Research
- +6
Yasmine Farouk, Nathan J. Brown, Maysaa Shuja Al-Deen, …
{
"authors": [
"Michele Dunne"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Carnegie Europe",
"Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "menaTransitions",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "MEP",
"programs": [
"Middle East"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"Middle East",
"Israel",
"Levant"
],
"topics": [
"Security"
]
}
Source: Getty
In The Media
Distinguishing Between Settlers
Prime Minister Netanyahu must minimize the political and financial support for hard-core settlers, in order to mitigate the possibility that they negatively affect the peace talks.
Published on Sep 1, 2010
Source: The New York Times
The question is whether Netanyahu could minimize the amount of political and financial support that hard-core settlers can draw.
First, more than two-thirds of them live in large settlements that are relatively close to the 1967 Green Line and likely to be kept by Israel in a land swap deal with the Palestinians. Second, of the remainder who reside in settlements that would become part of the Palestinian state, some live there primarily for affordable housing and would be willing to relocate inside Israel in exchange for attractive compensation.
But there would definitely remain a hard core of thousands — probably tens of thousands — of religiously or politically motivated settlers who would not cooperate with evacuation and who would mobilize their many allies inside the Israeli parliament, government, and in the United States to try to derail a deal.
The question is whether Netanyahu could satisfy the concerns of most Israelis (including on religious issues such as access to Jewish holy sites in Jerusalem, Hebron, and elsewhere in the West Bank, as well as territorial and security issues) through a deal with the Palestinians and thereby minimize the amount of political and financial support on which recalcitrant settlers could draw. But at present the Israelis and Palestinians are still far from a point in the negotiations at which Netanyahu would face this problem.
About the Author
Michele Dunne
Former Nonresident Scholar, Middle East Program
Michele Dunne was a nonresident scholar in Carnegie’s Middle East Program, where her research focuses on political and economic change in Arab countries, particularly Egypt, as well as U.S. policy in the Middle East.
- Islamic Institutions in Arab States: Mapping the Dynamics of Control, Co-option, and Contention
- From Hardware to Holism: Rebalancing America’s Security Engagement With Arab StatesResearch
- +8
Robert Springborg, Emile Hokayem, Becca Wasser, …
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Europe
- Taking the Pulse: Does the EU Have a Germany Problem?Commentary
Are Germany’s economic, industrial, and political struggles becoming a liability for the EU’s ability to rise to the geopolitical moment?
Rym Momtaz, ed.
- Europe’s Overseas Countries and Territories as Geopolitical AssetsArticle
European states control several Overseas Countries and Territories around the world that carry strategic, economic, and environmental weight. As great powers challenge the rules-based order, defending them is a geopolitical imperative for Europe.
Marc Pierini
- Why Russia Could Escalate Hybrid Warfare Against EuropeCommentary
Mounting economic strain and battlefield losses will not necessarily make the Kremlin less dangerous. They could instead push Moscow toward a more aggressive hybrid campaign designed to test NATO’s Eastern flank, exploit allied hesitation, and fracture European resolve.
Maksym Beznosiuk
- Taking the Pulse: Enough with the Annual NATO Summits, Already?Commentary
Over the past ten years, NATO has held almost as many summits as it did during the entirety of the Cold War. Are they still useful, or is it time to stop holding annual meetings?
Rym Momtaz, ed.
- How NATO Became Anchored in the Black SeaCommentary
As Russia's war on Ukraine drags on, NATO is expanding its footprint in the Black Sea. Turkey, Romania, and Bulgaria are upgrading their fleets and deepening trilateral cooperation.
Dimitar Bechev
