American engagement and the pathways to Arab–Israeli peace

Bibliographic Data

ID8912153
AuthorsJeremy Pressman (0000-0001-9752-756X, University of Connecticut, corresponding author)
Year2014
Volume49
Issue4
Pages536-553
Publication date2014-01-20
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueCooperation and Conflict (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0010-8367 • E-ISSN: 1460-3691
PublisherSAGE Publishing (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1177/0010836713517569
OpenAlexW2313510098
LanguageEN
Citations received3
References cited29

This close empirical study of decades of US efforts to bring peace between Arab states and Israel helps reflect on Arild Underdal and Oran R. Young’s leadership typologies. Distinguishing between coercive leadership based on the incentives and sanctions that robust capabilities make possible and instrumental leadership focused more on talking, skilled mediation, and policy innovation is useful. However, this US mediation demonstrates that the two are not wholly distinct as previously suggested. The narrative of US efforts from Richard M Nixon to William J Clinton, including 22 cases of US involvement in Arab–Israeli mediation, suggests successful US mediation has been based on four factors. US involvement has led to breakthroughs when the US administration was highly engaged and kept at the problem after an initial diplomatic setback; benefitted from an exogenous event; managed that event to the US advantage; and dealt with strong Arab and Israeli partners

Administration (probate law · Criminology · Economics · Incentive · Mediation · Narrative · Political economy · Political science · Sanctions · Setback · Sociology · Jewish and Middle Eastern Studies · Law · Middle East and Rwanda Conflicts · Political Conflict and Governance

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub