Agenda Central Political Objectives: 2000 – 2007 Key Military Operations and Political Consequences Lessons Learned – Israeli Perspective Implications.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Israel. Post WWII In 1947 the United Nations proposed dividing Palestine into an Arab nation and a Jewish nation. In 1947 the United Nations proposed.
Advertisements

Israeli/Palestinian Conflict- Timeline
Israel/Palestine Britain had ruled the area of Palestine since 1920 – Remember: Palestine is not a country – After WWII, many Jews return to the.
The Palestinian-Israeli Conflict. 1947: U.N. Partition of Palestine The UN proposed an Arab state and a Jewish state. The UN proposed an Arab state and.
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict: Security Geneva Initiative Shaul Arieli October
 The new nation was immediately invaded by armies from neighboring Arab states. Five Arab nations (Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, and Iraq) attacked.
July Threats facing Israel: 1. Demographic issues 2. Security: conventional, terrorism, long-range missiles 3. Delegitimization.
ARAB- ISRAELI CONFLICT CONTINUES THE MIDDLE EAST IN THE TWENTIETH CENTURY.
The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: A Lesson in Perspective
SS7H2 The student will analyze continuity and change in Southwest Asia (Middle East) leading to the 21st century. d. Explain U.S. presence and interest.
The Arab Israeli Conflict. Camp David Accords 1978 BACKGROUND Israel had control of the Sinai Peninsula (6 Day War) President Sadat (Egypt) & President.
Timeline of the Arab and Israel Conflict. Late 1800’s to WW 1 Zionism: Zionism: Theodore Herzl, a leading Jewish sympathizer, states that a Jewish homeland.
28-2: The Arab-Israeli Conflict By: Deric M., Marc F.
Oz Naor Israeli Emissary January Israel’s Military Administration of the West Bank and Gaza After the 1967 war, Israel immediately offered.
Turmoil in the Middle East Conflict between Arab countries and Israel.
Inversion Towards Occupation A New Challenge to Israel’s National Security Concept January 2007.
Palestine ( ) a region controlled by the English- called the Palestine Mandate or the British Mandate Both Arab and Jewish residents live in this.
The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: A Lesson in Perspective
The Arab-Israeli Conflict 2000-PRESENT. People/Things to Know Hamas: A radical Islamist political party and militant group. Currently controls the Gaza.
Israel and the Rise of Palestinian Identity West Bank, Gaza Strip and the PLO.
Background: IIsrael Population - 77 Million Major Religion – JJudaism Main Export – CComputer Software, military equipment, chemicals, agricultural.
Israel Vs. Palestine Today. Last Pieces of Palestine 500,000 flee from Israelis into these areas: Gaza Strip – Ruled by Egypt. Small area along.
The War on Gaza Introduction to the topic Presentation by Ronja Harder, nov 2009.
Middle East-Geography
Emergent Nationalism in the Middle East The Struggle for Stability.
National Security Affairs Briefing
U.S. INVOLVEMENT IN THE MIDDLE EAST A Timeline ©2012, TESCCC U.S. History Unit 12, Lesson 1.
 Zionism  Movement seeking to establish a Jewish nation  U.N. Resolution 181  Adopted by the U.N. General Assembly  Partitioned Palestine and established.
Unit 4: Modern middle East
IN RETROSPECT: UNDERSTANDING THE DYNAMICS OF THE ISRAELI- PALESTINIAN NEGOTIATIONS MARCH 2014.
Attempts at Peace. Arafat accepts 242 & 338 (1988) Condemns violence Recognizes Israel Accepts UN Security Council Resolutions 242 (Israel withdraw from.
The Middle East, Young & Kent: International Relations since 1945.
After World War I, much of the Middle East was controlled by the British and the French. The region had been taken from the defeated Ottoman Turkish Empire.
