当前位置: X-MOL 学术International Studies Perspectives › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Security, Terrorism, and Territorial Withdrawal: Critically Reassessing the Lessons of Israel's “Unilateral Disengagement” from the Gaza Strip
International Studies Perspectives ( IF 1.8 ) Pub Date : 2022-10-18 , DOI: 10.1093/isp/ekac013
Rob Geist Pinfold 1
Affiliation  

In contemporary Israel, the apparently negative consequences of the 2005 “unilateral disengagement” from the Gaza Strip have fueled a perception that leaving territory harms national security. Three claims underlie this framing: (1) domestic Israeli political considerations—not national security concerns—caused the disengagement; (2) Israel abandoned territory without receiving any compensation; and (3) leaving Gaza only precipitated further terrorist attacks. This article challenges these claims. It argues that domestic dynamics alone do not explain the withdrawal. Instead, Israel withdrew to mitigate its casualties, yield foreign policy gains, deter and deny terrorist groups, and avert a perceived demographic threat. The disengagement did not seek to resolve the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. Instead, through a limited territorial exit, it sought to stabilize the conflict and stymie negotiations with the Palestinians. In contrast to dominant perceptions, Israel achieved all of these objectives. Furthermore, it was Israel's post-disengagement policies that precipitated most of the recent security threats, not the withdrawal itself. These findings reassess the disengagement's goals and efficacy. They demonstrate that in contrast to popular perceptions in Israel today, the Gaza disengagement neither was a strategic blunder nor does it exemplify that territorial withdrawal constitutes a flawed policy choice.

中文翻译:

安全、恐怖主义和领土撤离:批判性地重新评估以色列从加沙地带“单方面脱离接触”的教训

在当代以色列,2005 年从加沙地带“单方面脱离接触”的明显负面后果助长了一种观念,即离开领土会损害国家安全。这一框架的基础是三个主张:(1)以色列国内的政治考虑——而不是国家安全问题——导致了脱离接触;(2) 以色列放弃领土而没有得到任何补偿;(3) 离开加沙只会促成进一步的恐怖袭击。本文对这些说法提出质疑。它认为,单靠国内动态并不能解释撤军。取而代之的是,以色列撤军是为了减轻伤亡,获得外交政策收益,威慑和拒绝恐怖组织,并避免感知到的人口威胁。脱离接触并不是为了解决巴以冲突。相反,通过有限的领土出口,它试图稳定冲突并阻碍与巴勒斯坦人的谈判。与主流看法相反,以色列实现了所有这些目标。此外,造成最近大多数安全威胁的是以色列的脱离接触后政策,而不是撤军本身。这些发现重新评估了脱离接触的目标和效果。他们表明,与当今以色列的普遍看法相反,加沙脱离接触既不是战略失误,也不是领土撤离构成有缺陷的政策选择的例证。不是提款本身。这些发现重新评估了脱离接触的目标和效果。他们表明,与当今以色列的普遍看法相反,加沙脱离接触既不是战略失误,也不是领土撤离构成有缺陷的政策选择的例证。不是提款本身。这些发现重新评估了脱离接触的目标和效果。他们表明,与当今以色列的普遍看法相反,加沙脱离接触既不是战略失误,也不是领土撤离构成有缺陷的政策选择的例证。
更新日期:2022-10-18
down
wechat
bug