|
Will you read my paper for me? (Israel/US Related)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| RJT |
Alright, I'm basically responsible for summing up the history of the nation of Israel in less than 5 pages - I need to know if my paper reasonably hits on the high points of U.S./Israeli foreign policy/relations.
Note: This is raw as it gets, no proofreading, nothing. Also, it's the first part of a 3 part paper, so if it seems like I'm not hitting near what I discuss in the intro, understand there's ten more pages to this paper... Thanks.
| quote: |
In a geopolitical climate where control of resources equals power, the strategic interests of nations tens of thousands of miles apart are brought together by common goals. This is nowhere more apparent than in the Middle East, as nations across the globe continue to vie for control over the worlds’ largest known resource for energy. There is perhaps no relationship more clearly designed solely for these strategic interests than that of the U.S. and Israel, and also perhaps no more controversial relationship. The U.S. support of Israel since the 1950’s has at times had questionable motivations, and can in many ways be seen as responsible for further destabilization of the region. It is our intent to first give a historical overview of the two nations relationships in light of the formation of Israel, analyze the intensified codependent foreign and economic policies of each nation in the post 9/11 political climate, and finally to offer policy suggestions with the aim of achieving greater regional stability.
Initial support for an Israeli state came in the 1917 Balfour Declaration made by the British government asserting:
“His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country".
And thus Jewish emigration to Palestine began, with the support of the UK and U.S., and following World War 1, the support of the League of Nations who assigned the U.K. the “Palestine Mandate” which granted the British control over the lands of modern Israel & Jordan. The British encouraged Jewish immigration to Palestine throughout the 20’s and 30’s, and following the Second World War, international support for an independent state of Israel became overwhelming.
Following World War 2, due in part to the overwhelming cost of rebuilding the United Kingdom, the British made public their intent to withdraw from the Palestine Mandate. This plan to withdraw resulted in the United Nations 1947 Partition Plan (1947 General Assembly Resolution 181 Part II.), which in 1948 would divide the lands of Palestine into three distinct states; A Jewish state, and Arab state, and an international zone which included the religiously crucial cities of Bethlehem and Jerusalem. On May 14, 1948, Israel was declared an independent state, and was incidentally recognized immediately as a sovereign nation by the U.S. Following this declaration of independence, however, Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Jordan, and Lebanon all invaded the nation of Israel. The Israelis pushed the attacking armies back, and in the end, the 1948 war resulted in Israel controlling not only the land granted to them in the UN’s 1947 plan, but also much of the land set aside for Arabs as well as a large portion of the City of Jerusalem. Over the next half a century, Israel would be riddled by several wars, and U.S. involvement would escalate from its passive (neutral) support in the late 40’s and 50’s, to a relationship whose intents are not always clear.
Early on in U.S./Israeli relations, the U.S. exerted far less influence and economic support than it would 2 decades later. During the Arab-Israeli conflict in 1948, the U.S. maintained a neutral stance, and focused its foreign policy on Soviet containment and support for oil. In fact, during the 1956 Suez Crisis, the U.S. placed heavy political pressure on Israel, France, and the U.K. for a cease-fire and rapid withdrawal from Egypt, though this would be the last public display of the U.S. exerting this kind of economic and political pressure on Israel.
The first full U.S. support for Israel would come during Lyndon Johnson’s presidency where U.S. policy made the turn to complete support for Israel. This became abundantly clear following the Six-Day War occurring in 1967, during which the Egyptians had disregarded U.N. command, and increased its military activity near the Israeli border significantly. When the Israeli’s launch a preemptive strike on the Egyptians, they were attack by Jordan, and war once again broke out in the region. The U.S. was careful not to appear militarily allied with Israel, so as not to be drawn into another war that could put the U.S. at odds with the Soviets. At the wars end, however, the popular belief was that a wedge had been drawn between the apparent Israeli/Western alliance and the Arab/Communist alliance. President Johnson’s decision to approve the sale of U.S. military technology to Israel following the war only further alienated the Arab world.
Following the 6-Day War, the Israeli’s would live in 6 years of relative peace until October 1972 when they were attacked again by both Syria and Egypt. Though Egypt and Syria had threatened the attack for months, Israel was not goaded into striking first, a decision that more than likely only strengthened the U.S./Israeli alliance, as in the words of Henry Kissinger, had the Israeli’s struck first they wouldn’t receive “so much as a nail” in aid from the U.S. In turn, the U.S. did provide weapons and supplies to Israel during this 4th Israel/Arab war, and is in large part credited with helping Israel get out of the conflict successfully. At the end of the conflict, the U.S. put tremendous pressure on Israel to allow U.S. mediation in the dispute between Israel & Egypt, and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger again made it clear that diplomacy should be the end of this conflict, and not bloodshed.
Tensions between Israel and Egypt would not finally cool until the end of the Carter administration. The Camp David Accords are symbolic of a drastically changed political climate in the Middle East, and particularly embodied the end of a unified Arab front against Israel. Unfortunately, for much of the Arab world, these accords only bred further contempt for Israel and the West, as it was perceived that Egyptian President Sadat was making far too many concessions to Israel solely for the sake of peace. This would eventually lead to his assassination, and though the relationship of Israel and Egypt has normalized, the Camp David Accords have left the pride of much of the Arab world bruised to this day, with sole responsibility laying at the feet of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East.
