not have justifiably imprisoned her for life, and any long-term prison sentence would result in her only having a stronger animosity for Israel upon her release, likely leading to even more violence. It is a tough thing to do especially when one’s political and social dynamics reward violence, aggressiveness, and fighting fire with fire, but in situations like this one that involve radicalized youth, backing down and taking a more lenient stance is a good first step in reducing future violence.

[dril9-blog]

Israeli general reveals wartime contingency to evacuate Gaza border residents - Israel News

The plan would temporarily remove Israeli civilians from rocket fire range in the event of another round of fighting, the head of Southern Command says.

I don’t think Israel’s plan to evacuate civilians within rocket range in the event of another Gaza conflict is an especially wise one, and I also don’t think that public discussion of the plan is especially effective. This announcement seems to throw yet another roadblock in the way of creating lasting peace because if Israel is able to avoid civilian casualties from a conflict with Hamas then it will have less incentive to work for peace. Additionally, having concrete plans to evacuate Israelis in future conflicts is not a matter of being prepared, but it instead will likely lead to future conflicts. After all, spending significant amounts of money on fairly odd plans in the event of a future military conflict means that there are already resources invested in the yet-to-occur conflict.

[bluedonkey417-deactivated201703]

Netanyahu Says Golan Will Always Remain Part of Israel, While Syria Has Vowed to Do Anything to Take It Back

http://www.timesofisrael.com/syria-vows-to-use-any-means-necessary-to-take-back-golan/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

http://www.timesofisrael.com/syria-vows-to-use-any-means-necessary-to-take-back-golan/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

After Nentanyahu said that Golan will remain part of Israel forever, Syria’s Deputy Foreign Minister Faisal Mekdad said that Syria will use any means necessary to take it back. Mekdad believes that the Golan Heights are still occupied territory under international law and can still be taken back from the Israelis. Netanyahu would not accept giving Golan up to end the Syrian civil war.

[dril9-blog]

It doesn’t seem to me that there is much Syria can do about Israel’s possession of the Golan Heights. The international community’s general indifference and lack of pressure on Israel about the area have sent a fairly strong signal that the Golan Heights region is a relatively low priority compared to areas such as Gaza and the West Bank. Additionally, Syria seems like it has enough on its plate already with Assad’s efforts to consolidate and retain power in the face of large-scale armed opposition. Given the recent disclosures of repeated Israeli airstrikes against the Assad regime, this claim to the Golan seems like he standard defiant response an embattled government gives when a neighbor takes action that they can do nothing to change. Given that Assad lacks control over all of the non-Golan parts of Syria, it is doubtful that he could actually challenge Israel over ownership of the Golan Heights.

[bluedonkey417-deactivated201703]

Two IDF Soldiers Jailed for Burning Palestinian Flag

http://www.timesofisrael.com/2-idf-soldiers-jailed-for-burning-palestinian-flag/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Two IDF soldiers have been jailed for burning a Palestinian flag. The soldiers confiscated the flag from a car that passed through a vehicle checkpoint they were monitoring, and later burned the flag.

I think that flag burning should be considered acceptable as an expression of speech, but should not be committed by soldiers. If a citizen burns a flag, it shouldn’t be as controversial because it’s that person expressing their disappointment with their country. However, if individuals that are part of a government entity, I think they should refrain from making political statements or actions such as flag burning.

[dril9-blog]

I think there are a few other interesting dynamics at play that contribute to this situation. One is that we can assume the soldiers were wearing their uniforms when they burned the flag given that it was at an IDF checkpoint, which would obviously be inappropriate because they were representatives of Israel and the IDF while in uniform. I think the situation would be different if the soldiers were burning a flag when they were on their own time, out of uniform and off duty.

Additionally, the specificity of the incident involving Israeli soldiers burning a Palestinian flag means some interesting power relations are at play. When an American citizen burns an American flag, for example, they are “punching up”- they are a member of the United States so they are criticizing a group they are already a part of, and the flag burning is presumably an act of protest against the US government, which holds more power than the individuals who are carrying out the flag burning. In the same sense, I think it would also be acceptable for Venezuelan citizens, for example, to burn an American flag, because their country is less powerful and they are criticizing a nation that is further up the rankings in terms of international clout. However, Israeli soldiers burning a Palestinian flag is an example of “punching down” because Palestinians have obviously suffered when living in the state of Israel and the IDF has a great deal of power over Palestinian citizens. At the point where the Palestinian flag represents a group that does not even have a state and members of the IDF have a great deal of power, the soldiers’ actions go beyond protest and instead is an unacceptable act to burn a Palestinian flag.

