Where Balloons Go

IA literature review

Elizabeth — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 14:47:22 +0000

Israeli defense forces
Women in the military
Sexual assault in war
Prisoner of war treatment
1948 Palestinian civil war

1. The feminist assault on the military. (the lingering battle to allow women in combat) (Cover Story).
2. Women, war, and rape. (At the well: violence: personal and political).(Brief Article).
3. Women of valor: why Israel doesn’t send women into combat.
4. Violence against women in armed conflict.
5. Women in front line combat — a defence issue or a discrimination issue? (Editorial Comment).
6. Israel Is Created as a Homeland for Jews, May 14, 1948
7. Triumph and catastrophe: in continuing the discussion begun in the July/August 2002 Humanist regarding the origins of the strife between Israelis and Palestinians, events in Israel’s first decade as a nation firmly drew the lines of conflict. (Origins of the Israeli/Palestinian Conflict).
8. Second class in the Israeli military; women are fighting for equality in the ranks.
9. How sexual trauma can create obstacles to transnational feminism: the case of Shifra
10. Leadership behind the curtains: the case of Israeli women in 1948.

1. Horowitz, David. “The feminist assault on the military.” National Review 5 Oct. 1992: 46+. Expanded Academic ASAP. Web. 6 Dec. 2009. .

2. Epp, Marlene. “Women, war, and rape. (At the well: violence: personal and political).” The Other Side May-June 2002: 42+. Expanded Academic ASAP. Web. 6 Dec. 2009. .

3. Van Creveld, Martin. “Women of valor: why Israel doesn’t send women into combat.” Policy Review 62 (1992): 65+. Expanded Academic ASAP. Web. 6 Dec. 2009. .

4. “Violence against women in armed conflict.” Peace and Freedom Fall 2008: 20. Expanded Academic ASAP. Web. 6 Dec. 2009. .

5. “Women in front line combat — a defence issue or a discrimination issue? (Editorial Comment).” National Observer – Australia and World Affairs Winter 2001: 5+. Expanded Academic ASAP. Web. 6 Dec. 2009. .

6. “Israel Is Created as a Homeland for Jews, May 14, 1948.” DISCovering World History. Online ed. Detroit: Gale, 2003. Student Resource Center – Gold. Web. 6 Dec. 2009. .

7. Schafer, David. “Triumph and catastrophe: in continuing the discussion begun in the July/August 2002 Humanist regarding the origins of the strife between Israelis and Palestinians, events in Israel’s first decade as a nation firmly drew the lines of conflict. (Origins of the Israeli/Palestinian Conflict).” The Humanist Nov.-Dec. 2002: 22+. Expanded Academic ASAP. Web. 6 Dec. 2009. .

8. Lief, Louise. “Second class in the Israeli military; women are fighting for equality in the ranks.” U.S. News & World Report 22 May 1995: 47+. Expanded Academic ASAP. Web. 6 Dec. 2009. .

9. Weinbaum, Batya. “How sexual trauma can create obstacles to transnational feminism: the case of Shifra.” NWSA Journal 18.3 (2006): 71+. Expanded Academic ASAP. Web. 6 Dec. 2009. .

10. Kabalo, Paula. “Leadership behind the curtains: the case of Israeli women in 1948.” Modern Judaism 28.1 (2008): 14-40. Expanded Academic ASAP. Web. 6 Dec. 2009. .

Women of valor: why Israel doesn’t send women into combat.
• What: What are the reasons for Israel’s prohibition against women in combat duty?
• D.V.: prohibition of women in combat
• I.V.: physical strength, budget
• Conclusion: Israel can’t afford to train women (who supposedly lack endurance and physical strength) to be combat-ready.

Leadership behind the curtains: the case of Israeli women in 1948
• What: What contributions did Israeli women make in 1948?
• D.V.: Israel’s position upon the outcome of the war (internally and externally)
• I.V.: organization into groups, political obstacles
• Conclusion: women were incapable of becoming strong powers in the political theater

How sexual trauma can create obstacles to transnational feminism: the case of Shifra
• What: What are the effects of previous sexual violation on transnational feminism?
• D.V.: internal focus over transnational focus
• I.V.: sexual assault, damage to national identity
• Conclusion: emotional trauma from sexual assault hinders the goals of transnational feminism.

