International Relations from a Middle Eastern
Perspective
Dr. Lior Lehrs
Lecture I: IR and Conflict Resolution in the Middle East
Background
Tension between Pan-Arabism: Arab world as one, seeking to create one Islamic
country for all Muslims; vs Nation-State nationalism (Palestinians, Iraqis, etc. as
di erent nationalities).
Non-Arab actors in MENA: Israel, Turkey, Iran. They have great power and are able
to exert in uence in the region.
Israeli-Palestinian con ict as a core con ict, and Israeli-Arab con icts as secondary
con icts.
Interlocking con icts: Israel-Egypt; Israel-Jordan; Israel-Syria.
Regional changes in recent years: Arab spring, civil wars, Iran-Saudi Arabia proxy
con ict.
Normalisation agreements like the "Abraham Accords"
Three levels of analysis (+ an extra)
1st, the individual: private citizens, specially in democracies, who are perceived as
leader and that exert great in uence over the population, orienting perception and
ideology.
2nd, state or society: public opinion, political groups (islamic, left-wing, right-wing),
bureaucracy, and regime type (liberalism: democratic peace).
3rd, regional: regional identity constructs? (Constructivism) Regional institutions?
(Liberal institutionalism).
4th, international: superpowers, the distribution of power (Neo-realism).
Stages in con ict resolution, which are not linear
(Negative peace: no violence or war, but core con icting issues are not resolved)
1. Con ict/crisis prevention: prevent the escalation of an already present con ict.
In the Israeli-Palestinian con ict, Egypt acts as the main mediating force
between Hamas and Israel, along with Jordan.
1
ff
fl
fl
fl
fl
fl
fl
fl
fl
fl
fl
fl
fl
fl
2. Con ict management: without reaching an agreement, it is the process of
nding ways to ease tensions and to reach a resolution. "Shrinking the con ict".
Separation of forces.
3. Con ict resolution: both sides negotiating and reaching a formal resolution on
the main issues of a con ict, through their leaders or elites. First step, because
citizens need to comply. Israel with Egypt and Jordan.
4. Stable peace: parties no longer considering the use of force to resolve a con ict,
the recognition of the status quo. Citizens no longer feel at odds with the
previous con icting part: tourism, civil society, etc. Sometimes a lot of time is
needed in order to reach this step from the previous one.
5. Reconciliation: main goal, but most di cult to achieve. It involves changing the
perception of the people: narrative, identity, the conception of nationality…
(Positive peace: structural and core issues are addressed and the con ict is no
more).
Intractable Con icts
Deeply-rooted, intense, complex and enduring con icts. Characteristics:
- Protracted: persisting for a long time
- Destructive and violent
- Perceived as irreconcilable: strong resistance to settlement
- Protected values; on identity and values.
- Zero-sum gas, total and central (controls a signi cant part of the public agenda)
These con icts could be interstate or intrastate, or frozen and active.
Exs.: Northern Ireland, Kashmir, Kosovo.
Protected/Sacred value
Distinct, fundamental values that are perceived by a particular social group as
sacred and not open to compromise, replacement or abandonment. They hold a
taboo status and their violation is likened to the violation of society’s ethical and
moral principles. Protected values are important in peace negotiations.
In the Israeli-Palestinian con ict, examples are the Holy City of Jerusalem and
Palestinian Refugees.
2
fi
fl
fl
fl
fl
fl
fl
fl
ffi
fi
fl
fl
fl
fl
Contested narratives
Historical narratives: "a social and political construction that coherently interrelates
a sequence of historical and current events; they are accounts of a community’s
collective experiences, embodied in its belief system and represent the collective’s
symbolically constructed shared identity".
It is not intended to provide an objective history, it is quite selective of the facts that
t the narrative. Revision, selection and ordination of past details in a way that will
serve for the needs of the present and for particular political positions and ideology.
They are shared by the society and treated as the only truthful description.
Functions of the con ict narrative; "ethos of con ict"
1. Justi es the outbreak of the con ict and the course of its development; justify
decisions and act towards the enemy
2. Presents a positive image of one’s group; create a sense of di erentiation and
superiority
3. Delegitimises the opponent
4. Presents one’s group as being a victim of the opponent.
5. Motivating function for mobilisation and action, solidarity
Narratives in con ict resolution
Create limits and constrain for any exibility in peace negotiations. Any respect to
the other side’s narrative could be perceived as compromising one’s own narrative.