[dril9-blog]

For first time, Netanyahu admits Israel struck arms shipments en route to Hezbollah in Syria - Israel News

PM says Israel would exhaust all options to protect itself before entering battlefield; according to foreign reports, Israel carried out numerous strikes in Syria and Lebanon, destroying weaponry meant for Hezbollah.

The new revelation of Israeli strikes against forces allied with Russia in Syria seems to indicate that substantial Israeli action against ISIS in the Syrian civil war is unlikely. Netanyahu said that the strikes were carried out in order to prevent Hezbollah from being supplied with new weapons, which indicates that Israel has only entered the conflict in order to protect its own interests. While Israel is obviously at risk if ISIS gains a bigger foothold and further destabilizes the region, it would likely take an immediate threat to Israel that other nations did not counter in order to spark Israeli intervention against ISIS. It seems likely that Israel will continue to take action against shipments of weapons to Hezbollah, but absent credible ISIS threats or ISIS collaboration with groups such as Hezbollah (obviously very unlikely given the Sunni-Shiite divide) then it does not appear Israel is aiming to strike ISIS any time soon.

[dril9-blog]

Israel Electric Corp., Palestinians reach deal to suspend West Bank power cuts - Israel News

Power supply to West Bank cities was disrupted over a mounting $460 million Palestinian debt; under new deal, PA to immediately transfer $4.2 million.

I am happy to see that Israel has restored the West Bank’s electricity supply after two days, and hopefully the recent PA payment can be the first step in preventing future cuts. Electricity is a pretty basic part of a decent standard of living, and especially in such a hot climate it is important for things like refrigeration. The fact that electricity supply interruption happened in the first place likely points to a failure of Palestinian leadership, as letting unpaid bills pile up to the point that citizens have their electricity cut off is simply unacceptable. I would not be surprised to find that very few of the PA leaders were affected personally by the power interruptions, while they no doubt caused hardship for countless West Bank residents. In the future I think it would be beneficial to draw up an agreement under which electricity cutoffs would not happen unless something truly egregious happens, as they harm countless citizens who have little to no influence over whether the bill actually gets paid.

[dril9-blog]

Israel halts cement deliveries to Gaza, accuses Hamas of pilfering materials - Israel News

Shipments of cement for large international projects will continue, body that oversees Israel's civilian policy towards Gaza says in statement, accuses Hamas of 'flagrant deviation from the agreements.'

This article does not go into much depth as the curtailment of shipments happened extremely recently, but if Israel’s allegations are right then it serves as another example of how the leadership in Gaza ignores the needs of common citizens. Given that the cement was supposed to help rebuild homes that were destroyed in the 2014 conflict, taking actions to divert the cement to other projects clearly prevents citizens from having a basic standard of living. If true, such actions by Hamas leadership in Gaza are clear examples of exploiting citizens and should be condemned. However, Israel’s across-the-board freeze on cement is also problematic, as it makes it impossible for individuals who were using the building materials for their intended purpose (rebuilding destroyed homes) to carry out their work. This across-the-board freeze also hurts civilians whose homes were destroyed, and it seems to be a needlessly blunt response to the ongoing theft of the cement.

[dril9-blog]

Israeli military chief appeals to soldiers after shooting

Israel’s military chief on Wednesday issued a rare memo to soldiers, urging them to use their weapons responsibly in the wake of the deadly shooting of a Palestinian attacker as he already lay wounded on the ground.

