ארכיון Rebecca Bornstein - Mitvim https://mitvim.org.il/en/writer/rebecca-bornstein/ מתווים Thu, 25 Feb 2021 11:07:57 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.8.1 https://mitvim.org.il/wp-content/uploads/fav-300x300.png ארכיון Rebecca Bornstein - Mitvim https://mitvim.org.il/en/writer/rebecca-bornstein/ 32 32 Eastern Mediterranean Regional Dynamics: Conflicts and Opportunities for Conflict Resolution Support https://mitvim.org.il/en/publication/eastern-mediterranean-regional-dynamics-conflicts-and-opportunities-for-conflict-resolution-support/ Wed, 27 Jun 2018 09:58:42 +0000 https://mitvim.org.il/?post_type=publication&p=3070 Diplomatic engagement between countries in the Eastern Mediterranean presents the opportunity for greater regional cooperation on a range of issues, including policy, security and economic growth. Increased cooperation has the potential to lead to shared regional norms and institutions that promote regional stability and aid in conflict resolution support. But the potential for regional cohesion is limited, both because of differences in national priorities and recent and long-standing conflicts. This policy brief explores the limitations and potential of conflict resolution support in the Eastern Mediterranean. It offers operational recommendations for experts and policy-makers working to strengthen regional dialogue and find new lenses for approaching conflict resolution.

הפוסט Eastern Mediterranean Regional Dynamics: Conflicts and Opportunities for Conflict Resolution Support הופיע לראשונה ב-Mitvim.

]]>
Diplomatic engagement between countries in the Eastern Mediterranean presents the opportunity for greater regional cooperation on a range of issues, including policy, security and economic growth. Increased cooperation has the potential to lead to shared regional norms and institutions that promote regional stability and aid in conflict resolution support. But the potential for regional cohesion is limited, both because of differences in national priorities and recent and long-standing conflicts. This policy brief explores the limitations and potential of conflict resolution support in the Eastern Mediterranean. It offers operational recommendations for experts and policy-makers working to strengthen regional dialogue and find new lenses for approaching conflict resolution.

הפוסט Eastern Mediterranean Regional Dynamics: Conflicts and Opportunities for Conflict Resolution Support הופיע לראשונה ב-Mitvim.

]]>
Trump’s Policies on Iran and North Korea Are Weakening U.S. Diplomatic Power https://mitvim.org.il/en/publication/trumps-policies-on-iran-and-north-korea-are-weakening-u-s-diplomatic-power/ Wed, 20 Jun 2018 14:25:22 +0000 https://mitvim.org.il/?post_type=publication&p=2890 President Trump’s meeting with Kim Jong Un took place at a perilous time for American diplomacy. The meeting came on the heels of a surprising dispute with Canada, Germany, and France at the G7 summit, culminating in Trump’s refusal to support the summit communique and twitter spat with Canada’s Prime Minister. In Singapore with Kim Jong Un, Trump pivoted, and made surprising concessions to the rogue nuclear state. Trump has championed the ideas of unpredictability and brinkmanship, and both are on display. But unpredictability is not a successful foreign policy outlook. The U.S. needs a new approach to restore diplomatic credibility, strengthen partnerships, and meet the nuclear challenges posed by both Iran and North Korea. The current standing of American diplomacy shows the flaws of Trump’s approach. The U.S. is publicly at odds with Canada over trade, and with European allies over climate, defense spending, and Iran. Transatlantic unity has been frayed by unpredictability and withdrawal from international agreements. As Trump met Kim, many supporters of a substantive deal on denuclearizing the Korean peninsula considered a new hurdle: that counterparts will no longer see the U.S. as credible or capable of implementing a nuclear agreement. Denuclearization is a lofty goal in ideal times, and the current climate makes it even less probable for a nuclear state to voluntarily surrender its capabilities. In this context, it is unsurprising that the Trump-Kim meeting did not result in a tangible ‘win’ for nonproliferation. North Korea made no new commitments. Kim gained positive publicity

הפוסט Trump’s Policies on Iran and North Korea Are Weakening U.S. Diplomatic Power הופיע לראשונה ב-Mitvim.

