Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-qs9v7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T13:30:08.088Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Doves, Hawks, and other Birds of a Feather: The Distribution of Israeli Parliamentary Opinion on the Future of the Occupied Territories, 1967–1977

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2009

Avner Yaniv  and
Fabian Pascal
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Studies of the domestic sources of Israel's foreign policy have tended to treat Israel's parties as homogeneous blocs of opinion. Israel's political parties are implicitly arrayed in such analyses on a left-to-right continuum. This begins on the left with the New Communist List (RAKAH) and extends through the Israel Communist Party (MAKI), MOKED, Haolam Hazeh Koah Hadash, the Civil Rights Movement, SHELI, the United Workers Party (MAPAM), the Labour Party (formerly Ahdut Haavoda), Israel's Workers List (RAFI) and the Workers of Israel Party (MAPAI), the Independent Liberals, the Democratic Movement for Change, the National Religious Party, the Likud (composed of the state list, the Liberal Party, Laam, the Free Centre, the Greater Israel Movement, Shlomzion and Herut) and finally ends on the right with the ultra-orthodox Agudath Israel (AGI) and the Workers of Agudath Israel (PAGI). The left-to-centre part of this continuum is presented as moderate in varying degrees on questions relating to Israel's most cardinal external question, namely the terms of accommodation with the Arabs. The right-to-centre part of this same continuum is associated with hawkish views, which also vary in their degree of militancy.

Type
Notes and Comments
Information
British Journal of Political Science , Volume 10 , Issue 2 , April 1980 , pp. 260 - 267
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1980

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See, for example, Safran, N., ‘Israel's Internal Politics and Foreign Policy’ in Hammond, P. Y. and Alexander, S. S., eds., Political Dynamics in the Middle East (New York: Elsevier, 1972)Google Scholar, Brecher, M., The Foreign Policy System of Israel (London: Oxford University Press, 1972)Google Scholar; Wagner, A. R., ‘Israeli Foreign Policy’ in Mclaurin, R. D., Mughisuddin, M. and Wagner, A. R., Foreign Policy Making in the Middle East (New York: Praeger, 1977)Google Scholar; Safran, N., Israel: The Embattled Ally (Boston: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1978).Google Scholar

2 Time magazine sneered at Begin, by hinting that his name rhymed with Fagin, Newsweek called election day ‘The Day of the Hawks’ and the International Herald Tribune argued in its headlines that ‘Israeli turnabout upsets U.S. campaign for a settlement’ and that ‘Arabs view Likud victory as major setback to peace efforts’.

3 See Haaretz, 19, 20 and 21 09 1978Google Scholar; also Tavor, M., ‘Begins Widerspenstige Mannschaft’ in Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung of 25 11 1978.Google Scholar

4 See, for example, Smooha, Sammy, Israel: Pluralism and Conflict (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1978)Google Scholar; Etzioni-Halevi, Eva (with Rina Shapira), Political Culture in Israel: Cleavage and Integration Among Israeli Jews (New York: Praeger, 1977)Google Scholar; Isaac, Rael Jean, Divided Israel: Ideological Politics in the Jewish State (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1976)Google Scholar; and Aronoff, Myron J., Power and Ritual in the Israel Labour Party (Amsterdam: Van Gorcum, 1977).Google Scholar

5 The Hebrew plural for Knesset.

6 Smith, H., Hakol al Behirot Be Israel (Tel Aviv: Adi, 1969)Google Scholar