The recent memo from General Eizenkot seems to indicate that Israel could be planning to enforce tighter restrictions on soldiers’ use of force. Preventing killings such as the recent one referenced in the article is desirable for Israel even when viewed entirely through Israeli self-interest. After all, killings that are seen as extrajudicial and gratuitous only stoke violence and backlash among Palestinians. However, this also brings in an interesting tension, as cracking down on soldiers who shoot Palestinians without cause can alienate Israeli hardliners. This is especially relevant given the compulsory service in the IDF- the last thing a Likud member would want, for example, would be to appear to be lacking support for IDF members. As such, responses by government officials could be politically treacherous and this may be a matter better handled by using the military to more strictly enforce existing regulations on use of force.

[dril9-blog]

Israel backs down in Brazil diplomat stand-off - BBC News

Israel reassigns its nominee for ambassador to Brazil, whose appointment Brasilia refused to accept, apparently because he is a former settler leader.

Reassigning Dani Dayan seems to be a sign that Israel could be willing to work with Brazil to a greater degree on building a more productive relationship between the two countries. The article described how Brazil is Israel’s largest South American trading partner, so maintaining healthy relations with Brazil is clearly important to Brazil. Because of the economic significance of the Israel-Brazil relationship, this move seems to me less like a loss for Israel and more like a smart way to make a gesture of moving past prior conflicts to Brazil. After all, Israel simply does not appear to lose that much by ending the push for Dayan as an ambassador, and it stands to benefit greatly from maintaining quality ties with Brazil. It wouldn’t be worth hurting an already-fragile and important international relationship over an ambassador.

[dril9-blog]

An 'Internal Boycott' in Israel?

The leader of the Israeli Sociological Society said he is implementing a 2011 decision by the group’s general assembly to refrain from academic cooperation with Ariel University, which is located in an Israeli settlement in the West Bank.

I don’t see the Israeli Sociological Society’s plan as particularly productive in this situation. While there are, of course, plenty of legitimate criticisms of settlements, there is a distinction between criticizing settlements as an academic and engaged citizens and simply refusing to work with academics from other universities. I see this refusal to work with other academics as a harmful practice for a liberal society- after all, if there are problems with settlements then they can be expressed and evaluated through academic discourse. There is of course a role for academics to serve as activists in the public sphere- plenty of important social movements and pushes for change have their roots in universities- but boycotting one’s colleagues is not the way to achieve goals and to preserve the academic community. Such practices also raise the question of what will happen to universities in disputed territory if all Israeli academics refuse to work with their faculty- will people living in settlements simply have to go elsewhere for education? This would presumably drive down rates of higher education among settlers and take away opportunities to learn how to critically engage with and evaluate arguments, leading to a more dogmatic generation of settlers. Additionally, I would expect academics in Israel to be less supportive of boycotting universities in settlements given that they themselves are subject to the harmful pressures of the movement in the United States and elsewhere to boycott all Israeli universities.

[traveltheworldobsession-blog]

In an interview with Kuwaiti TV channel, Abbas voiced strong opposition to violent struggle against Israel and said that the way to establish a Palestinian state is only by diplomatic means.

President Abbas, of the Palestinian Authority, told Kuwait Scoop TV in an interview that he acknowledges that the Palestinian people have made no advances in the current crisis of their people towards statehood. He notes that, "In 2000-2005 we engaged in a violent struggle. It ruined the country and we did not achieve anything; to the contrary, international public opinion sided with Israel, which enjoyed worldwide legitimacy to attack Palestinians,“ Abbas said. He has obviously not wanted to let the people forget of his stance on Israel’s current government though. He notes that the world is changing and that in some areas of the world, like Japan, he has been greeted as a head of state leader. It is good to also make aware, that President Abbas does not agree with Iran in their statements of support because he notes that they are only providing support and arms to Hamas and Islamic Jihad. This should be a promising sign from the PLO acknowledging those bad fractions of their government. But is it something that we can take serious yet or is it too soon to figure out?

I think that this is the major quote that stood out to me in the article, President Abbas said that, "Hence, I think that we would not be able to liberate Palestine tomorrow or the day after, but we will be able to do so eventually if the state is built gradually, brick after brick.” This sense of determination is something that Israel cannot ignore and the international community should be aware of. The US leaders should be taking more of a critical role in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict working towards a resolution. The lack of support from our government is a pressing issue for the Palestinians, but it is it really helping Israel either at this point? If we can work on solving the issues in other areas of the Middle East then why can’t we start the final work of figuring out the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?