Palestinians & Israel: A Territorial and Inhumane Dispute Joshua Foster Final Project.
“Ethnic” Conflict in the former Yugoslavia/Bosnia Slavic ethnic group Croatia Serbia Bosnia Catholics Orthodox Islam.
Hezbollah “The Party of God”. What led to the creation of Hezbollah? The Iranian Revolution of 1979 The Israeli invasion of Southern Lebanon in 1982.
Arab-Israeli Conflict Arab Nationalism vs. Jewish Nationalism.
Land & Religion: Middle East Conflicts © 2011Clairmont Press.
| UnclassifiedFor Official Use Only Planning Directorate// Israel Defense Forces Strategic Division// International Military Cooperation Department Military.
The State of Israel. Zionism and the Jewish connection to the land The Jews felt that Palestine was the land that God promised them thousands of years.
People around the world increase the fight for Jewish homeland in the region where the ancient Hebrews lived …..this is called Zionism.
Aspects of the Israeli Barrier May 2010 Shaul Arieli
By. Megan, McKenzie, Rob and Antoren.  Terrorism is the use of violence and threats to intimidate or harm.  Both Palestinians and Israelis conduct terrorism,
1 Disengagement The Vision Creating a new chance to achieve peace. Restarting direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians on the final status.
Creating the Modern Middle East. Uniting Peoples:  -Arabs took over the region in the mid 600s.  1. governed for over 150 years  -The Turks led by.
Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. Why can’t we all just get along? Judaism: Jerusalem was the capital of their kingdom and where the Great Temple was built.
The Arab Israeli Conflict Key Questions Why was Israel founded? Why have Arab nations attacked Israel? What issues have made the Arab-Israeli conflict.
One Land, Two Peoples The Arab-Israeli Conflict. The size of Israel compared to the state of California (Israel is approx. the same size as New Jersey)
After World War I, much of the Middle East was controlled by the British and the French. The region had been taken from the defeated Ottoman Turkish Empire.
Topic 4: Lebanon and the Occupied Territories Topic 4: Lebanon and the Occupied Territories Conflict and Crisis in the Middle East
ISRAELI- PALESTINIAN CONFLICT: PRESENT PRESENT.
CONFLICTS IN THE MIDDLE EAST Setting the Stage After WWII the UN decided that the Jewish people in Europe should get their own nation. Came at a.
* The mandate system established after World War I was phased out after World War II by the Unites Nations. Recall that the French mandates were Syria.
Modern World Issues The Middle East The Arab-Israeli Conflict.
 Parliamentary Democracy  Democratic/Socialist  Prime Minister- Benjamin Netanyahu  Closely linked to the US and western Europe (US is their #1.
CWI: MAY 25, 2016 BE AWARE OF NEW DATES FOR ASSIGNMENTS AND THE FINAL. Graphic Novel “Israeli Settlements” Information (critical to test) Available online.
Timeline of the Arab and Israel Conflict. Late 1800s to WW I Zionism: Zionism: Theodore Herzl, a leading Jewish sympathizer, states that a Jewish homeland.
ARAB ISRAELI CONFLICT PART II
Presentation 5.
The israeli-palestinian conflict
Aim: What events led to the ongoing conflict between Jews & Muslims
Arab-Israeli Conflict Part III
GCSE Knowledge organiser Arab Israeli Conflict
ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN NEGOTIATIONS
Israeli and Arab Conflict
Intifada The problems of the “Occupied Territories” were not solved
Middle East, 1945-present.
Do Now: Clear your desk and take out Part I of your SOL Review Guide. You may use it on the Review Quiz. After you turn in the quiz, grab today’s Agenda.
Israeli/Palestinian Conflict- Timeline
Israel/Palestine Timeline
Presentation transcript:

Agenda Central Political Objectives: 2000 – 2007 Key Military Operations and Political Consequences Lessons Learned – Israeli Perspective Implications for the US Military What Israel Should Learn From US Experience in Iraq Political Consequences of Military Operations in the Long War: The Israeli Experience,

Central Political Objectives: Finalize Peace Deal with Palestinian Authority Gain Local and International Recognition of Borders Dramatically Improve Security for Civilian Population Political Consequences of Military Operations in the Long War: The Israeli Experience,

Key Military Operations Political Consequences of Military Operations in the Long War: The Israeli Experience, Withdrawal From Lebanon. Limited Military Operations in the West Bank and Gaza Limited Military Operations in the West Bank and Gaza 2002Operation Defensive Shield Maintaining Tight Military Control Over West Bank and Gaza 2005Withdrawal From Gaza 2006Medium-Scale Operations in Gaza and Lebanon

2000: Unilateral Withdrawal From Lebanon Desired Political End-State Decrease local and international criticism of continued military presence in Lebanon Local and International recognition of border with Lebanon To increase security for Israeli citizens in North To weaken Hezbollah political rationale To strengthen Lebanese central government Military Operations Withdrawal of Israeli forces from Security Zone in May. Monitor border with patrols and sensors End-State Achieved Internationally recognized border with Lebanon. Shebaa Farms still disputed locally Security for Israeli citizens in North is neither diminished nor increased Hezbollah perceived victor and deploys even further south along border with Israel Lebanese central government is not significantly strengthened Lebanese government doesn’t restore effective authority in southern Lebanon (SCR 425) Possible that withdrawal influenced Arafat decision to ignite second Intifada in September Political Consequences of Military Operations in the Long War: The Israeli Experience,

2000: Limiting Operations During Negotiations Desired Political End-State Comprehensive peace agreement with Palestinian leaders Local and international recognition of established borders End of large-scale, organized Palestinian terrorism against Israeli civilians Establishment of a democratic, secular Palestinian state Military Operations Israeli military remains withdrawn from Palestinian population centers Limited operations in Area B and C – checkpoints, ambushes, arrests, and intelligence activity In Gaza, primarily protect Jewish communities and monitor border Limited joint patrols and ongoing coordination with Palestinian security services End-State Achieved Frequency of terror attacks against Israeli civilians continues upward trend started in 1993 Breakdown of negotiations at Camp David in July. Attempts to re-start negotiations fail Al-Aqsa Intifadah begins in September Political Consequences of Military Operations in the Long War: The Israeli Experience,

2000–2002 : Limiting West Bank & Gaza Operations Desired Political End-State Comprehensive peace agreement with Palestinian leaders Local and international recognition of established borders End of large-scale, highly-coordinated Palestinian terrorism against Israeli civilians Establishment of a democratic, secular Palestinian state Military Operations Israeli military remains withdrawn from Palestinian population centers Limited operations in Area B and C – checkpoints, ambushes, and intelligence activity In Gaza, protect Jewish communities and monitor border End-State Achieved After Camp David, subsequent negotiations at Taba fail to achieve political progress Al-Aqsa Intifadah leads to dramatic spike in terror attacks against Israeli civilians Israeli public is substantially less willing to continue Oslo Peace Process Political Consequences of Military Operations in the Long War: The Israeli Experience,

2002 : Operation DEFENSIVE SHIELD Desired Political End-State To eliminate terrorist infrastructure and mitigate ability to strike Israeli civilians Limited international criticism of operation and support from key allies like the US To de-legitimize Palestinian Authority leadership To increase international support for Israeli political position that emerged at Camp David Military Operations Re-establishing military control over all Palestinian population centers in West Bank Large-scale joint military and intelligence operation designed to kill or capture known terrorists Continue pin-point attacks against terrorists in Gaza and maintain control over border Keep Hezbollah from opening an additional front along the northern border End-State Achieved Established military control over the West Bank with minimum loss of life Dramatic reduction in terror attacks in Israel Negligible pressure on Israel to pull back forces at end of operation Political Consequences of Military Operations in the Long War: The Israeli Experience,