Reevaluation and reframing the narrative is necessary for reconciliation, not to be
prisoners of the past.
Narratives can change and have internal di erences.
Israeli-Jewish narrative Palestinian-Muslim narrative
Land of Israel, Eretz Israel Palestine, Filastin
Yerushalayim al-Quds
Temple Mount Al-Aqsa
War of Independence "The catastrophe"
Judea and Samaria, Yehuda and Shomron West Bank
Security Fence/Barrier Separation/Apartheid Wall
3
fi
fi
fl
fl
fl
fl
ff
fl
ff
From con ict to peace?
- Ripeness theory (Zartman):
1. Perceptions of a Mutually Hurting Stalemate (MHS)
2. Perceptions of a Way Out
3. Leadership that can deliver
- "Two level game" (Putnam)
Public legitimacy for peace policy.
- International mediation
Mediation types: communicator, facilitator, formulator, manipulator.
Lecture II: The Arab-Israeli conflict and peace process
Background
1947 181 UN Partition plan: 2 separate states, Jerusalem under international
administration; the plan was rejected by the Palestinians.
The region had previously been under British and French control.
The 1948 started as a civil war all over the country, and the second stage, after
Israel declared its statehood, neighbouring countries joined the con ict, becoming
the rst Arab-Israeli war. In 1949, the Armistice agreement between Israel and
Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria.
The West Bank was controlled by Jordan, and the Gaza Strip was controlled by
Egypt. They joined the con ict promising a sovereign Palestine, but did not give up
control after the war.
The Six Day War (1967)
During the 1950s and 1960s, the Arab countries refused to recognise Israel.
Growing tension and border incidents.
In 1964, the Arab League was established. They adopted a resolution in which they
recognised that their ultimate goal was the destruction of Israel.
Crisis of May 1967: Sinai was deemed a demilitarised zone. The Straits of Tiran
were blockaded by Nasser, and Israel mobilised forces into the Sinai, expelling
UNEF peacekeeping forces.
Egypt, Syria and Jordan arranged a defence pact.
4
fi
fl
fl
fl
Israel then gained control over the Sinai peninsula, the Golan Heights, the West
Bank, the Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem.
After the ’67 War
Israeli leadership was aware of the dilemma that occupying all those territories
meant. Israel formulated a secret proposal to Syria and Egypt: Israel would give up
the Sinai peninsula and the Golan Heights in exchange for international recognition
and a peace agreement. These territories had been occupied for geostrategic
reasons; but the West Bank and East Jerusalem were not given up due to the
religious/ideological dispute.
Khartoum Arab League Summit: "the Three No’s", with Israel, there’s no peace, no
negotiation, and no recognition. But some Arab leaders rethought this statement
shortly after. Also, Israeli started building settlements in these territories.
United Nations Security Council Resolution 242: Formula for peace? It was at least
the basis for a peace agreement. "Land for peace". Very vague language.
Israel-Egypt: from war to peace
New heads of state in both countries: Anwar al-Sadat and Goida Meir
1969-1970 War of attrition, with diplomatic e orts failing until 1973, when the Yom
Kippur War started. It was a completely surprise attack on Israel by Egypt and Syria,
being the biggest blow to Israeli information services. Jordan was not involved,
because it had established a special relation with Israel (the King even warned Meir
of the Egyptian and Syrian intention to attack Israel).
This was the last major con ict between Israel and Arab countries.
The peace process
Henry Kissinger, US Secretary of State, noted that the con ict was transcendent to
the Middle East (it could develop into a Soviet-American con ict). So a peace
process needed to be established.
1977, Sadat visits Israel, which was criticised by Syria.
1978, Camp David agreement between Egypt and Israel, mediated by Jimmy Carter
( nal agreement in 1979). 80% of support for this agreement in Egypt:
- Egypt-Israel Peace Treaty: Israel withdrawal from Sinai (going back to pre-1967
borders) and other security arrangements. Israeli settlements would be relocated.
- Framework for negotiations on a Palestinian self-rule
- US guarantees and assistance. Sadat moving to the American sphere of
in uence.