[dril9-blog]

I agree with you on the argument that the US should take a more significant role in resolving Palestinian claims to statehood- after all, it is in the best interests of Israel, regional stability, and the United States to prevent future armed conflict and have a stable solution in the region. One additional element regarding American involvement I found especially interesting was how Abbas comment that “Russia is a dear friend to us and it fully supports the Palestinian issue.” This indicates that even absent other concerns, American support for some sort of Palestinian state would be worthwhile because it would check the influence of Russia and other rival states. American involvement would help create peace out of the current situation, but it would also help avoid the undesirable (for the US) prospect of an independent Palestine that serves as a Russian client state in the Middle East.

[dril9-blog]

Biden calls for end to violence, but says Israel can't stop it 'just by physical force' - Israel News

In talks earlier with Netanyahu, the U.S. vice president also slammed Abbas for failing to condemn Tuesday's surge in attacks, in which in American citizen was killed.

In this article, Biden makes the comment that ISIS makes Arab states more likely to support a hypothetical peace deal with Israel than they previously were. However, I’m not sure this is necessarily the case- while ISIS does destabilize the region, many of the governments in the region would be hurt by seeming too close to Israel. After all, if regime stability for Arab nations in the region is to occur going forward then they will likely at some point have to fold ISIS sympathizers and jihadists into support for their governments. This puts the regimes in an awkward position because while a peace deal with Israel would likely be advantageous for many of them, it is also worthwhile to not seem to onboard with it. Additionally, some of the regional Arab governments could likely gain from the regional instability ISIS has caused by conquering new territory or resources, as well as leading Arab state opposition to ISIS fighters in order to take on more of a leadership role in the region. These potential benefits from the instability for Arab governments in the region also make Biden’s claim seem a bit unlikely.

[dril9-blog]

An editorial from the IDF's highest ranking Muslim

There’s only one country in the Middle East that could produce a soldier like me

This article gives an interesting perspective that seems to support some of Shipler’s thoughts on how to create peace between Arabs and Jews. Waheeb’s gradual acceptance of Israel and Israeli Jews as he spent time with them in his teens follows pretty closely with the idea that proximity and dialogue between Arabs and Jews make up an effective way to create understanding and peace between individuals. I think it’s a pretty safe claim to make that if Waheeb had not met many Jewish people, he would likely hold many of his early beliefs about Israel and its Jewish citizens.

In the editorial, Waheeb noted that he is not particularly religious. This raises the question of whether he would have had a harder time building relationships with Israeli Jews and advancing in the military if he were more serious about Islam. I think both of these would probably have been at least somewhat more difficult, but I also do not think being a more religious Muslim than Waheeb is an absolute limiter on the relationship one can attain with Israeli Jews.

One thing the article left me wondering is if Waheeb’s religious and ethnic background could serve as an impediment to his career in the IDF. Could he conceivably be passed over for future promotions because he is an Arab and Muslim? I assume it would be fairly unpopular with some groups of Israeli citizens to have a Muslim IDF general (though plenty would no doubt be fine with it).

On a lighter note, he also has one of the best beards I’ve seen in a while.

[bluedonkey417-deactivated201703]

Israel's Defense Minister Concerned About Iranian Presence in Syria

http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Israel-very-concerned-by-rising-Iranian-power-in-Syria-Yaalon-says-446426

Israel is concerned about Iran increasing its presence in Syria. Israel’s defense minister Moshe Ya'alon believes that this may allow Iran to carry out terrorist attacks against Israel from the Golan Heights. Ya'alon said that Iran “has not given up on its attempts to transfer weapons to the Gaza strip through various means, and we witness these attempts all the time.”

I agree with Ya'alon’s concerns. In addition to what Ya'alon mentioned, I am concerned about what could happen if the Islamic State would get involved in the attacks against Israel. Just because there are Muslims in Israel doesn’t make them safe from the Islamic State. The Islamic State has attacked Muslims who do not agree with their radical fundamentalist beliefs.