Independent variables related to my dependent variable (exclusion of women from combat in IDF following 1948):
• budgetary restrictions
• physical strength
• sexual assault risks
• transnational feminist goals

Unfinished IA map

Elizabeth — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 02:41:08 +0000

This is the concept map of my IA ideas pending discussion with Mr. Gleeksicles.

~*Awesome*~

Geopolitics of the Six Day War

Elizabeth — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 14:36:23 +0000

Describe the interests and actions of the various Great Powers and International Organizations involved in the Six Day War.

United States

Americans approved the transfer of Hawk surface-to-air missiles to Israel
recommitted to Israel’s security and the need to maintain a regional balance of power
cut economic assistance to Egypt by 1965 under the leadership President Lyndon B. Johnson, which pushed the Egyptians closer to the Soviets
President Dwight Eisenhower pressured Israel to withdraw from Sharm el-Sheikh despite the fact that the Egyptians did not offer any concessions in return
Eisenhower pledged that the U.S. would guarantee Israel’s right of passage in the Straits of Tiran
the Americans also sponsored a United Nations resolution establishing the United Nations Emergency Force presence between the Egyptians and the Israelis
Americans repeatedly rebuffed Israeli requests for military aid and approval for an Israeli preemptive attack on Egypt
Americans aggressively pursued diplomatic solutions and sought to cobble together an international regatta to challenge the Egyptian blockade on Israeli shipping in the Straits of Tiran

Great Britain

self interest in the region= tried to safeguard their share
provided Israel some weapons to defend itself
British policymakers decided to adopt a more neutral or pro-Arab stance
war marked a turning point in relations between Israel and Britain, ending a brief period of close cooperation

Soviet Union

by the early 1950s the Soviets no longer regarded the Zionist state as useful for extending their influence into the Middle East
the Soviets took on the role of armorer for both Syria and Egypt, supplying them with modern tanks, aircraft and later missiles
the Soviet Union exerted a troublesome influence on the events leading up to the war by feeding Arab suspicions about Israel
after the war the Soviets rapidly made up the equipment losses suffered by the Syrians and Egyptians and increased their involvement in Egypt’s anti-aircraft defenses
Israel’s victory in the Six-Day War had an enormous impact on the Jewish population in the Soviet Union and helped set in motion the Jewish exodus from the Communist regime

France

France had been a key weapons supplier to Israel during the 1950’s and the first half of the 1960’s
French fighter jets made up the backbone of Israel’s air force on the eve of the Six Day War
France hoped to protect its overseas empire in the face of mounting insurgencies
1958 to the Presidency of France had begun a gradual shift in policy, a mending of relations with the Arabs and a move away from Israel
in addition to the embargo on Israeli weapons purchases imposed in 1967, France also refused to deliver 50 aircraft already paid for in full
the French embargo marked the end of close military relations between Israel and France and the beginning of a strong relationship between Israel and the U.S

United Nations

United Nations Emergency Force

in place along the Egypt-Israel border since the Suez Crisis of 1956
an irritating presence to Egyptian militarism
the Arab League declared their wish to finally achieve the dissolution of Israel in 1964
Egypt forced a withdrawal of UNEF from the border
Canada’s objected to the retreat of UNEF, arguing that it would spark armed conflict
UNEF heads attempted to slow removal, but war broke out in June of 1967

United Nations Security Council

previous year (November 1966) had drafted Resolution 228, which cautioned Israel against continued encroachment into Jordanian territory
Abba Eban made a speech to the Security Council in order to explain Israel’s justifications for going to war
Security Council Resolution 242 (November 1967) called for the removal of Israeli forces from occupied territory to facilitate peace between Israel and Arab countries
called for end of “belligerency” between the involved states (Lebanon, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Israel)
start of “land for peace” – would become a major part of future Arab-Israeli relations
Israel still maintained expanded borders

