Editor’s音符

IF 0.8 3区 社会学 Q2 AREA STUDIES
Eric Hooglund
{"title":"Editor’s音符","authors":"Eric Hooglund","doi":"10.1080/19436149.2023.2168382","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We open our Spring 2023 issue with a significant analysis—and critique—of the European Union’s post-2006 policy toward the Palestinians living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, two territories that have been under Israeli military occupation since June 1967. Madrid-based scholar, Itxaso Dom ınguez de Olaz abel, argues in ‘EU Policies in Historic Palestine’ that EU policies are focused almost exclusively on pressuring the Palestinian Authority, set up in parts of the West Bank in 1995, to comply with Israeli security demands. In so doing, EU policies ignore both the history of the Palestinian ‘problem’ and its continuing and negative ramifications for Palestinians living under Israeli (primarily) and other legal regimes. In effect, EU policy treats the Palestinian Authority as a sovereign entity, ignoring the reality of its subordination to Israeli military control. The Palestinian ‘problem’ dates backs to the November 1947 vote of the then new United Nations to divide the UK’s Palestine Mandate—mandate being a fancy 1920s term for a colony—into an Arab and a Jewish state. The UN vote led to a civil war in Palestine; the intervention of Arab armies, primarily from Egypt, Jordan and Syria, to protect the Arab state—which never came into existence; the displacement of 700,000 Palestinian civilians, most of whom became refugees in Gaza and Lebanon; the establishment of the new state of Israel on 78 percent of the former Palestine Mandate; and two Palestinian-inhabited territories: the Gaza Strip under Egyptian administration and the West Bank under Jordanian administration until the June 1967 War, when Israel seized control of both areas. The Oslo Peace Process between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) from 1993 to 2000 was supposed to lead to an independent Palestinian state comprised of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. However, the summer 2000 failure of final status peace talks, ‘mediated’ by the United States—which blamed the PLO for the collapse of negotiations—led to four years of intifada [uprising] in Gaza and the West Bank, albeit with Israel always in control of the conflict and the Palestinians bearing the brunt of casualties and destruction. An Egyptian-mediated agreement ended the conflict in February 2005, although since then Gaza has had its own government separate from the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank, and it also literally is sealed off from the rest of the world, as its land and Mediterranean Sea borders are tightly controlled by Egypt and Israel. It is within this political context that EU policy visa-vis Palestine and Palestinians is not focused on the much needed economic, educational and social development programs that would contribute to peace but rather on security assistance so that the Palestinian Authority can comply with Israeli-defined","PeriodicalId":44822,"journal":{"name":"Middle East Critique","volume":"32 1","pages":"1 - 3"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Editor’s Note\",\"authors\":\"Eric Hooglund\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/19436149.2023.2168382\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We open our Spring 2023 issue with a significant analysis—and critique—of the European Union’s post-2006 policy toward the Palestinians living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, two territories that have been under Israeli military occupation since June 1967. Madrid-based scholar, Itxaso Dom ınguez de Olaz abel, argues in ‘EU Policies in Historic Palestine’ that EU policies are focused almost exclusively on pressuring the Palestinian Authority, set up in parts of the West Bank in 1995, to comply with Israeli security demands. In so doing, EU policies ignore both the history of the Palestinian ‘problem’ and its continuing and negative ramifications for Palestinians living under Israeli (primarily) and other legal regimes. In effect, EU policy treats the Palestinian Authority as a sovereign entity, ignoring the reality of its subordination to Israeli military control. The Palestinian ‘problem’ dates backs to the November 1947 vote of the then new United Nations to divide the UK’s Palestine Mandate—mandate being a fancy 1920s term for a colony—into an Arab and a Jewish state. The UN vote led to a civil war in Palestine; the intervention of Arab armies, primarily from Egypt, Jordan and Syria, to protect the Arab state—which never came into existence; the displacement of 700,000 Palestinian civilians, most of whom became refugees in Gaza and Lebanon; the establishment of the new state of Israel on 78 percent of the former Palestine Mandate; and two Palestinian-inhabited territories: the Gaza Strip under Egyptian administration and the West Bank under Jordanian administration until the June 1967 War, when Israel seized control of both areas. The Oslo Peace Process between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) from 1993 to 2000 was supposed to lead to an independent Palestinian state comprised of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. However, the summer 2000 failure of final status peace talks, ‘mediated’ by the United States—which blamed the PLO for the collapse of negotiations—led to four years of intifada [uprising] in Gaza and the West Bank, albeit with Israel always in control of the conflict and the Palestinians bearing the brunt of casualties and destruction. An Egyptian-mediated agreement ended the conflict in February 2005, although since then Gaza has had its own government separate from the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank, and it also literally is sealed off from the rest of the world, as its land and Mediterranean Sea borders are tightly controlled by Egypt and Israel. It is within this political context that EU policy visa-vis Palestine and Palestinians is not focused on the much needed economic, educational and social development programs that would contribute to peace but rather on security assistance so that the Palestinian Authority can comply with Israeli-defined\",\"PeriodicalId\":44822,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Middle East Critique\",\"volume\":\"32 1\",\"pages\":\"1 - 3\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Middle East Critique\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/19436149.2023.2168382\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"AREA STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Middle East Critique","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19436149.2023.2168382","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们在2023年春季刊的开篇,对欧盟2006年后对居住在加沙地带和西岸的巴勒斯坦人的政策进行了重要的分析和批评,这两个地区自1967年6月以来一直处于以色列的军事占领之下。马德里学者Itxaso Dom ınguez de Olaz abel在“历史上的巴勒斯坦的欧盟政策”中认为,欧盟的政策几乎完全集中在向1995年在西岸部分地区成立的巴勒斯坦权力机构施加压力,使其遵守以色列的安全要求。在这样做的过程中,欧盟的政策既忽视了巴勒斯坦“问题”的历史,也忽视了它对生活在以色列(主要是)和其他法律制度下的巴勒斯坦人的持续负面影响。实际上,欧盟的政策将巴勒斯坦权力机构视为一个主权实体,无视其服从以色列军事控制的现实。巴勒斯坦“问题”可以追溯到1947年11月,当时新成立的联合国投票将英国的巴勒斯坦托管区(托管区是20世纪20年代对殖民地的一个时髦说法)划分为一个阿拉伯国家和一个犹太国家。联合国的投票导致了巴勒斯坦的内战;阿拉伯军队(主要来自埃及、约旦和叙利亚)的干预,以保护从未存在过的阿拉伯国家;70万巴勒斯坦平民流离失所,其中大多数成为加沙和黎巴嫩的难民;在原巴勒斯坦托管地78%的基础上建立新的以色列国;以及两个巴勒斯坦人居住的领土:埃及管理的加沙地带和约旦管理的西岸,直到1967年6月战争爆发,以色列控制了这两个地区。从1993年到2000年,以色列和巴勒斯坦解放组织(PLO)之间的奥斯陆和平进程(Oslo Peace Process)被认为是为了建立一个由加沙地带和约旦河西岸组成的独立的巴勒斯坦国。然而,2000年夏天,由美国“调停”的最终地位和平谈判的失败——美国指责巴解组织导致了谈判的破裂——导致了加沙和西岸长达四年的起义,尽管以色列一直控制着冲突,巴勒斯坦人首当其冲地承受着伤亡和破坏。2005年2月,一项由埃及调停的协议结束了冲突,尽管从那时起,加沙就有了自己的政府,独立于西岸的巴勒斯坦权力机构,而且由于其土地和地中海边界受到埃及和以色列的严格控制,它实际上也与世界其他地方隔绝了。正是在这样的政治背景下,欧盟对巴勒斯坦和巴勒斯坦人的政策并没有把重点放在促进和平的急需的经济、教育和社会发展项目上,而是放在安全援助上,以便巴勒斯坦权力机构能够遵守以色列的规定
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Editor’s Note
We open our Spring 2023 issue with a significant analysis—and critique—of the European Union’s post-2006 policy toward the Palestinians living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, two territories that have been under Israeli military occupation since June 1967. Madrid-based scholar, Itxaso Dom ınguez de Olaz abel, argues in ‘EU Policies in Historic Palestine’ that EU policies are focused almost exclusively on pressuring the Palestinian Authority, set up in parts of the West Bank in 1995, to comply with Israeli security demands. In so doing, EU policies ignore both the history of the Palestinian ‘problem’ and its continuing and negative ramifications for Palestinians living under Israeli (primarily) and other legal regimes. In effect, EU policy treats the Palestinian Authority as a sovereign entity, ignoring the reality of its subordination to Israeli military control. The Palestinian ‘problem’ dates backs to the November 1947 vote of the then new United Nations to divide the UK’s Palestine Mandate—mandate being a fancy 1920s term for a colony—into an Arab and a Jewish state. The UN vote led to a civil war in Palestine; the intervention of Arab armies, primarily from Egypt, Jordan and Syria, to protect the Arab state—which never came into existence; the displacement of 700,000 Palestinian civilians, most of whom became refugees in Gaza and Lebanon; the establishment of the new state of Israel on 78 percent of the former Palestine Mandate; and two Palestinian-inhabited territories: the Gaza Strip under Egyptian administration and the West Bank under Jordanian administration until the June 1967 War, when Israel seized control of both areas. The Oslo Peace Process between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) from 1993 to 2000 was supposed to lead to an independent Palestinian state comprised of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. However, the summer 2000 failure of final status peace talks, ‘mediated’ by the United States—which blamed the PLO for the collapse of negotiations—led to four years of intifada [uprising] in Gaza and the West Bank, albeit with Israel always in control of the conflict and the Palestinians bearing the brunt of casualties and destruction. An Egyptian-mediated agreement ended the conflict in February 2005, although since then Gaza has had its own government separate from the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank, and it also literally is sealed off from the rest of the world, as its land and Mediterranean Sea borders are tightly controlled by Egypt and Israel. It is within this political context that EU policy visa-vis Palestine and Palestinians is not focused on the much needed economic, educational and social development programs that would contribute to peace but rather on security assistance so that the Palestinian Authority can comply with Israeli-defined
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Middle East Critique
Middle East Critique AREA STUDIES-
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
6.20%
发文量
25
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信