]]>
President Trump’s meeting with Kim Jong Un took place at a perilous time for American diplomacy. The meeting came on the heels of a surprising dispute with Canada, Germany, and France at the G7 summit, culminating in Trump’s refusal to support the summit communique and twitter spat with Canada’s Prime Minister. In Singapore with Kim Jong Un, Trump pivoted, and made surprising concessions to the rogue nuclear state. Trump has championed the ideas of unpredictability and brinkmanship, and both are on display. But unpredictability is not a successful foreign policy outlook. The U.S. needs a new approach to restore diplomatic credibility, strengthen partnerships, and meet the nuclear challenges posed by both Iran and North Korea.

The current standing of American diplomacy shows the flaws of Trump’s approach. The U.S. is publicly at odds with Canada over trade, and with European allies over climate, defense spending, and Iran. Transatlantic unity has been frayed by unpredictability and withdrawal from international agreements. As Trump met Kim, many supporters of a substantive deal on denuclearizing the Korean peninsula considered a new hurdle: that counterparts will no longer see the U.S. as credible or capable of implementing a nuclear agreement. Denuclearization is a lofty goal in ideal times, and the current climate makes it even less probable for a nuclear state to voluntarily surrender its capabilities.

In this context, it is unsurprising that the Trump-Kim meeting did not result in a tangible ‘win’ for nonproliferation. North Korea made no new commitments. Kim gained positive publicity surrounding the meeting and a new U.S. commitment to suspend a large-scale military exercise with South Korea. It is unclear what comes next, and the potential for disagreement is high. While disputes with Canada lead to angry tweets, disputes with angry nuclear weapons states have far greater risks.

Trump’s talks with Kim are juxtaposed with his withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal (JCPOA) and lack of a viable strategy. Direct and implicit threats are insufficient to meet long-term challenges, and they exacerbate tensions by empowering Iranian hardliners. Secretary Pompeo’s recent speech on Iran was not a strategy, but a demand for full submission that unilateral U.S. sanctions are unlikely to achieve, especially as European partners advance financial blocking regulations and exemptions from reimposed nuclear sanctions.

In the immediate term, U.S. threats coupled with European efforts may prevent Iranian nuclear escalation. But while the deal’s opponents feared regulations that would ‘sunset’ in the mid-2020’s, we are now in a shakier environment in which those provisions may collapse well before 2020. As a result of JCPOA withdrawal, the international community is less prepared to address a potential collapse, or an ambiguous action by Iran. Prior to the JCPOA, Iran’s strategy was based on developing its nuclear program in the grey area between technical compliance and clear violation. If Iran again began to operate in the margins, without committing a clear violation, how would the world respond?

A viable strategy should emphasize diplomacy wherever possible. It should consider that all other JCPOA parties, including China and Russia, remain committed to the deal. It should deploy threats of force sparingly and wisely, and promote smart diplomatic processes towards both North Korea and Iran when the chances of success appear realistic. Otherwise, the Trump administration risks placing the U.S. in a more isolated position, with less insight into Iran’s nuclear activities, and a diminished ability to leverage the powers of alliances and diplomatic credibility when engaging with rogue regimes. These are important tools that the administration should not turn away from.

Rebecca Bornstein is Director for External Relations and Researcher at the Mitvim Institute.

הפוסט Trump’s Policies on Iran and North Korea Are Weakening U.S. Diplomatic Power הופיע לראשונה ב-Mitvim.

]]>
Preventing an Israel-Iran Escalation in Syria via Diplomacy https://mitvim.org.il/en/publication/preventing-an-israel-iran-escalation-in-syria-via-diplomacy/ Thu, 15 Feb 2018 08:18:17 +0000 https://mitvim.org.il/?post_type=publication&p=3032 After an Iranian drone entered Israeli airspace 10 February 2018, Israel responded by striking Iranian and Syrian targets in southern Syria. Anti-aircraft fire led to the downing of an Israeli F-16 warplane. This was the first direct confrontation between Israel and Iran in Syria, and it has prompted concern over further military escalation along the Israeli-Syrian border. In order to prevent such an escalation, Israel cannot rely only on security means. It should also make effective use of diplomacy: to identify clear and feasible policy goals regarding Syria, to foster alliances with countries that can help advance these goals, and to mobilize these countries into constructive action. This document includes experts’ perspectives on Israeli interests at stake, and diplomatic channels that can be promoted with Russia, the US, Turkey, and Germany in order to prevent further escalation. It is based on a policy workshop convened by the Mitvim Institute on 15 February 2018.

