Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a major issue in political, public and media discourse in Israel. Public opinion in Israel regarding the conflict is considered highly involved. Based on a public opinion study and personal interviews, the analysis focuses on Israeli positions regarding the conflict and long-proposed solutions.

Over the past few decades, the political left in Israel gladly adopted its label as the “Peace Camp”, which served to distinguish it from the nationalist right-wing. The public discourse in the country was quick to follow suit and the common perception that Israeli left-wing politics equates a dovish policy agenda that is above all committed to the pursuit of peace with Israel’s neighboring countries and the Palestinians has been internalized. While the equation of Israel’s political left with the peace movement provided both the Israeli left and the right with a formative story, the truth about the relationship between the Israeli peace camp and the Zionist left is more complex.

Over the past two decades, with the common public perception that the right has largely delivered on its promise for personal security while sidelining the peace negotiations, the idea of working towards a peace agreement became not only unfeasible but even seemingly irrelevant. The shrinking of electoral power is reflected in a near erasure of the peace process from the public discourse. This essay reflects on the decline of the Israeli left and the necessary steps in creating a vision and a way forward for supporters of liberal democracy in Israel.

In contemporary Israeli discourse, the word ‘peace’ is almost a dirty word that elicits sniggers at best, except perhaps on the political fringes. Accordingly, there is not a single person in a position of power in Israeli politics today who is willing to stand behind the equation proudly touted in the 1990s: “land for peace”. That was the logic of the agreement with Egypt and it was supposed to govern the Oslo Accords with the Palestinians, too. How did we get to this point, where peace has gone from being the dream of many Israelis to a wedge issue? Not a subject of legitimate debate over the parameters of peace, or the risks versus the odds and so on – but a symbol of something negative and even toxic in the context of election campaigns?

Nearly three decades after the signing of the Oslo Accords, Israel and the Palestinians have failed to reach a permanent agreement. Despite talks at Camp David in 2000, in Taba in 2001 and Annapolis in 2007, this goal seems further away than ever. By now, mutual distrust, the stalled negotiations, civil wars in the Arab world and the absence of the United States and Europe from the peace process, combined to drive the Israeli Peace Camp” into an ideological shift: from seeking a peace agreement with the Palestinians, to bilateral or unilateral separation. At the same time, ideas such as a federation, a confederation or a single state are gaining traction among Israelis. This essay looks at four main groups of organizations that constitute the new face of the Israeli Peace Camp according to their approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

While identity politics contributed to the democratization of American society, in Israel they have had deeply regressive effects on Israeli society, fueling tribalism and discord. This essay reviews the development of identity politics in Israeli political discourse, explores its foundations, and demonstrates how it has eventually led to the Peace Camp being marked as a status symbol and social marker of a specific ethnic, educational and social group.

The breakdown into rival political camps in Israel in the early days of the state was very different from now, revolving, among other things, around the tensions between the socialist and liberal camps and the country’s positioning vis-à-vis the Soviet Union. The Zionist left parties, i.e. the “workers’ camp”, considered the liberal parties as their chief ideological rivals rather than the proponents of a “greater Israel”. This essay reviews the history of the Israeli Labor Party and its relationship with the country’s peace camp.

Twelve years ago, Israel and the Palestinian Authority (PA) were making significant progress in the US-sponsored bilateral peace negotiations. Since then, the stalemate in the talks has become the new normal. The Israeli peace camp has been subjected to a smear campaign that has shaken its self-esteem and ruined its chances of winning over the public. This systematic smearing of Israeli and Palestinian two-staters has paid off: Israel's declared left-wing parties now constitute together roughly a meager 10% of the vote and the issue of the conflict has been pushed to the sidelines. How did we get to this point? This essay offers insights into several processes that combined to transform Israel's political landscape over the past decade.

While peace initiatives have always been part of Israel’s political landscape, they have varied widely in the form and intensity of their dynamics, significance for the public debate and impact over the years. Diverse movements, networks, groups and alliances have been created to nurture Israeli-Palestinian relations as part of an effort to bring an end to the conflict and putting a stop to the enmity, violence and injustices it entails. This broad assortment of initiatives has come to be loosely known as the Israeli Peace Camp. In the past few decades, this camp has attained notable achievements yet also faced considerable setbacks. This essay reviews the history of the peace camp in the period 1967-2000.