ALLIANCES

Israeli + USA

United States – maintained diplomatic relations outside their borders to keep the peace
also reaped benefits from said diplomatic relations
United States had bountiful Jewish population
Presidents pandered to Zionist Jews to maintain order and popularity
Israel asked for United States for military assistance during the Yemen War
United States began to give Hawk air missiles to Israel
Arabs was infuriated by the United States giving supplies to Israel

Arab Countries + USA

although the United States often favored the Israelis, kept diplomatic friendships with the Arab countries
interests in the Middle Eastern oil fields
Cold War – needed to secure relations with the Arab countries to fight communist threat
embargoed arms because they didn’t want to seem as if they were favoring the Jews over the Arabs
precedent seen in the intermittent support of the Partition of Palestine earlier

Syria and Egypt + Soviet Union

Soviets sought to extend their Communist ideals into the Middle East; needed a gateway
Syria and Egypt – socialist ideology – still lacked full Communist leanings
Soviet Union used the war between Israel and Egypt to extend their control in the Middle East
Soviets supplied massive amounts of arms to the Arabs

Egypt/Jordan/Syria/Lebanon + Kuwait/Algeria/Saudi Arabia/Iraq

All four of the countries contributed troops and arms
existed due to states’ Pan-Arab leanings

Delicious Scavenger Hunt-Suez Crisis 1956

Elizabeth — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 14:40:11 +0000

Suez Crisis Timeline

Nasser Giving Speech

BBC Suez Main Page

Security Council Resolution S/2322

Audio Slideshow

The Musketeer’s Cloak: Strategic Deception During the Suez Crisis of 1956

President Nasser: Denouncement of the Proposal for a Canal Users’ Association, 1956

Eisenhower’s Diary

Paratroopers Port Said

Suez Crisis: Key Maps

Nasser Biography

Suez Crisis Resources

Combined OPVL – Gamal Abdel Nasser, Anthony Eden, Abba Eban

Elizabeth — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 15:05:53 +0000

Origins:

Gamal Abdel Nasser: Speech Justifying Nationalization of the Suez Canal Company

Egypt
1956
Speech given by then-President Nasser to people of Egypt
In response to British and French protests against nationalization of the Suez
Gamal Abdel Nasser – second President of Egypt and strong Arab nationalist

Anthony Eden: Views of Gamal Abdul Nasser

United Kingdom
1956 and 1960
Written memoir and excerpts from a private letter to Dwight D. Eisenhower
Anthony Eden – Prime Minister of Great Britain, Conservative politician
In response to Nasser’s nationalization of the Suez Canal

Abba Eban: Speech to the Security Council on Israel’s Offensive in Sinai

United Nations in New York City
1956
Speech given to the United Nations Security Council
Abba Eban – Israeli diplomat
In explanation for Israeli offensive against encroaching Egyptians
In defense of actions in the face of alleged Egyptian threat

Gamal Abdel Nasser: Response to the Anglo-French Ultimatum

Egypt
1956
Speech given to Egyptian people
Gamal Abdel Nasser – second President of Egypt and strong Arab nationalist
In response to to Israeli offensive in the Sinai peninsula and the following British and French ultimatum

Ultimatum called for an end to the fighting and the occupation of Suez canal locations by the British and French

Purpose:

Gamal Abdel Nasser: Speech Justifying Nationalization of the Suez Canal Company

In explanation of Egypt’s actions in nationalizing the Suez

“we exercised a right which stems from the very core of Egyptian sovereignty”

Raising support for the nationalization by providing counterarguments to British and French protests

“we shall pay [Britain] for her 44 per cent of the shares”
“The Suez Canal would have been restored to us in 12 years [...] has disclosed hidden intentions and unmasked Britain”

Claiming Egyptian sovereignty over the Suez Canal due to location and past responsibility

“we maintained freedom of shipping in the canal
“the canal has been under Egyptian protection because it is part of Egypt [...] we protected it for years because it is our territory”

Anthony Eden: Views of Gamal Abdul Nasser

In explanation of opinions and actions directed toward Nasser
In attempt to secure support for preemptive measures against Nasser

Force in Deciding Conflicts

Elizabeth — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 03:04:12 +0000

“The use of force, more than diplomacy or appeals to norms and values, ultimately determines the outcome of a dispute.”