הפוסט Preventing an Israel-Iran Escalation in Syria via Diplomacy הופיע לראשונה ב-Mitvim.

]]>
After an Iranian drone entered Israeli airspace 10 February 2018, Israel responded by striking Iranian and Syrian targets in southern Syria. Anti-aircraft fire led to the downing of an Israeli F-16 warplane. This was the first direct confrontation between Israel and Iran in Syria, and it has prompted concern over further military escalation along the Israeli-Syrian border. In order to prevent such an escalation, Israel cannot rely only on security means. It should also make effective use of diplomacy: to identify clear and feasible policy goals regarding Syria, to foster alliances with countries that can help advance these goals, and to mobilize these countries into constructive action. This document includes experts’ perspectives on Israeli interests at stake, and diplomatic channels that can be promoted with Russia, the US, Turkey, and Germany in order to prevent further escalation. It is based on a policy workshop convened by the Mitvim Institute on 15 February 2018.

הפוסט Preventing an Israel-Iran Escalation in Syria via Diplomacy הופיע לראשונה ב-Mitvim.

]]>
Trump’s Statement on Jerusalem https://mitvim.org.il/en/publication/trumps-statement-on-jerusalem/ Thu, 21 Dec 2017 07:34:53 +0000 https://mitvim.org.il/?post_type=publication&p=4026 On 6 December 2017, US President Donald Trump delivered a statement in which he recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. His statement was warmly received in Israel, but was heavily criticized in Europe and the Middle East. This document includes commentaries by Mitvim Institute experts regarding Trump’s statement on Jerusalem and its possible implications: Dr. Nimrod Goren claims that introducing a vision of peace for Jerusalem is the ultimate response to Trump’s statement; Dr. Lior Lehrs argues that Trump changed US policy on Jerusalem, but only partially; Rebecca Bornstein explains that while Trump’s supporters applaud him, the statement puts US interests at risk; Prof. Elie Podeh analyzes why the likelihood of a breakthrough towards peace is now even more remote; and Dr. Ido Zelkovitz concludes that Trump’s statement is fueling Hamas’ incitement efforts.

הפוסט Trump’s Statement on Jerusalem הופיע לראשונה ב-Mitvim.

]]>
On 6 December 2017, US President Donald Trump delivered a statement in which he recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. His statement was warmly received in Israel, but was heavily criticized in Europe and the Middle East. This document includes commentaries by Mitvim Institute experts regarding Trump’s statement on Jerusalem and its possible implications: Dr. Nimrod Goren claims that introducing a vision of peace for Jerusalem is the ultimate response to Trump’s statement; Dr. Lior Lehrs argues that Trump changed US policy on Jerusalem, but only partially; Rebecca Bornstein explains that while Trump’s supporters applaud him, the statement puts US interests at risk; Prof. Elie Podeh analyzes why the likelihood of a breakthrough towards peace is now even more remote; and Dr. Ido Zelkovitz concludes that Trump’s statement is fueling Hamas’ incitement efforts.

הפוסט Trump’s Statement on Jerusalem הופיע לראשונה ב-Mitvim.