: Tight Control Over West Bank and Gaza Desired Political End-State To limit international criticism of new status quo and support from key allies like the US To de-legitimize Palestinian Authority - internationally and locally To increase support for Israeli political position that emerged at Camp David and US Road Map To cripple terrorist ability to strike Israeli civilians and decrease popularity of radicals Military Operations Monitor and mitigate terror activity in Palestinian population centers in the West Bank Conduct operations to kill or capture known terrorists and create impression of “ever-presence” Creating correlation between terror attacks on Israelis and consequences for Palestinian civilians Continue pin-point attacks against terrorists in Gaza. Construction of security fence system End-State Achieved Maintain military control over the West Bank with minimum loss of life Dramatic reduction in terror attacks sustained over time and pre-1993 normalcy gained in Israel Negligible pressure on Israel to either pull back forces or limit breadth of ongoing operations Radical Islamic groups like Hamas and Islamic Jihad become more popular Political Consequences of Military Operations in the Long War: The Israeli Experience,

2005 : Disengagement From Gaza Desired Political End-State Unilateral implementation of Israeli vision of two-state solution To decrease international criticism and increase support from key allies like the US Local and international recognition of southern border Unchanged or reduced ability of terror groups to strike Israeli civilians Military Operations Monitor fenced border and coastline. Arrest or kill individuals attempting breach of border Conduct pinpoint operations against known terrorists with commando units and IAF Maintain tight control over West Bank End-State Achieved Decrease in international criticism and increased support from key allies like the US Dramatic increase in the number of attempts to breach fence and fire Qassam rockets Nearly six months later, Hamas wins Palestinian parliamentary elections Political Consequences of Military Operations in the Long War: The Israeli Experience,

2006 : Medium-Scale Operations in Gaza & Lebanon Desired Political End-State To restrict growing political strength and military activity of Hamas and Hezbollah Palestinian & Lebanese populations blame Hamas and Hezbollah for instigating conflict To encourage Lebanese and Palestinian central governments to act against terror groups To mute international criticism and maintain support from key allies like the US Local and international recognition of established borders To strengthen Israeli deterrence vis-à-vis Hamas, Hezbollah, and Middle Eastern nation states Military Operations New strategy – hold central governments responsible for terror group actions Limited ground invasion to clear border of terrorist emplacements and infrastructure End-State Achieved At outset, Arab nations like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and even Lebanon voice understanding Lebanese military deploys along Israeli border and takes more active stance against radicals Palestinian Authority President Abbas stands firm in opposition to Hamas Question over legal ownership of Shebaa Farms re-opened. Impact on deterrence debatable Political Consequences of Military Operations in the Long War: The Israeli Experience,

2007 : Political Consequences of 2006 Operations Palestinian Authority Palestinian Authority President Abbas loses control of Gaza to Hamas Abbas must choose between civil war or accept a more Islamic Palestine and relinquish power Israel Israeli leaders prepare public for more conflict and increase military spending Israeli population unwilling to support further unilateral withdrawals Government decision-making is limited by a population less ready to embrace risks for peace Lebanon Central government defeats a small militia, Fatah al-Islam. Possible signal to Hezbollah Lebanese government deploys military in South, but does not fully assert authority Hezbollah political position is not improved, but increases capabilities and presence in south Syria & Iran Strengthens public resolve against US and Israel. Increased coordination between two nations Political Consequences of Military Operations in the Long War: The Israeli Experience,

2007 : Consequences of Divergent Perspectives Israeli Perspective Palestinian Authority will be flexible, since they need support to face growing Hamas threat Hezbollah (Syria and Iran) are preparing for and will instigate another round of violence Palestinian Perspective Israelis can’t defeat Hamas or Hezbollah. PA is in strong political position as only viable partner Vision of a primarily secular, democratic Palestine is under attack from radical Islamic groups Lebanese Perspective Radical groups like Hezbollah and Fatah al-Islam endanger central government and civilians Over Next Six Months PA hardens political stance & anti-Israel rhetoric. Nov. conference doesn’t improve negotiations Hamas fight with PA intensifies. Hamas steps up attacks on Israel to demonstrate significance Israel focuses on Hamas & Islamic Jihad in West Bank. Gaza ops only change after major attack Lebanese government does not take on Hezbollah. Hezbollah prepares for next round with Israel Political Consequences of Military Operations in the Long War: The Israeli Experience,