5
fi
fl
fl
ff
fl
fl
Implications of the agreement
Egypt was isolated from the Arab world: was kicked out of the Arab League and
President Sadat was killed by Islamic fundamentalists.
In Israel, there were protests against the evacuation of the settlements in the Sinai.
Since then, peace has been maintained. Cold peace? Public opinion in Egypt is still
very critical of the Palestinian issue.
Middle East Peace Process
1991, the Cold War ended. But the Gulf War started. In October 1991, there was the
Madrid Peace Conference: direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians,
Jordan, Syria and Lebanon.
1993, Oslo agreement between Israel and Palestine.
1994, the second peace: Israel-Jordan peace agreement, secret contacts over the
year. But issues remain: borders, water, security cooperation, and the holy places in
Jerusalem
Israel and the Arab World
1990s Israel-Syria Peace negotiations. Issues: the border, security, water, Syria’s
relations with Iran and Hezbollah. No agreement has yet been reached (last attempt
was in 2011, before Syria’s civil war). With Lebanon, there is no active war or
con ict, but there is no formal relation, and the issue of Hezbollah is still present.
2002: Beirut Arab League Summit: Arab Peace Initiative O ering normalisation with
Israel in exchange for the establishment of a Palestinian State.
2020: normalisation agreements (Abraham Accords) between Israel with the UAE,
Bahrain, Sudan, and Morocco
6
fl
ff
Lecture III: Israel-Palestine
Background: the end of the British Mandate
This region was under the control of the Ottoman Empire, after the WWII, it was
controlled by the British. Between 1918 and 1948, under the British, there was
growing tensions and clashes between the Jews and Palestinian communities. They
lived completely separately.
1947, the British wanted to leave, moving the issue to the UN. In November 1947
the Partition plan, Resolution 181 was issued: two-state solution and Jerusalem and
Belen under international control. Arab-Palestinians rejected, and this led to the
1948 was after the declaration of statehood of Israel.
1948 War: called by Israelis the "Independence War" and by Palestinians the "al-
Nakba"
1948 - the Israeli Narrative
The Palestinians and Arabs rejected the partition plan and initiated the war; if they
had agreed, the parties could have lived in peace
The Armies of the Arab countries invaded in order to prevent the partition, destroy
Israel and expel all the Jews (for example: the Jewish quarter)
A war of survival that was imposed on Israel, with 6,000 dead Israelis, including
Holocaust survivors.
The Palestinians and the Arabs responsible for the outcomes, including the refugee
problem. The refugees left voluntarily because of fear and because they were asked
to leave by their leaders.
850,000 Jewish refugees from Arab and Muslim countries
1948 - the Palestinian narrative
The UN plan was based on injustice. The war was a just war, a natural reaction to
injustice.
Catastrophe: Israel has full responsibility for the expulsion of the refugees
Israel’s goal and plan: ethnic cleansing, new Jewish villages were built on the ruins,
abandones neighbourhoods were lled with new immigrants.
750,000 refugees, destruction of many villages. Palestinians lost property and
control over their lives.
Zionist forces were much better organised, armed and trained. Israel refused to let
refugees come back.
7
fi
—
Both sides need to acknowledge that they have di erent narratives. Both have to
acknowledge responsibility.
The Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO)
Before its creation, Palestinian representation was not organised and was disputed
by many Arab countries. But now the PLO is recognised as the sole representative
of the Palestinians.
In 1959, Palestinian students founded the Fatah, one of them being Yasser Arafat.
1960’s: Armed struggle, launched attacks on Israel from its bases in Jordan and
Syria.
1964: the creation of the the PLO at the Cairo Summit.
After 1967, the Fatah took over the PLO from the Arab countries, Arafat — the PLO
chairman. PLO created state-like institutions.
1970: Black September. the PLO created a small state in Jordan. At some point, it
became inconvenient for the Jordanian regime due to terrorist activities carried out
by the PLO. They were kicked out and had to move to Beirut.
PLO attacks on Israeli targets in Israel and outside (aircraft hijackings, with the most
notable being the Munich Olympics massacre). This brought international attention
to the con ict. Connections with the IRA in Ireland and the FARCs in Colombia.