]]>
Trump Should Not Play Politics with the Iran Nuclear Deal https://mitvim.org.il/en/publication/trump-should-not-play-politics-with-the-iran-nuclear-deal/ Wed, 16 Aug 2017 12:20:36 +0000 https://mitvim.org.il/?post_type=publication&p=4135 The adversarial US-Iranian relationship has many dimensions, including Syria, Yemen, the Gulf and terrorist financing. But the primary threat from Iran is nuclear. Prior to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), American and Israeli security discourse centered on potential military strikes on Iranian facilities, and the large-scale escalation that could follow. That rhetoric has been scaled back, and Israeli security analysts no longer list a nuclear Iran as a top threat. Both the US and the International Atomic Energy Agency have repeatedly certified Iran’s compliance with the deal. If Iran’s compliance continues, the deal serves the security interests of the US, Europe and Israel. More broadly, it contributes to global stability by strengthening the nonproliferation architecture and dissuading other countries from rushing toward a bomb. The deal does not rely on trusting Tehran: it significantly lengthens Iran’s potential breakout time, and provides increased visibility into its nuclear program. Under JCPOA conditions, it is easier for the US and its partners to respond to any serious violation, as it contains mechanisms for a coordinated global response. This reality is clear, even to former critics of the deal. Trump’s bombastic rhetoric toward Iran is not backed up with fact: there is no case in which unilateral withdrawal serves US interests. If Trump withdraws, one of two scenarios would unfold: 1) The P5+1 and Iran continue to enforce the deal, marginalizing US influence. Absent a true Iranian violation, Europe would not follow a US exit, and the US would find itself with

הפוסט Trump Should Not Play Politics with the Iran Nuclear Deal הופיע לראשונה ב-Mitvim.

]]>
The adversarial US-Iranian relationship has many dimensions, including Syria, Yemen, the Gulf and terrorist financing. But the primary threat from Iran is nuclear. Prior to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), American and Israeli security discourse centered on potential military strikes on Iranian facilities, and the large-scale escalation that could follow. That rhetoric has been scaled back, and Israeli security analysts no longer list a nuclear Iran as a top threat. Both the US and the International Atomic Energy Agency have repeatedly certified Iran’s compliance with the deal.

If Iran’s compliance continues, the deal serves the security interests of the US, Europe and Israel. More broadly, it contributes to global stability by strengthening the nonproliferation architecture and dissuading other countries from rushing toward a bomb. The deal does not rely on trusting Tehran: it significantly lengthens Iran’s potential breakout time, and provides increased visibility into its nuclear program. Under JCPOA conditions, it is easier for the US and its partners to respond to any serious violation, as it contains mechanisms for a coordinated global response.

This reality is clear, even to former critics of the deal. Trump’s bombastic rhetoric toward Iran is not backed up with fact: there is no case in which unilateral withdrawal serves US interests. If Trump withdraws, one of two scenarios would unfold: 1) The P5+1 and Iran continue to enforce the deal, marginalizing US influence. Absent a true Iranian violation, Europe would not follow a US exit, and the US would find itself with very little leverage to negotiate any future deal on Iran. 2) Iran also leaves, and the deal falls apart. Iran’s breakout time is reduced, and international inspectors are barred from facilities. The nuclear threat re-emerges as a primary global security concern, and policymakers again prepare for worst-case military scenarios.

Trump’s motivations are unclear.

JCPOA withdrawal may be part of his quest to erase the legacies of the Obama administration, whatever their merits.

The second option is that this is a strategic decision, to create a credible threat of leaving to pressure Iran to fold to US pressure on another issue (such as ballistic missiles). Pressure could take the form of additional sanctions, threats to leave, and dissuading American and European companies from developing business ties with Iran, as Trump is reportedly already doing.

Policy “wins” are in short supply for the Trump administration, and in this case, a “win” is the ability to say that he pushed Iran into a better deal. This approach has some potential, and an inherent cost.

The potential rests on Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani, who was just reelected on a platform of engagement with the West. Unlike his conservative competitors, Rouhani’s personal legacy is tied to the nuclear deal, and if any Iranian president can lobby Ayatollah Khamenei to accept additional restrictions, it is him.

But putting the JCPOA on the line risks nuclear security progress for an unclear end. Trump’s vision of a “better” deal might include only a minor change to the JCPOA, or symbolic concession on Iran’s regional activities. Is there a potential gain that is worth the risk to the nuclear deal, and the harm to American diplomatic credibility? While the US certified Iran’s compliance in July, Trump said that he expects Iran to be declared noncompliant at the next 90-day review, and that “if it was up to me, I would have had them noncompliant 180 days ago.” Trump has reportedly tasked White House staffers with preparing for a noncompliance possibility.