Lessons Learned – Israeli Perspective Political Consequences of Military Operations in the Long War: The Israeli Experience, : Limiting military operations leads to dramatic increase in number of attacks : Extensive military operations decrease attacks, but also prevent political progress. 2005: Unilateral actions don’t improve prospects for peace 2006: Momentary intensification of conflict can jump start political progress 2007: First international conference since 2001 will take place in November. Attack frequency increases

Lessons Learned – Israeli Perspective Political Consequences of Military Operations in the Long War: The Israeli Experience, Peace Process Begins IDF Loosens Controls. Terrorism Spikes Ability to Compromise Reduced on Both Sides. Negotiations Fail to Progress Attacks Intensify. IDF Dismantles Terror infrastructure Relative Calm Creates Conditions to Restart Negotiations Peace Process 1.Remove military from Palestinian population centers as confidence building measure. Number of attacks increase dramatically 2.In response to spike in attacks, Israeli military conducts pin-point operations. Ability of both sides to compromise is hindered. Momentum of negotiations is slowed to a near halt 3.As terror attacks increase in frequency or a successful large-scale attack takes place, the Israeli military response reduces terror capabilities, but also returns Israeli-Palestinian relations to status quo prior to peace process

Lessons Learned – Israeli Perspective Throughout negotiations with Palestinians, extensive Israeli military operations are required Withdrawing military without political agreement empowers radicals and leads to more attacks Information operations are as important as ground operations - fully integrated part of strategy Terrorist infrastructures can be destroyed, but requires deployment of significant ground forces Need “Strategic Privates” who think critically and understand how their actions impact strategy Must keep constant vigilance and be prepared for enemy successes that undermine status quo A conflict between Israel and multiple Arab nations is more likely today than it was 20 years ago Political Consequences of Military Operations in the Long War: The Israeli Experience,

Implications for US Military Reduction in violence depends on perception of military “ever-presence” and response to attacks Must establish and maintain security for civilian population to achieve political objectives Holding a host responsible for non-state actors makes preventative action a national interest You don’t need to win hearts and minds to dramatically reduce attacks Reducing military operations as quid pro quo during political negotiations leads to more violence Strategic Privates who think critically and understand how their actions impact strategy are vital Don’t let need to focus on today’s urban fight keep you from preparing for tomorrow’s war By enabling establishment of PA, Israel transformed non-state actor (PLO) into proto-nation - Palestinian population is relatively homogenous, educated, secular, and economically stable - Strong primary self-identification as Palestinian over ethnic, religious, or other kin group - If difficult for Palestinians to achieve critical nation-building milestones, harder for Iraq - Empower leading non-state actor did not halt rise of successors - Islamic Jihad and Hamas Political Consequences of Military Operations in the Long War: The Israeli Experience,

What Israel Should Learn from US Experience in Iraq Assume knowledge transfer and integrate US Lessons Learned into IDF planning and training More fully integrate information operations into overall strategy, planning, and execution Core Middle East conflicts – Sunni-Shi’a, Secular-Islamic, Arab-Persian – are intensifying Collaboration with central government against militias – force multiplier and strategic IO tool - Move beyond inevitable confrontational and adversarial approach of peace process - Establish an Israeli-Palestinian alliance against radical groups based on shared interest - Israeli soldiers train Palestinian military and conduct joint operations - Economic development for West Bank and Gaza jointly administered by PA and Israel - PA ends public incitement against Israel and stops celebrating terrorism - IO value of Israeli-Palestinians conducting joint raid broadcast on Al-Jazeera Political Consequences of Military Operations in the Long War: The Israeli Experience,