The transformation of the PLO
1964/1968: The Palestinian National Charter (pseudo-constitution): reject any
solution that does not involve the total liberation of Palestine. Armed struggle being
the only way to liberate Palestine
1969-1974: "Secular democratic state". Not only Muslim Palestinians belong here.
After 1973: internal debate in the PLO on the political strategy, partition or not.
US (and the West) preconditioned the PLO in order to participate in the international
community: accepting UNSCR 242 (Israel would withdraw from invaded territories in
the Yom Kippur war), recognising Israel, and renouncing terrorism.
Israel claimed the PLO is a terrorist organisation, negotiations with Jordan.
The PLO and the two-state solution
1987 (turning point): rst Intifada in the West Bank and Gaza, which was not
organised by the PLO (it was a popular uprising).
8
fl
fi
ff
July 1988: Jordanians disengage from the West Bank.
November 1988: PLO accepting the two-state solution. Political strategy to reach
achievements
December 1988: Arafat accepted 242 and 181 and renounced terrorism. Secret
talks between the PLO and US
The road to Oslo — ’93
The two greatest enemies joined in a meeting mediated by Bill Clinton.
1991: the Gulf War: PLO’s political and economic crisis due to their support of
Saddam Hussein. The West, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait stopped supporting
them. Really pushed the PLO to more compromise.
New actor in the Palestinian side: Hamas (Islamic Resistance Movement) emerged
as an alternative to the PLO. From a territorial-political con ict, to a religious
con ict.
"Our battle with the Jews…" "The land of Palestine is an Islamic Waaf (holy land:
the struggle is di erent)". "No solution for the Palestinian question except through
Jihad". "Israel, Judaism and Jews challenge Islam and Muslim people". PLO looks
much more moderate in comparison now.
1992: Election in Israel — Labor-led government (leftist); PM Yitzhak Rabin. Would
start negotiations with Palestinians and Syrians (not mentioning the PLO). But the
only legitimate representative of the Palestinians was Arafat.
1993: Israel-PLO secret uno cial channel in Oslo. There was no mediation. Parties
wanted to negotiate, which is why US involvement was not needed.
Oslo Accords
September 1993: Oslo I Accord
Mutual recognition: Israel and the PLO. Biggest symbolic achievement.
Two stages: 1. Palestinian Interim Self-Government authority for ve years, and 2.
Final status agreement (deadline: 1999). It was not a peace agreement; it was a
temporary agreement settling the bases for peace. First time the Palestinians had
an independent authority.
Four main core issues: refugees, Jerusalem (two most important), borders, and
security
1994: The establishment of the Palestinian Authority (at the beginning only in Gaza
and Jericho) and a Palestinian Police: transfer of responsibilities to the PA. A big
critic was Benjamin Netanyahu.
9
fl
ff
ffi
fl
fi
1994: Arafat moved to Gaza. Palestinian prisoners captured during the Intifada were
released. International aid to the PA (more than $35 billion since 1993; some sort of
a Marshall Plan; but there are many claims of corruption from the EU and Arabs).
1995: Oslo II, division of the territories into Palestinian territories and proper Israel.
West Bank and Gaza; and Israel. Full Palestinian control over majority-Palestinian
areas. Some cities were granted security control by the Israelis. Problem of the
settlements. Also, the rst election for a Palestinian president and parliament.
Hamas was against all Oslo Accords, and boycotted all their plans.
Peace spoilers and the crisis in the process
Palestinian spoilers: attacks of Hamas and Islamic Jihad (1994 Dizengo Street bus
bombing; 1995 Beit Lit suicide bombing; 1996 Jerusalem bus 18 suicide bombings).
Israeli spoilers: 1994 Cave of Patriarchs massacre; 1995 PM Yitzhak Rabin
assassination
1996: election of PM Netanyahu (Likud party), who won mainly because of the
security issues. Face of the opposition to the Oslo Accords.
The issue of the expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank and Gaza.
Beginning of the shift of public opinion, from hope to no where.
Final Status talks and the collapse of the Oslo Process
1999 Election of PM Barak from the Labor party.
Final status negotiations: 4 core issues
July 2000: Camp David summit, mediated by Jimmy Carter (who formulated a draft
peace agreement), did not reach a nal status agreement
September 2000: The second intifada, much harsher and more violent.
