Search results

You are looking at 1 - 5 of 5 items for :

  • "Arab-Israeli context" x
  • Refine by access: All content x
Clear All

For over five decades, the Cold War security agenda was distinguished by the principal strategic balance, that of a structure of bipolarity, between the United States (US) and the Soviet Union (USSR). This book seeks to draw from current developments in critical security studies in order to establish a new framework of inquiry for security in the Middle East. It addresses the need to redefine security in the Middle East. The focus is squarely on the Arab-Israeli context in general, and the Palestinian-Israeli context in particular. The character of Arab-Israeli relations are measured by the Israeli foreign policy debate from the 1950s to the 1990s. A dialogue between Islam and Islamism as a means to broaden the terrain on which conflict resolution and post-bipolar security in the Middle East is to be understood is presented. The Middle East peace process (MEPP) was an additional factor in problematizing the military-strategic concept of security in the Middle East. The shift in analysis from national security to human security reflects the transformations of the post-Cold War era by combining military with non-military concerns such as environmental damage, social unrest, economic mismanagement, cultural conflict, gender inequity and radical fundamentalism. By way of contrast to realist international relations (IR) theory, developing-world theorists have proposed a different set of variables to explain the unique challenges facing developing states. Finally, the book examines the significance of ecopolitics in security agendas in the Middle East.

Jeremy Pressman

stricken from our fist and our lives cut down’.2 This book illustrates and critiques the beliefs that Arabs and Israelis hold about how best to achieve their fundamental political and security goals. What is the best way to get what one 1 Sword.indb 1 25/03/2020 15:11:00 The sword is not enough wants in international affairs? In the Arab–Israeli context, the dominant belief has been that (1) military force is the best way to achieve one’s goals and (2) negotiations and concessions are a sign of weakness that only invite further demands and military attacks.3 In

in The sword is not enough
Open Access (free)
Redefining security in the Middle East
Tami Amanda Jacoby
Brent E. Sasley

Arab–Israeli context in general, and the Palestinian–Israeli context in particular, as these conflicts are yet to be resolved and form the most intractable core of geopolitical relations, issues and transformations in the region as a whole. Traditional security studies in the Middle East Until the 1990s, strategic studies of the Middle East have been particularly opposed to

in Redefining security in the Middle East
Arabs, Israelis, and the limits of military force

The Arab–Israeli conflict has been at the centre of international affairs for decades. Despite repeated political efforts, the confrontation and casualties continue, especially in fighting between Israelis and Palestinians. This new assessment emphasizes the role that military force plays in blocking a diplomatic resolution. Many Arabs and Israelis believe that the only way to survive or to be secure is through the development, threat, and use of military force and violence. This idea is deeply flawed and results in missed diplomatic opportunities and growing insecurity. Coercion cannot force rivals to sign a peace agreement to end a long-running conflict. Sometimes negotiations and mutual concessions are the key to improving the fate of a country or national movement. Using short historical case studies from the 1950s through to today, the book explores and pushes back against the dominant belief that military force leads to triumph while negotiations and concessions lead to defeat and further unwelcome challenges. In The sword is not enough, we learn both what makes this idea so compelling to Arab and Israeli leaders and how it eventually may get dislodged.

Constructing security in historical perspective
Jonathan B. Isacoff

that overlaid the infiltrations with a political dimension, as Israel did not treat them for what they were but linked them to the broad Arab–Israeli context and to the country’s political and security problems’ ( Tal, 1996 : 61). It is important to point out that the preceding view of Israel’s reprisal policy as other than a purely strategic effort

in Redefining security in the Middle East