At first glance, it appears that the Arab Spring has had an isolating effect on Israel, and damaged its regional position and strategic calculus. But this is only impressionistic, because the Arab Spring has coincided with changed domestic politics in Israel: a right-wing government more or less supportive of illiberal efforts among secular nationalists, religious Zionists, and the haredi.
Indeed, Israeli leaders and commentators themselves feed into this impression of the Arab Spring as a new development Israel must contend with. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu sees a dark tide of intolerance of religious fundamentalism diametrically opposed to Israel's democratic values. The (not unexpected) rise of Islamist parties where open elections have taken place is a trend that Defense Minister Ehud Barak has called "very, very disturbing." The Israel Defense Forces Chief of Staff stated that these trends "are redrawing the range of threats faced by Israel."
Others argue that the Arab Spring provides an opportunity for Israel to connect to the publics who have taken control of their destiny and will soon be in control of their countries, and together build a new Middle East.
But the reality is that the Arab Spring hasn't changed Israel's regional position or strategic calculus to any great degree -- at most, it has augmented existing trends. Instead, the challenges the Arab Spring poses for Israel are no different from the broader cyclical challenges Israel has been facing since 1948.
First, there is the claim that the Arab Spring had nothing to do with Israel. But Israelis -- particularly in the wake of the attack on the embassy in Cairo -- came to see it as another element in the "siege" of Israel.
Ari Shavit at Haaretz says
The combination of the Arab spring with the Palestinian September could create a perfect storm. Since the big Arab revolution is not offering real hope, it awakens rage and hatred. The first wave of rage and hatred was focused on Hosni Mubarak, Muammar Gadhafi and Bashar Assad. The second wave will be focused on Israel.
This is not different from the threats Israel faced from a region-wide Arab nationalism in the aftermath of the 1948 War, the emergence of Nasser's pan-Arabism, and the efforts to redress the "Arab loss" in both the 1948 and the 1967 wars, and then liberate Palestine.
Second, there is nothing new about the fact that the Arab Spring, ostensibly about domestic issues, also drags Israel in, particularly in Egypt. This is no different from the rousing anti-Israel rhetoric found pre-Arab Spring in state-run media, religious sermons, and among professional associations.
Third, the argument that the Arab Spring is isolating Israel does not pose a new condition for Israel. Pre-Arab Spring, Turkish-Israeli relations were already growing cold; the global BDS movement was already advancing; and the peace process with the Palestinians has been in constant crisis since the Oslo Accords were signed -- indeed, the Accords themselves were subject to several crises that some feared would derail them before they were put into place.
This is no different from the isolation Israel experienced after the 1967 War, when African, Eastern European, and Asian states began severing ties with Israel; when delegitimization of Zionism -- that it is a racist ideology -- was promoted at the United Nations; and peace talks with the Arab states were alternately called for and rejected.
Finally, discussions of how Israel must respond to these conditions are also recycled. Reports that Israel is searching for new friends (e.g., those it can count on to be at odds with Islamists or other Middle Eastern states for geostrategic reasons) are no different from David Ben-Gurion's "periphery strategy," in which Israel would leap over its immediate Arab neighbors to strategic ties with Iran, Turkey, and some African states.
An overly-assertive strategy is not warranted under the current circumstances. Rather, a wait-and-see posture allows Israel to gauge where these dynamics are going, and to respond accordingly to specific changes and issues.
Israel is on edge as a result of the Arab Spring, as to be expected. But it will not be affected in a major way because it has already dealt with these similar circumstances. Certainly Israel needs to construct clear tactical policies for responding to the Arab Spring and the changed regional dynamic. But this, too, shall pass. Israel has successfully made it through (most would say muddled through) past changes. This is in part because the changes that take place in the region are new only in the form they take, but not the patterns and conditions they represent.
The Arab Spring is of course an important development in the Middle East, restructuring parts of Arab politics. But nobody knows how things will turn out, even in the short-term. It's not clear how strong the moderate Islamists parties who've won in Tunisia and Egypt will be in parliament and in governing, faced with harder-line Islamists, non-Islamists, and remnants of the old regimes. And the successes of the regimes in the Gulf have also demonstrated that the Arab Spring is a contained phenomenon.
Already, there are signs that the Arab Spring has changed Hamas's calculations: the organization has announced it would accept non-violence as a tactic against Israel, would accept the pre-1967 borders as the foundation for a Palestinian state, and might even consider a peace treaty with Israel under the right conditions -- even as it reduces ties with Syria.
This only strengthens the sense that Israel can do little but go slow.
First published at Mideast Matrix, on December 27, 2011.
Follow Brent E. Sasley on Twitter: www.twitter.com/besasley
Abraham H. Foxman: Israel's Hard Times, and the New York Times
Bernard Starr: Two Cultures, Two Genocides, One Story
Conrad Black: The Biggest Story of 2011 for Me? Israel Survives the Arab Winter
Arab Spring 'anti-democratic' says Benjamin Netanyahu - Telegraph
Binyamin Netanyahu attacks Arab spring uprisings | World news ...