December 2000: the Clinton Plan
February 2001: Election of PM Sharon (Likud), because public opinion no longer
trusted peace could be achieved. Made very clear he was not negotiating with the
PLO.
2001-2003: escalation, terror attacks and military operations
2005: Abu Mazen was elected as the Palestinian Authorities president. This was the
last time an actual presidential election was held in Palestine, because of the
Hamas-Fatah con ict.
10
fl
fi
fi
ff
The Israeli narrative
The goal was security but Oslo has led to more terror
Arafat failed to transform from a terrorist to a statesman, "two-faced", ambivalent
toward violence, did not prepare the public for peace and used incitement (jihad,
treaty of Hudaybiyyah).
"We gave them weapons and they shot at us".
Only reason for the limitations on free movement and the erection of the wall, was in
order to prevent terror attacks
The PA controlled 98% of Palestinians, they are corrupt, non-democratic, their goal
was eliminating Israel, not the occupation.
Camp David was a failure, because there were no partner for peace, and "we
o ered them everything and they started a war".
The Clinton Administration blamed Arafat for the failure of the negotiations.
After the collapse of the Oslo process
2005 Sharon’s disengagement plan: evacuation of 21 settlements in Gaza of about
8000 Israelis and 4 in the West Bank. (Con ict management?)
2006 PA election: Hamas won, 2007: Hamas takeover of Gaza after clashes with
Fatah. Rounds of wars between Israel and Hamas.
2007-2008: Annapolis process (Olmert-Abu Mazen): negotiations on all issues.
Core Issues - Final Status
- Borders: settlements, which will be evacuated, which will stay. Israeli withdrawal
in the West Bank; Palestinian state; land swaps and settlements (2% [Palestinian
proposal] or 6% [Israeli proposal]); how to connect the West Bank with Gaza
(tunnel?)
- Jerusalem: Palestinian and Jewish neighbourhoods in East Jerusalem; the Old
City/Holy Basin; the Holy Places; Border and Municipality
- Refugees: International commission: compensation, resettlement, rehabilitation,
etc. (options: in Palestine, in areas in land swaps, in host countries, in third
countries, or admission to Israel (15,000 or 100,000?). Apology/acknowledging
su ering (right of return), Jewish refugees.
- Security: Palestinian security forces (limitations) and international presence,
special presence in Jordan-Palestinian border to avoid smuggling. Anti-terrorism
intelligence sharing.
11
ff
ff
fl
Netanyahu administration
Since his reelection in 2009 until 2020, after Olmert’s resignation, PM Netanyahu’s
Administration froze peace talks.
2009 Netanyahu’s Bar-Ilan Speech: accepting two-state solution for the rst time
but with a demilitarised Palestine state, the recognition of Israel as a Jewish state.
2013-2014: Kerry initiative failed, last negotiation round. Obama decided to focus
on other issues of the Middle East.
2020: Netanyahu suggested an annexation plan. He became more extreme and
appealed more to the far-right. Eventually this failed. The Abraham Accords were
signed under the condition that Palestine was not annexed.
Jerusalem
Modern Jerusalem was not built until the last couple centuries.
It has around 900,000 residents: 62% Jewish (1/3 of which are ultra-orthodox), and
38% are Palestinians (legal status: Israeli residents, not citizens).
It is one of the core issues for nal status negotiations, it is at the heart of the Israeli
and the Palestinian ethos. It has a special "protected value". substantial discussions
on Jerusalem occurred twice in 2000 and 2008. The gaps between the sides were
narrowed but "nothing is agreed upon until everything is agreed".
Issues in con ict: Arab and Jewish neighbourhoods in East Jerusalem; the Old City/
Holy Basin; the Western Wall and the Temple Mount, and two capitals.
Arab and Jewish in East Jerusalem
"The Clinton Formula", agreement in principle: Jewish neighbourhoods under Israeli
sovereignty; Arab neighbourhoods under Palestinian sovereignty. Formed the basis
of proposals in the Annapolis process.
Disagreements: Har Home, Annexation of Givat Ze’ev and Ma’ale Adumim.
12
fl
fi
fi