Living in the shadow of a violent conflict keeps security at the top of the national agenda, pushing aside equally important issues such as health, transportation, welfare, infrastructure and education. When the discussion is dominated by the security establishment, solutions for prevention, retaliation and even negotiation remain within the confines of military thought, and decision-making gets stuck in a rut. Creative thinking is not allowed in and discourse becomes automatic. Decisions are based on expert assessments that are all forged in the same breeding ground. Against this background, Women Waging Peace championed two goals: promoting a respectful agreement to end the conflict and increased participation of women in foreign and security policy-making in accordance with UN Security Council Resolution 1325. 

The word "occupation" brings forth many images: right against left, settlers against the IDF, the Defense budget, boycotts of products from the occupied territories, BDS, the mantra "there is no partner for peace." But few talk about its impact on Israel's standard of living.

The report – a joint publication of Ir Amim and Peace Now – focuses on the rapid escalation of private settlement activity in the heart of Batan al-Hawa, a Palestinian community in Silwan, located just outside the Old City walls within clear sight of Al-Aqsa. Batan al-Hawa is now the site of the largest attempted settler takeover in East Jerusalem, representing not only the large-scale displacement of an entire community but also the complicity of the Israeli government in facilitating private settlement in the Historic Basin. 

Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE HE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 Recent tensions on the Temple Mount/Haram al-Sharif are not isolated events but part of the growing rise of temple movements organizations and groups committed to challenging existing arrangements on this most contested of holy spaces. Despite Israel’s chief rabbis recently reinstating the ban on Jews ascending the Temple Mount, ascents are on the rise, along with a range of activities to realize the Mount as the site of the Third Temple.  The steady advance of these movements-and the permeation of their values into the public discourse represent one of the most volatile issues in the Middle East conflict today.  Ir Amim’s comprehensive report analyzes the dynamics of the growth of the Temple movements, their increasing acceptance in the political center in Israel and the nature and depth of ties between Temple groups and the Israeli political establishment. /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} Recent tensions on the Temple Mount/Haram al-Sharif are not isolated events but part of the growing rise of temple movements-organizations and groups committed to challenging existing arrangements on this most contested of holy spaces.   Despite Israel’s chief rabbis recently reinstating the ban on Jews ascending the Temple Mount, ascents are on the rise, along with a range of activities to realize the Mount as the site of the Third Temple.  The steady advance of these movements-and the permeation of their values into the public discourse—represents one of the most volatile issues in the Middle East conflict today.  Ir Amim’s comprehensive report analyzes the dynamics of the growth of the Temple movements, their increasing acceptance in the political center in Israel and the nature and depth of ties between Temple groups and the Israeli political establishment. - See more at: http://www.ir-amim.org.il/en/report/dengerous-liaison#sthash.cf6vuQqG.d… Recent tensions on the Temple Mount/Haram al-Sharif are not isolated events but part of the growing rise of temple movements-organizations and groups committed to challenging existing arrangements on this most contested of holy spaces.   Despite Israel’s chief rabbis recently reinstating the ban on Jews ascending the Temple Mount, ascents are on the rise, along with a range of activities to realize the Mount as the site of the Third Temple.  The steady advance of these movements-and the permeation of their values into the public discourse—represents one of the most volatile issues in the Middle East conflict today.  Ir Amim’s comprehensive report analyzes the dynamics of the growth of the Temple movements, their increasing acceptance in the political center in Israel and the nature and depth of ties between Temple groups and the Israeli political establishment. - See more at: http://www.ir-amim.org.il/en/report/dengerous-liaison#sthash.cf6vuQqG.d…

On June 20, 2013, the Heinrich Böll Foundation Israel, the Tami Steinmetz Center for Peace Research, the Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies and the S. Daniel Abraham Center for Strategic Dialogue held the conference 20 Years since the Oslo Accords - Success and/or Failure?. In advance of a comprehensive publication of contributions, we are pleased to present this analysis by Dr. Ephraim Lavie on the early foundation of obstacles in the Oslo negotiation process.

On the 11th anniversary of the Security Council’s Resolution 1325, Heinrich Boell Foundation Israel supported the issue of Palestine-Israel Journal of Politics, Economics and Culture: Women and Power. This issue presents an in-depth analysis of gender perspectives, particularly the impact of the conflict on women and women’s role in peacebuilding.