Preparing for contingencies is the job of a president. But predicting noncompliance without evidence of a meaningful violation is wrong and dangerous.

Leaving, or threatening to leave the JCPOA weakens the image of the US as a power that stands by its agreements. This has long-term implications for American diplomacy, and short-term costs for our ability to use diplomacy to constrain Iran on other issues. Confronting Iran’s destabilizing activities – without sacrificing the progress of the nuclear deal – is one of the great policy challenges of our time.

By threatening to leave, Trump is risking a great deal of global stability for very little gain.

(originally published in the Jerusalem Post)

הפוסט Trump Should Not Play Politics with the Iran Nuclear Deal הופיע לראשונה ב-Mitvim.

]]>
Trump’s Visit to the Middle East https://mitvim.org.il/en/publication/3949/ Sun, 21 May 2017 06:31:13 +0000 https://mitvim.org.il/?post_type=publication&p=3949 Donald Trump made his first foreign trip since taking office to the Middle East. In May 2017 he visited Saudi Arabia, Israel, and the Palestinian Authority. Throughout his regional tour, the US president highlighted common security threats that can help unite nations and religions in the Middle East. He called for joint action against terror and extremism, and expressed hope and belief that Israeli-Palestinian peace is possible. However, the visit did not include major policy announcements, and many open questions remained about future American policies in the Middle East. This document includes commentaries by Mitvim Institute experts regarding Trump’s visit to the Middle East and its outcomes: (1) Regional security, not the peace process, tops Trump’s Middle Eastern agenda, by Dr. Nimrod Goren; (2) Trump chose Saudi Arabia; Israel did not object, by Prof. Elie Podeh; (3) The Arab media was happy about Trump’s visit to Saudi Arabia, by Khader Sawaed; (4) The US adopts a multi-lateral approach to peacemaking, and the Palestinians are on board, by Dr. Ido Zelkovitz; (5) Trump was in Israel and Saudi Arabia but attention is focused on America and Iran, by Rebecca Bornstein; (6) Trump passes a low bar, by Gabriel Mitchell

הפוסט Trump’s Visit to the Middle East הופיע לראשונה ב-Mitvim.

]]>
Donald Trump made his first foreign trip since taking office to the Middle East. In May 2017 he visited Saudi Arabia, Israel, and the Palestinian Authority. Throughout his regional tour, the US president highlighted common security threats that can help unite nations and religions in the Middle East. He called for joint action against terror and extremism, and expressed hope and belief that Israeli-Palestinian peace is possible. However, the visit did not include major policy announcements, and many open questions remained about future American policies in the Middle East.

This document includes commentaries by Mitvim Institute experts regarding Trump’s visit to the Middle East and its outcomes: (1) Regional security, not the peace process, tops Trump’s Middle Eastern agenda, by Dr. Nimrod Goren; (2) Trump chose Saudi Arabia; Israel did not object, by Prof. Elie Podeh; (3) The Arab media was happy about Trump’s visit to Saudi Arabia, by Khader Sawaed; (4) The US adopts a multi-lateral approach to peacemaking, and the Palestinians are on board, by Dr. Ido Zelkovitz; (5) Trump was in Israel and Saudi Arabia but attention is focused on America and Iran, by Rebecca Bornstein; (6) Trump passes a low bar, by Gabriel Mitchell

הפוסט Trump’s Visit to the Middle East הופיע לראשונה ב-Mitvim.

