Tel Aviv Notes

Yoel Guzansky examines the United Arab Emirates’ (UAE) civilian nuclear energy program, and the broader potential for nuclear proliferation in the region in light of recent developments with the Iranian nuclear deal.

Following the failure of efforts to reach agreement between Hamas and Fatah on the formation of a government of national unity, there are growing fears among Palestinians that the two movements are now on the brink of an all-out civil war. Indeed, some argue that the war has already begun, albeit still on a small scale.

The recent series of interviews with Syrian President Bashar Asad in Arab and Western media reveals the extent of changes in the Middle East, in general, and Syria, in particular, in the wake of the confrontation between Israel and Hizbullah in the summer of 2006. Before that conflict, Asad hardly ever mentioned “Israeli aggression against Syria that can end in war” or the “state of alert” in the Syrian army, but since then, Asad has repeatedly stressed the readiness of his military forces.

The latest report of the United Nations International Independent Investigation Commission into the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri refrained from pointing the finger of suspicion directly at Syria. Nevertheless, its ongoing work, and especially the intention of Lebanon, supported by elements at the UN, to establish a special international tribunal to try those accused of involvement in the assassination, have already raised concerns in Syria about an additional wave of pressure that could culminate, this...

The current public debate in Israel about the size of increases to the defense budget before its approval by the Knesset is focused on astronomical figures: some 30 billion shekels over the next three years. Acceptance of such demands from the defense establishment and other budgetary bodies could seriously undermine the fiscal discipline that has contributed to financial stability and economic growth and might set in motion retrograde patterns of economic behavior.

On August 31, Iran clarified that it had no intention of suspending uranium enrichment activities as demanded by UN Security Council Resolution 1696.Nevertheless, the expiration of this deadline has not opened the door to immediate discussions on sanctions. In fact, any resolve the international community once had to force Iran either to acquiesce or be exposed as a defiant nuclear proliferator is quickly dissolving, and only the US is now pressing for sanctions. European leaders, who earlier this year were widely reported to be firm...

Iran has ignored the deadline set in the UN Security Council’s ultimatum and continues to reject any suspension of uranium enrichment. Although the Security Council is now required to decide on next steps, the United States is the only Council member supporting early political and economic sanctions. If no agreement is reached in the Council, Washington may try to create some mechanism for sanctions that bypasses the Council.

For Hizbullah and its supporters in Lebanon, UN Security Council Resolution 1701 is, if not a clear victory, then certainly the least of all evils. The main reason is that 1701 keeps the discussion of Hizbullah’s disarmament within the confines of the barren exercise known as the “œLebanese National Dialogue.” Moreover, the Resolution provides no effective mechanism for action by the Lebanese Government or UNIFIL to disarm Hizbullah or terminate its existence as a state within a state.

On July 31, 2006, the UN Security Council (SC) adopted resolution 1696, which makes it mandatory (under Article 40 of Chapter VII of the UN Charter) for Iran “to take the steps required by the International Atomic Energy Agency Board of Governors… which are essential to build confidence in the exclusively peaceful purpose of its nuclear programme”… The IAEA was requested to report by August 31 on whether Iran has established full and sustained suspension of all activities mentioned in the resolution, as well...

Although Israel’s political leadership has designated the clash with Hizbullah a “œwar of no choice,” it has still been obliged to define realistic objectives for the prosecution and termination of this war. These objectives must inevitably relate to the broader regional and global context of the confrontation.

In addition to the release of the two soldiers abducted by Hizbullah, the declared objectives of Israel’s military campaign in Lebanon include the dismantling of Hizbullah’s militia and the deployment of the Lebanese armed forces up to the common border. Achieving these objectives in the face of Hizbullah opposition will ultimately require some cooperation, if not from Shi’ites who provide Hizbullah’s base of support, then at least from the other main Lebanese communities: the Sunni Muslims, the Christians and...

Over the past two weeks, Israel has been enmeshed in conflict precipitated by kidnappings in the south and in the north. Those two tactical events have deteriorated into fighting with strategic consequences. The tactical successes of Hamas and Hizbullah have exposed Israel to extortion and it may well have to pay some price for its failures and for the return of the kidnapped soldiers. In this situation, Israel’s objective is to turn tactical setbacks into strategic outcomes whose gains outweigh the losses. Understanding the...