[dril9-blog]

The problem of Iran in Syria is especially interesting for Israel, and I think it raises the question of how much Iranian involvement is acceptable for Israel. Obviously an Iranian takeover in Syria would not be desirable, but if Iran simply provides enough aid for Assad to regain control over the country, could this result in a better situation for Israel? Assad would presumably not do much to mess with Israel, and the argument could be made that greater regional stability would be worth continuing to stomach an Assad regime.

I think the ISIS question is the key factor that makes a limited degree of Iranian support for Assad a situation that could be tolerable for Israel. ISIS and Assad are on opposite sides of the conflict, and a power vacuum stemming from the Assad regime losing even more control over the country could allow greater gains by ISIS, which would obviously not be the preferred outcome from Israel’s perspective. In a sense, limited Iranian engagement on the side of Assad may be a way to prevent ISIS’s spread closer to Israel. The issue, however, is that such a check on ISIS might still not be worth the increased Iranian influence.

[dril9-blog]

An Egyptian lawmaker hit a fellow parliamentarian with his shoe Sunday over the latter's meeting with the Israeli ambassador to Egypt. Sunday's parliament session was adjourned for 10 minutes as the two lawmakers were kicked out, the state-run MENA news agency reported. Tawfiq Okasha, a...

The shoe-throwing episode in Egypt yesterday appears to be the type of political grandstanding that impedes cooperation in the region. While Egypt and Israel have not always been the best of friends, there are enough common issues they share that cooperation is often in both nations’ best interests. When there is disagreement over a member of parliament meeting with another nation’s official, it is indicative of a liberal state that the disagreement is addressed with dialogue instead of throwing shoes- a big sign of disrespect. The fact that Okasha argued the meeting with Koren was to advance Egypt’s immediate interests shows how the shoe-throwing was simply an unwise response to a meeting that may well have been beneficial to Egypt as a whole. It is not effective for Egypt to maintain some sort of diplomatic relationship with Israel while members of parliament throw shoes at one another once the relationship is mentioned in public.

[elegantmooncollectionblog-blog]

Hillary Clinton Wants a Two-State Solution

Hillary Clinton declared that both Trump and Cruz are approaching the Israel-Palestine conflict completely wrong.  In my last post, I wrote about Trump declaring himself neutral in the conflict and apparently Cruz is completely standing with Israel.

Clinton stated that she wants to support Israel, but, “I also believe the Palestinians deserve to have a state of their own.  That’s why I support a two-state solution.  That’s what I have worked on.  That’s what I tried to move forward when I was secretary, and holding three very intense conversations between the prime minister of Israel and the president of the Palestinian Authority.”  Although she says this, and I completely agree, the end of this article stopped me dead in my tracks.  

Clinton’s email scandal came back into play.  She said in an email in 2011, she had a plan to “stir up Palestinian unrest” in order to pressure Israel to restart peace talks with the Palestinian Authority.  

I researched Clinton’s email scandal and didn’t find any specific emails having to do with Israel and Palestine in CNN or The New York Times.  I’m not sure whether to trust my source.  But, the email scandal, lies, and fact that Clinton is being investigated by the FBI are enough for me to believe she might be saying these things about Israel and Palestine.

 http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/208367#.Vsv2R4R4alI

[dril9-blog]

This article does a bad job of assessing what the Clinton emails in question mean for her stance on Israel. If you follow the link in the final paragraph of the article, it leads to a description by the same news source about Clinton’s supposed secret plan to undermine Israel. She never wrote an email endorsing an increase in Palestinian unrest- that’s a clear misreading of the article. According to the same source, what happened was that an advisor sent her a proposal to support non-violent protests by Palestinian women in order to put pressure on Israel- far from the violent unrest the article’s headline seems to imply. Clinton never replied to the email, and the article indicates the most she did in response to it was to possibly ask for it to be printed. I don’t think that indicates any sort of bombshell or reduced Clinton support for Israel.

Israel National News is not a very objective source that in my opinion tends to have a fairly clear editorial agenda. While writers at Israel National News might see Clinton’s support for a two-state solution as some inherent betrayal of Israel, I would argue that support for a Palestinian state and continued support of Israel are not mutually exclusive. While it might not be realistic at this moment, supporting a two-state solution doesn’t make an individual inherently anti-Israel. And Clinton’s emails as they stand now in the public record don’t really bring any important new information to the table.