]]>
The Netanyahu-Trump Meeting https://mitvim.org.il/en/publication/the-netanyahu-trump-meeting/ Sun, 26 Feb 2017 11:16:10 +0000 https://mitvim.org.il/?post_type=publication&p=3338 The Israeli Prime Minister and his government reacted favorably to the election of Donald Trump as the new US President. However, since Trump assumed office, questions have mounted regarding his policies towards Israel, the IsraeliPalestinian peace process, and the Middle East. The first official meeting between Trump and Netanyahu, on February 15th in Washington D.C., was an opportunity to assess the policy directions of the new administration. This document includes commentaries by Mitvim Institute experts regarding the Netanyahu-Trump meeting and its outcomes: (1) The atmosphere was good but the policy was vague, Gabriel Mitchell; (2) The settlements and the Palestinian issue take a back seat in Israel-US relations, Nitzan Horowitz; (3) A regional breakthrough requires progress on the Israeli-Palestinian track, Dr. Nimrod Goren; (4) The Iran nuclear deal is likely to remain intact, Rebecca Bornstein; (5) The Palestinians do not have a friend in the White House, Dr. Ido Zelkovitz; (6) The Palestinian citizens of Israel were ignored once again, Kamal Ali Hassan; (7) Things went well for Netanyahu and Trump, but what comes next?, Dan Rothem.

הפוסט The Netanyahu-Trump Meeting הופיע לראשונה ב-Mitvim.

]]>
The Israeli Prime Minister and his government reacted favorably to the election of Donald Trump as the new US President. However, since Trump assumed office, questions have mounted regarding his policies towards Israel, the IsraeliPalestinian peace process, and the Middle East. The first official meeting between Trump and Netanyahu, on February 15th in Washington D.C., was an opportunity to assess the policy directions of the new administration.

This document includes commentaries by Mitvim Institute experts regarding the Netanyahu-Trump meeting and its outcomes: (1) The atmosphere was good but the policy was vague, Gabriel Mitchell; (2) The settlements and the Palestinian issue take a back seat in Israel-US relations, Nitzan Horowitz; (3) A regional breakthrough requires progress on the Israeli-Palestinian track, Dr. Nimrod Goren; (4) The Iran nuclear deal is likely to remain intact, Rebecca Bornstein; (5) The Palestinians do not have a friend in the White House, Dr. Ido Zelkovitz; (6) The Palestinian citizens of Israel were ignored once again, Kamal Ali Hassan; (7) Things went well for Netanyahu and Trump, but what comes next?, Dan Rothem.

הפוסט The Netanyahu-Trump Meeting הופיע לראשונה ב-Mitvim.

]]>
The UN Security Council Resolution on Israeli Settlement https://mitvim.org.il/en/publication/the-un-security-council-resolution-on-israeli-settlement/ Mon, 26 Dec 2016 10:38:09 +0000 https://mitvim.org.il/?post_type=publication&p=3321 UN Security Council Resolution 2334, adopted on December 23rd 2016, is not the first international decision against the Israeli settlements. It is aligned with previous criticisms voiced against the settlement enterprise – including in the Quartet report published in July 2016 – and with international efforts to maintain and promote the two-state solution. Nevertheless, the harsh Israeli response against the resolution, and the meaning attributed to the resolution by major international actors, indicate its potential importance. This document includes short commentaries by Mitvim Institute experts – Dr. Nimrod Goren, Dr. Ehud Eiran, Rebecca Bornstein, and Dr. Ido Zelkovitz – on various aspects relating to the resolution and its possible ramifications.

הפוסט The UN Security Council Resolution on Israeli Settlement הופיע לראשונה ב-Mitvim.

]]>
UN Security Council Resolution 2334, adopted on December 23rd 2016, is not the first international decision against the Israeli settlements. It is aligned with previous criticisms voiced against the settlement enterprise – including in the Quartet report published in July 2016 – and with international efforts to maintain and promote the two-state solution. Nevertheless, the harsh Israeli response against the resolution, and the meaning attributed to the resolution by major international actors, indicate its potential importance. This document includes short commentaries by Mitvim Institute experts – Dr. Nimrod Goren, Dr. Ehud Eiran, Rebecca Bornstein, and Dr. Ido Zelkovitz – on various aspects relating to the resolution and its possible ramifications.

הפוסט The UN Security Council Resolution on Israeli Settlement הופיע לראשונה ב-Mitvim.