This anti-American sentiment was only exacerbated by the Reagan administrations seeming unlimited support for Israel. Two of the major unifying concerns for Israel and the U.S. were terrorism and the Soviet threat. In the wake of both the Iran hostage crisis and the 1972 Munich Olympics, both the U.S. and Israeli’s understood the implications and consequences of terrorism as a very real threat. It was in no small part due to these two events that Israel and the U.S. found significant common ground, only furthering this alliance was the perception (or misperception) of significant Soviet support in the Arab world. Relations between the U.S. and Israel later in Reagans presidency when in 1988 Israel was granted the status of a major non-NATO ally, increasing aid to them to near 3 billion dollars annually. This also allowed Israel greater access to U.S. military technology, and eliminated all customs duties between the two nations, strengthening Israel’s status as both a military powerhouse and leading U.S. trade partner. Reagan’s administration is without doubt the time at which Israel’s status as both a major U.S. ally and as a representative of U.S. interests in the Middle East were solidified.
Into the early 90’s it seemed as if the U.S./Israel alliance had never been stronger, and though during the early years of Bush Sr.’s Presidency there was some firm talk on the part of President Bush and Secretary of State Baker regarding Israeli expansionism, eventually the Persian Gulf War would further strengthen U.S./Israel relations. In particular, U.S. pressure on Israel not to retaliate against Iraq following Iraqi missile attacks on Israel in January 1991. Israel bowed to U.S. pressure not to retaliate, and gained significant short term international esteem for not doing so.
|
If it's total , sorry I made you read it. :(
I'm just trying to pass... |
|
|
| reborndizzle |
| Wtf this is almost exactly like a paper my Debate Club teacher gave me. I have to write a page long speech about it.. |
|
|
| Marc Summers |
| short version plz |
|
|
| RJT |
| quote: | Originally posted by Marc Summers
short version plz |
Defeats teh purpose :( |
|
|
| Caela |
(saved for future use)...thanks RJT!
;) |
|
|
| RJT |
| I figured there would be a few of those :) |
|
|
| medinaM5 |
| wow, very well written bro...nice read |
|
|
| DJ Mikey Mike |
I'll give this a read tomorrow at work - ie. when I have nothing else to be doing.  |
|
|
| all-nite-freak |
| rjt you are way smarter than you look. |
|
|
| mezzir |
word dude
content looks pretty good, especially of this isn't all of it. i'm not great at content anyways so i did a quick skim for grammar, seeing as i'm a huuuuuuge ing grammar whore
looks good though, changes are in bold/italics
| quote: |
In a geopolitical climate where control of resources equals power, the strategic interests of nations tens of thousands of miles apart are brought together by common goals. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the Middle East, as nations across the globe continue to vie for control over the world's largest known resource for energy. There is perhaps no relationship more clearly designed solely for these strategic interests than that of the U.S. and Israel, and also perhaps none more controversial. The U.S. support of Israel since the 1950’s has at times had questionable motivations, and can in many ways be seen as responsible for further destabilization of the region. It is our intent to first give a historical overview of the two nations' relationships in light of the formation of Israel, to analyze the intensified codependent foreign and economic policies of each nation in the post 9/11 political climate, and finally to offer policy suggestions with the aim of achieving greater regional stability.
Initial support for an Israeli state came in the 1917 Balfour Declaration made by the British government asserting:
“His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country".
And thus Jewish emigration to Palestine began, with the support of the UK and U.S., and following World War 1, the support of the League of Nations who assigned the U.K. the “Palestine Mandate” which granted the British control over the lands of modern Israel & Jordan. The British encouraged Jewish immigration to Palestine throughout the 20’s and 30’s and, following the Second World War, international support for an independent state of Israel became overwhelming.
Following World War 2, due in part to the overwhelming cost of rebuilding the United Kingdom, the British made public their intent to withdraw from the Palestine Mandate. This plan to withdraw resulted in the United Nations'{?} 1947 Partition Plan (1947 General Assembly Resolution 181 Part II.), which in 1948 would divide the lands of Palestine into three distinct states; A Jewish state, an Arab state, and an international zone which included the religiously crucial cities of Bethlehem and Jerusalem. On May 14, 1948, Israel was declared an independent state, and was incidentally recognized immediately as a sovereign nation by the U.S. Following this declaration of independence, however, Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Jordan, and Lebanon all invaded the nation of Israel. The Israelis pushed the attacking armies back and, in the end, the 1948 war resulted in Israel controlling not only the land granted to them in the UN’s 1947 plan, but also much of the land set aside for Arabs as well as a large portion of the City of Jerusalem. Over the next half a century, Israel would be riddled by several wars, and U.S. involvement would escalate from its passive (neutral) support in the late 40’s and 50’s, to a relationship whose intents are not always clear.