This claim is neither 100% true nor 100% false. Personally, I think it is much more accurate to say that the use of force ultimately determines the outcome of a dispute by overriding ineffective diplomatic methods and establishing new, working diplomacy. Throughout history, cases of failed diplomacy have led to war, which ultimately solved the conflict and installed new channels of diplomacy to prevent further clashes. The most famous example of this is World War II. For three years, France (lead by Daladier) and Great Britain (led by Chamberlain) practiced the policy of appeasement, giving Hitler the lands he claimed to forestall an armed conflict. However, this policy led to additional areas’ absorption. This only ceased with the invasion of Poland, which resulted in a British declaration of war against Germany.

When, six years later, the war finally came to a close, the powers of the world recognized the failure of their diplomatic methods. The formation of the United Nations was a direct result of World War II and the defunct politics that led to it. Since the formation of the United Nations, there have been no “world” conflicts. Most contemporary conflicts are either between a small number of belligerents or contained to an isolated region. There have yet to be any trans-continental clashes in the sixty-four years of the United Nation’s existence. The reason for this is that heads of state are rarely willing to accept the shortcomings of their politics and must be pushed into forceful conflict to recognize the necessity of change.

The Zionist Case: Golda Meir

Elizabeth — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 14:57:18 +0000

Origin:

Jerusalem
March 25, 1946
“Testimony Before the Anglo-American Committee of Enquiry”
Speech given to powers of Britain and America
Golda Meir – Zionist activist and dedicated politician
In response to inquiry of said powers in the issue of Palestine
In response to the renewed fervor for Jewish homeland following the Holocaust

Purpose:

Securing a legitimate homeland within the area of Palestine

“create a free Jewish society”

Ensuring good standing in the graces of the UK and US

“you who have had the good fortune to belong to the two great democratic nations, the British and the American”

To assuage British and American worries over Zionist immigration into Palestine (through means of pathos) and to assert that Arab rights are not being abridged

“Jews only want [...] to bring the surviving Jewish children, of whom not so man are not left in the world”
“they sought to achieve these goals in complete friendship and cooperation with the Arab population”

Value:

Primary source
Golda Meir (future Prime Minister of state of Israel)
Born in Russia, exposed to Anti-Semitic pogroms; lived in United States
Bias can be seen in supposed “facts” (cooperation with Arab neighbors)
Much more based in emotional appeal than factual appeal

“to watch from here millions of Jews being slaughtered [...] I will say nothing about them [...] but you can imagine”

Value is decreased due to lack of facts and Zionist bias
Value due to actual political standing of Golda Meir

Limitation:

Limited by lack of facts
Does not mention Arab dissatisfaction with Zionist immigration; glosses over the troubles in Palestine
Given to two states who had already shown support for Zionist cause, as opposed to neutral states

Responsibilities of International Community Post-Holocaust

Elizabeth — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 14:22:59 +0000

Post World War II, the international community were saddled with various responsibilities to the victims of the Holocaust. They were ranked according to immediate need and long-term goals.

Palestinian Difficulties on International Stage

Elizabeth — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 17:06:38 +0000

Foreign interference from major powers in the Palestinian area was a major factor in preventing Arabs from voicing their interests. While the Arab race stretched far back in history and their presence in the land had been solidified over centuries, they were no match for the strength of a country like Great Britain. A major player in world politics for decades, Britain maintained its standing by being on the winning side in the first World War. The various other states meeting at the League of Nations were not going to stand up for a nation of people who had been absent from the global stage for the memorable past — even if they had wanted to.

When states met to discuss the fate of Palestine, emissaries from the surrounding countries were not invited. National leaders were not permitted. The people whose lives were in question were not consulted. Despite the lack of the ability that Great Britain demonstrated during the 1920 Palestine riots, they still believed that they had the right to control the area. As many other states around the world discovered long before and some time after, British self-entitlement was a force to be reckoned with.

Against the decision of countries like Great Britain, France, and the United States, the Arab nation was next to powerless. The Arabs were simply no match for a political and military power like the British Empire, who believed (and demonstrated this belief in arenas around the globe) that the voice of thousands of people can still be drowned out by the crack of rifles.

The Jewish Question

Elizabeth — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 14:22:03 +0000