]]>
The U.S. Elections and the Future of the Middle East https://mitvim.org.il/en/publication/the-u-s-elections-and-the-future-of-the-middle-east/ Wed, 14 Dec 2016 10:42:37 +0000 https://mitvim.org.il/?post_type=publication&p=3324 On December 14th 2016 IPCRI and the Mitvim Institute hosted at the American Colony Hotel in Jerusalem a public forum titled “The U.S Elections and the Future of Middle East.” After opening remarks by Dr. Gershon Baskin, Co-Chairman of IPCRI, and Dr. Nimrod Goren, Head of the Mitvim Institute, the speakers Dan Rothem, Rebecca Bornstein and Mofid Deak presented their assessments on American foreign policy in the Middle East under the presidency of Donald Trump. The forum was chaired by Suheir Jamil, a former researcher at the International Crisis Group, and was supported by the Kingdom of the Netherlands. This is a summary of the discussion that took place.

הפוסט The U.S. Elections and the Future of the Middle East הופיע לראשונה ב-Mitvim.

]]>
On December 14th 2016 IPCRI and the Mitvim Institute hosted at the American Colony Hotel in Jerusalem a public forum titled “The U.S Elections and the Future of Middle East.” After opening remarks by Dr. Gershon Baskin, Co-Chairman of IPCRI, and Dr. Nimrod Goren, Head of the Mitvim Institute, the speakers Dan Rothem, Rebecca Bornstein and Mofid Deak presented their assessments on American foreign policy in the Middle East under the presidency of Donald Trump. The forum was chaired by Suheir Jamil, a former researcher at the International Crisis Group, and was supported by the Kingdom of the Netherlands. This is a summary of the discussion that took place.

הפוסט The U.S. Elections and the Future of the Middle East הופיע לראשונה ב-Mitvim.

]]>
The Israel-US MoU as a prelude to Obama peace parameters? https://mitvim.org.il/en/publication/the-israel-us-mou-as-a-prelude-to-obama-peace-parameters/ Mon, 19 Sep 2016 17:11:23 +0000 https://mitvim.org.il/?post_type=publication&p=4186 The US and Israel have finalized a $38 billion, 10-year Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) governing US military aid to Israel. The MoU underscores America’s commitment to the future of the US-Israel alliance, even during a period of sharp policy disagreement on issues ranging from Iran to the settlements. The scope of the deal and its provisions on missile defense funding demonstrate a strong commitment to Israel’s qualitative military edge. But a strong aid deal is not all the US can do to enhance Israel’s security and standing in the region. Following the November elections, the Obama administration will have the opportunity to advance progress on another crucial issue – the stalled Israeli-Palestinian peace process. The MoU constitutes the largest bilateral military aid package in American history. It includes $500 million per year in missile defense funding, which until now has been determined separately during an annual congressional appropriations process. The benefit of incorporation is that funding is guaranteed until 2028; the figure does not mark a significant increase in the amount of support that has been provided by Congress. Once missile defense is accounted for, the increase in aid totals $200m. per year – just under seven%. For reference, 10 years ago the US added $600m. per year, an increase of 25%. This is perhaps reflective of the security situation Israel faced 10 years ago, in the aftermath of the disengagement from Gaza. The deal’s provisions on missile defense funding allow Israeli strategists to rely on a healthy budget over

הפוסט The Israel-US MoU as a prelude to Obama peace parameters? הופיע לראשונה ב-Mitvim.

]]>
The US and Israel have finalized a $38 billion, 10-year Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) governing US military aid to Israel. The MoU underscores America’s commitment to the future of the US-Israel alliance, even during a period of sharp policy disagreement on issues ranging from Iran to the settlements.

The scope of the deal and its provisions on missile defense funding demonstrate a strong commitment to Israel’s qualitative military edge. But a strong aid deal is not all the US can do to enhance Israel’s security and standing in the region.

Following the November elections, the Obama administration will have the opportunity to advance progress on another crucial issue – the stalled Israeli-Palestinian peace process.

The MoU constitutes the largest bilateral military aid package in American history.

It includes $500 million per year in missile defense funding, which until now has been determined separately during an annual congressional appropriations process. The benefit of incorporation is that funding is guaranteed until 2028; the figure does not mark a significant increase in the amount of support that has been provided by Congress.

Once missile defense is accounted for, the increase in aid totals $200m. per year – just under seven%. For reference, 10 years ago the US added $600m. per year, an increase of 25%. This is perhaps reflective of the security situation Israel faced 10 years ago, in the aftermath of the disengagement from Gaza.

The deal’s provisions on missile defense funding allow Israeli strategists to rely on a healthy budget over the next decade.

While guaranteed funding is provided in exchange for Israel’s pledge that it will not lobby Congress for additional funds for the duration of the deal, there is a qualifier: Israel may request additional funds in the event of an emergency such as war.

Israel’s longstanding state of emergency and periodic operations in Gaza and neighboring countries, coupled with support among congressional Republicans for additional funds, calls into question the effectiveness of the anti-lobbying provision. It is very possible that Israel will successfully lobby for additional missile defense funds before the deal ends in 2028.

It does not appear that political and diplomatic initiatives played a significant role in negotiations, despite speculation that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would have enjoyed greater leverage if he had concluded the agreement prior to the Iran nuclear deal.

Negotiations did not seem tied to progress on the peace process, despite Washington’s focus on a possible end-of-term effort to lay out the parameters of a future Israeli-Palestinian peace deal.

Concluding the deal now, however, provides more leverage should the Obama administration deliver a set of parameters that addresses settlements and other Israeli obstacles to peace.

There are two final points worth noting: first, provisions in the Iran deal on Tehran’s enrichment, and enrichment research and development, are set to expire in 10 years, around the time that the Israel-US MoU will end.

This is not cause for alarm: Iran will remain bound to enrichment restrictions enforced by the International Atomic Energy Agency in accordance with the Non-Proliferation Treaty. It will, however, lend leverage to Israel as it negotiates the successor to this deal.

The final point is that the MoU marks a worthy investment in Israel’s military security that should be met with policies designed to improve its regional security by finally moving toward a political resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

The months after the November election will provide the Obama administration with a chance to advance its vision of a final-status agreement. It is clear that such a move would need to address the destructive role of Israel’s settlement enterprise in the peace process.

The MoU is a worthy deal designed to ensure Israel’s security. It should empower the Obama administration to advance a vision of a two-state solution that transforms Israel’s regional standing and further bolsters its regional security.

(originally published in the Jerusalem Post)

הפוסט The Israel-US MoU as a prelude to Obama peace parameters? הופיע לראשונה ב-Mitvim.

]]>
The 2015 UN General Assembly and the Israeli-Palestinian Peace Process: Commentary & Analysis https://mitvim.org.il/en/publication/the-2015-un-general-assembly-and-the-israeli-palestinian-peace-process-commentary-analysis/ Wed, 28 Oct 2015 07:51:07 +0000 https://mitvim.org.il/?post_type=publication&p=4702 The stagnation in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process was clearly reflected at the 2015 UN General Assembly. The speeches of Mahmoud Abbas and Benjamin Netanyahu lacked vision and hope, and Barack Obama’s speech ignored the Israeli-Palestinian issue altogether. The results of the Quartet meeting, held on the margins of the General Assembly, were far from a breakthrough. This document includes commentary and analysis on these issues by Mitvim experts: Dr. Ilai Saltzman, Colette Avital, Dr. Nimrod Goren, Dr. Ido Zelkovitz, and Rebecca Bornstein.

הפוסט The 2015 UN General Assembly and the Israeli-Palestinian Peace Process: Commentary & Analysis הופיע לראשונה ב-Mitvim.

]]>
The stagnation in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process was clearly reflected at the 2015 UN General Assembly. The speeches of Mahmoud Abbas and Benjamin Netanyahu lacked vision and hope, and Barack Obama’s speech ignored the Israeli-Palestinian issue altogether. The results of the Quartet meeting, held on the margins of the General Assembly, were far from a breakthrough. This document includes commentary and analysis on these issues by Mitvim experts: Dr. Ilai Saltzman, Colette Avital, Dr. Nimrod Goren, Dr. Ido Zelkovitz, and Rebecca Bornstein.

הפוסט The 2015 UN General Assembly and the Israeli-Palestinian Peace Process: Commentary & Analysis הופיע לראשונה ב-Mitvim.

]]>