Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
The positive and businesslike approach that marked the meeting of the Negev Forum Steering Committee and Working Groups in Abu Dhabi (January 9-10, 2023) proves that the drive to entrench and deepen the Abraham Accords is still ongoing despite the change of government in Israel. Hopes for a breakthrough in Saudi-Israeli relations are also still being nurtured, reflected in practical steps already taken. Moreover, the issue was raised with Jake Sullivan during his visit to Israel. Still, as the Arab saying goes, al-’ajalah min al-shaytan – haste is from the devil – and premature pronouncements have done more harm than good. The change will not come overnight: the Palestinian issue is still a stumbling block, and political dynamics in the Kingdom are complex, at least as long as King Salman still reins in some of his son’s ambitions.
Topic:
Security, Diplomacy, Leadership, and Strategic Interests
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
Israel is facing a series of critical decisions in the national security arena, and the necessary condition for dealing with those challenges is maintaining maximum national cohesion. Therefore, lowering the flames in the current public debates and reaching a compromise is imperative.
Topic:
Security, Diplomacy, National Security, Leadership, and Partisanship
The Israel-Lebanon maritime boundary agreement is not a direct agreement between the two countries, but rather two separate agreements with the United States.
It is unique: the first such agreement reached between countries with no diplomatic relations, the first between adjacent states in the Eastern Mediterranean, and the first in the region to be resolved through indirect negotiations facilitated by a mediator.
A confluence of domestic and geopolitical events contributed to the signing of the agreement, including elections in Israel, the deterioration of Lebanon’s economy and the country’s descent into political crisis, and the consequences of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine for the global energy market.
Effective mediation between parties was more important than the degree of trust the parties had in the mediator or the mediator’s relative neutrality on the issue. The United States was not an unbiased mediator, but because of its own incentives to deliver an agreement and its leverage over both parties it was the only possible one.
International oil and gas companies influenced the negotiations, but did not directly participate in them. Due to their vested interest in securing their existing or prospective investments, they used public communications and discrete engagements with the Israeli and Lebanese governments to encourage a deal.
This agreement could serve as a model for other maritime disputes by demonstrating at least two things. Firstly, solutions can be achieved when parties delink their maritime negotiations from the core issues in their bilateral relationship. Secondly, if two sides are committed to reaching an agreement, the international law of the sea is sufficiently flexible for them to find a solution, even when one party is a signatory of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and the other is not.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, Maritime, and Negotiation
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
A clear Turkish rationale for better relations with Israel is to weaken the strategic partnership between Jerusalem, Greece, and Cyprus and get access to Israel’s natural gas.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Natural Resources, Gas, and Strategic Interests
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
As Tehran invests efforts to improve relations with Russia, Israel will have to maintain a dialogue with Moscow to safeguard its military and diplomatic freedom of action.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Military Strategy, Conflict, and Strategic Stability
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
Global powers might find it more challenging to reach a consensus on the Middle East than before. This makes it more critical for Israel to get separate understandings or develop new partnerships both globally and regionally.
Topic:
Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Hegemony, and Conflict
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
Despite former prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s claim to a 40-year friendship with President Joe Biden, the latter preferred the new government headed by Prime Minister Naftali Bennett.
Topic:
Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Military Strategy, Leadership, and Alliance
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, North America, and United States of America
The negotiations between the United States and Iran on renewing the
nuclear agreement have run into serious difficulties following the
opposition by the United States and the European partners to Iran's
demand that the IAEA close the open files on the Iranian nuclear
program before the implementation of the agreement (120 days after
signing). At the same time, Iran continues to accelerate the program,
including the enrichment of uranium using cascades of advanced
centrifuges. Three scenarios are possible: a resolution of the crisis and
achievement of an agreement; continued stagnation, i.e., lowintensity talks; or the collapse of the negotiations. The worst scenario
for Israel is a continuation of the current situation, in which Iran could
in a short time accumulate enough fissile material for weapons-grade
enrichment for several nuclear facilities, while the temptation of a
nuclear breakout increases. Thus, Israel should immediately
formulate a new strategy regarding Iran. The government should
conduct a discreet dialogue with the US administration and focus on
proposals that seek to advance Israel’s military and strategic needs,
including consolidating covert and effective cooperation with the
countries of the region under the auspices of the United States.
Topic:
Security, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Negotiation, and Strategic Interests