Early on in U.S./Israeli relations, the U.S. exerted far less influence and economic support than it would two decades later. During the Arab-Israeli conflict in 1948, the U.S. maintained a neutral stance and focused its foreign policy on Soviet containment and support for oil. In fact, during the 1956 Suez Crisis, the U.S. placed heavy political pressure on Israel, France, and the U.K. for a cease-fire and rapid withdrawal from Egypt, though this would be the last public display of the U.S. exerting this kind of economic and political pressure on Israel.
The first full U.S. support for Israel would come during Lyndon Johnson’s presidency where U.S. policy made the turn to complete support for Israel. This became abundantly clear following the Six-Day War occurring in 1967, during which the Egyptians had disregarded U.N. command and significantly increased their military activity near the Israeli border. When the Israelis launched a preemptive strike on the Egyptians, they were attack by Jordan, and war once again broke out in the region. The U.S. was careful not to appear militarily allied with Israel, so as not to be drawn into another war that could put the U.S. at odds with the Soviets. At the war's end, however, the popular belief was that a wedge had been drawn between the apparent Israeli/Western alliance and the Arab/Communist alliance. President Johnson’s decision to approve the sale of U.S. military technology to Israel following the war only further alienated the Arab world.
Following the 6-Day War, the Israelis would live in six years of relative peace until October 1972 when they were attacked again by both Syria and Egypt. Though Egypt and Syria had threatened the attack for months, Israel was not goaded into striking first. This decision more than likely only strengthened the U.S./Israeli alliance, as in the words of Henry Kissinger, had the Israeli’s struck first they wouldn’t receive “so much as a nail” in aid from the U.S. In turn, the U.S. did provide weapons and supplies to Israel during this fourth Israel/Arab war, which is largely credited with helping Israel get out of the conflict successfully. At the end of the conflict, the U.S. put tremendous pressure on Israel to allow U.S. mediation in the dispute between Israel and Egypt, and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger again made it clear that diplomacy, not bloodshed, should be the end of this conflict.
Tensions between Israel and Egypt would not finally cool until the end of the Carter administration. The Camp David Accords are symbolic of a drastically changed political climate in the Middle East, and particularly embodied the end of a unified Arab front against Israel. Unfortunately, for much of the Arab world, these accords only bred further contempt for Israel and the West, as it was perceived that Egyptian President Sadat was making far too many concessions to Israel solely for the sake of peace. This would eventually lead to his assassination, and though the relationship of Israel and Egypt has normalized, the Camp David Accords have left the pride of much of the Arab world bruised to this day, with sole responsibility laying at the feet of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East.<--run-on, idk how to fix it :/
This anti-American sentiment was only exacerbated by the Reagan administration's seemingly unlimited support for Israel. Two of the major unifying concerns for Israel and the U.S. were terrorism and the Soviet threat. In the wake of both the Iran hostage crisis and the 1972 Munich Olympics, both the U.S. and Israelis understood the implications and consequences of terrorism as a very real threat. It was in no small part due to these two events that Israel and the U.S. found significant common ground, only furthering this alliance was the perception (or misperception) of significant Soviet support in the Arab world.(unclear, comma in the middle of the sentence suggest relations but the choice of words leave it ambiguous) Relations between the U.S. and Israel (missing something here...relations did what) later in Reagans presidency when in 1988 Israel was granted the status of a major non-NATO ally, increasing aid to them to near 3 billion dollars annually. This also allowed Israel greater access to U.S. military technology, and eliminated all customs duties between the two nations, strengthening Israel’s status as both a military powerhouse and leading U.S. trade partner. Reagan’s administration is without doubt the time at which Israel’s status as both a major U.S. ally and as a representative of U.S. interests in the Middle East were solidified. Very unclear, try: During Reagan's administration Israel's status as both a major U.S. ally and as a representative of U.S. interests in the middle ease was made abundantly clear.
Into the early 90’s, it seemed as if the U.S./Israel alliance had never been stronger, and though during the early years of Bush Sr.’s Presidency there was some firm talk on the part of President Bush and Secretary of State Baker regarding Israeli expansionism, eventually the Persian Gulf War would further strengthen U.S./Israel relations. In particular, U.S. pressure on Israel to not retaliate against Iraq following Iraqi missile attacks on Israel in January of 1991. Israel bowed to U.S. pressure not to retaliate, and gained significant short-term international esteem for not doing so. |
|
|
|
| Lebezniatnikov |
| quote: | Originally posted by mezzir
word dude
content looks pretty good, especially of this isn't all of it. i'm not great at content anyways so i did a quick skim for grammar, seeing as i'm a huuuuuuge ing grammar whore
looks good though, changes are in bold/italics |
haha, love the avi + location. The Office for the win.
RJT: When's it due? If you want, send the whole thing to me via PM and I'll give it a read. I'm a Political Science/International Studies major, so I'm familiar with the topic and I'm also a grammer Nazi who enjoys proofing papers. |
|
|
| RJT |
Note to any of you who may end up using this paper: There are some pretty large grammatical errors at points, make sure you proofread! :)
Edit: Thanks Mezzir! :) |
|
|
|
|