Israel Surrounded as Arab Spring Turns Darker: Jeffrey Goldberg ...
Israel fears the force of Arab Spring power shift - Middle East - World ...
Sorry, but I do not understand this logic. Hamas has made a dramatic announcement that they will no longer use force of arms against Israel. Yes, they are just words and need to be backed up by actions, but how can the author suggest this is cause for Israel to "go slow" .... ?
Israel has successfully undercut the PA, both at the UN and at home. Israel won't talk to Hamas, of course, no matter what Hamas says. So exactly who will Israel talk to? Themselves?
This Fortress Israel mentality must end, or there will never be peace - and everything good about Israel will be destroyed from within by itself.
And, while in Israel unemployment stands at 5%, that of the population of Egypt is at anywhere between 20 to 40 per cent, depending on whose number one relies, and when a person is employed the wages are between one to two dollars a day...!!
No, no "narratives", i.e. fictional short stories designed for political expediency, will change the fact that Israel is not only the strongest economy in the region but also a strong economy by world standards, including by comparison to European countries.
Perhaps it is time to admit: The Muslim-Arab world should learn a thing or two from this tiny but persistent and assertive country.
1) "Palestine" - Since the beginning of the 20th century is the name of a territory - not a nationality or a state - populated by Jews, Arabs, Armenians, Greeks and others. This territory is no longer since in 1921 77% of it was handed over to the Arabs who subsequently set up their own state and renamed their part of the territory to Jordan. The rest, 23%, was legally, assigned to be "the national home for the Jewish people" who set up their state and renamed their part Israel.
2) United Nations partition proposal of 1947 was just that, a proposal. The actual partition of "Palestine" took place in 1921 and 1922.
3) The partition of 1921 and 1922 has been enshrined in international law in the form of the San Remo Conference, 1920; League of Nations decisions, 1922; and the United Nations Charter, Article 80.
Thus, for the sake of an accommodation of peaceful coexistence between Arab and Jew, between the Muslim-Arab world and the nation-state of the Jewish people, Israel, wouldn't it be appropriate to live by international law; because it is the right thing to do and because it is the most practical step...??
International law recognized WB as occupied land; and building on the occupied land is against the International law. So, for the sake of accommodation of peaceful coexistence Israel needs to live by the Int'l law.
1) The "spring", sadly, so far can better be described as an Islamist winter, and dark, cold and stormy at that.he
2) Israel, again, sadly, has been so far the only liberal democratic state and society in the region; one in which all are equal before the law, and all are welcome participants in society and its government.
Let us hope tiny Israel will be a bit more of a positive influence upon the struggling liberals in the Muslim-Arab world.
Three things can be said in response to this:
1. One can make the argument that Israel has reached illiberal democracy status. You cannot suppress free speech and pass laws limiting democracy without the world noticing.
2. Enough of the ridiculous lie that Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East. Turkey has been a democracy longer than Israel has.
3. I challenge your "all are equal before the law" assertion. Let's compare the process for purchasing property in Israel for a Jewish family, and then for an Israeli Arab family, and then let's talk about being equal before the law.
1) The above line misses one word: "attempt". One can attempt to make the argument, but only attempt...!!
2) I am sorry to inform the poster that Israel - and I say so with some sadness - is the only liberal democratic country in the region. Islamist Turkey is actually moving further and further from this goal.
3) All citizens of Israel are indeed equal before the law, despite the "narrative", i.e. fictional short stories designed for political expediency, some attempt to paint regarding the land acquisition in Israel. You see, the vast majority of real estate in Israel is state owned and all to whom such land is sold or leased are treated equal by the state. The rest, privately owned land, may be acquired by anyone, including non-Israeli citizens.
There is still freedom in the air residual from Arab Spring. Hope Israel will get in the swing of things.
Tel-Aviv is a lovely sea-side city, and the center of commerce and entertainment of Israel - not unlike New York city in the US - but beyond the fact that it is a very dynamic place, it is neither Israel's largest city and certainly not Israel's capital city.
Perhaps the poster need to do some homework about Israel's geography, history and social and political makeup prior to hoping for "a change" in Israel.
The report, Doctoring the Evidence, Abandoning the Victim, to be published later this month, is based on 100 cases of Palestinian detainees brought to PCAT since 2007. It says: "This report reveals significant evidence arousing the suspicion that many doctors ignore the complaints of their patients; that they allow Israeli Security Agency interrogators to use torture; approve the use of forbidden interrogation methods and the ill-treatment of helpless detainees; and conceal information, thereby allowing total immunity for the torturers."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/nov/03/israeli-doctors-report-torture-palestinian
Now, let's see, the PCAT and the PHR are, no doubt, extreme ultra left wing communist organisations, just like B'tselem, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, and newspapers like the Guardian are anti semitic hamas loving publications, and the only "fair and balanced" news source is Fox News?