Query Result Set
Skip Navigation Links
   ActiveUsers:903Hits:18680068Skip Navigation Links
Show My Basket
Contact Us
IDSA Web Site
Ask Us
Today's News
HelpExpand Help
Advanced search

  Hide Options
Sort Order Items / Page
ISRAEL–PALESTINE (2) answer(s).
 
SrlItem
1
ID:   145761


Confederalism: a third way for Israel–Palestine / Scheindlin, Dahlia; Waxman, Dov   Journal Article
Waxman, Dov Journal Article
0 Rating(s) & 0 Review(s)
Summary/Abstract After years of wishful thinking and failed efforts at Israeli–Palestinian peacemaking, the Obama administration has now finally acknowledged what most observers have been saying for some time—there is no chance of a two-state solution to the conflict, at least in the next couple of years.1 Many now question whether such a solution will ever be possible. Although diplomats and experts have long regarded a two-state solution as the best way to resolve this most intractable conflict—and for the last two decades, a majority of Israelis and Palestinians have agreed with this—this conventional wisdom is now seriously in doubt.
        Export Export
2
ID:   156552


Throwing stones in social science: Non-violence, unarmed violence, and the first intifada / Pressman, Jeremy   Journal Article
Pressman, Jeremy Journal Article
0 Rating(s) & 0 Review(s)
Summary/Abstract Social scientists treat stone-throwing as a non-violent act or argue that protest movements may be primarily non-violent despite stone-throwing. However, this study of an iconic example, the first intifada (Palestinian uprising, 1987–1993), demonstrates that stone-throwing is better characterized as unarmed violence. Definitions of violence underscore that throwing rocks is a violent act. Moreover, informed observers and data collected on stone-induced injuries during four years of the intifada illustrate the bodily harm caused by stones. The throwing of stones was central to the intifada and its identity and definition. Stone-throwing was the most visible tactic Palestinians used in the first intifada. Lastly, most scholars emphasize the protestors’ perceptions when it might be that the targets’ perceptions matter more for understanding definitions of (non-)violence and subsequent policy changes. These findings challenge important social science work and the mainstream Israeli and Palestinian narratives about the first intifada.
        Export Export