SEARCH THE HSDL
Searching for terms: EXACT: "Zanotti, Jim" in: author
Set an Alert to get future results
Results 1 - 30 (of 152) sorted by relevance sort by date
Only 2/3! You are seeing results from the Public Collection, not the complete Full Collection. Sign in to search everything (see eligibility).
-
U.S. Foreign Aid to the Palestinians [May 31, 2011]"From FY2008 to the present, annual U.S. bilateral assistance to the West Bank and Gaza Strip has averaged over $600 million, including annual averages of over $200 million in direct budgetary assistance and over $100 million in non-lethal security assistance for the Palestinian Authority (PA) in the West Bank. Additionally, the United States is the largest single-state donor to the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA). However, whether UNRWA's role is beneficial remains a polarizing question, particularly with respect to its presence in Hamas controlled Gaza. […] The power-sharing or 'unity' government expected in the wake of the May 2011 Fatah-Hamas agreement will not be eligible for U.S. aid if Hamas is included in the government and does not change its stance towards Israel--possibly subject to some limited exceptions. Even if the immediate objectives of U.S. assistance programs for the Palestinians are met, lack of progress toward a politically legitimate and peaceful two-state solution could undermine the utility of U.S. aid in helping the Palestinians become more cohesive, stable, and self-reliant over the long term."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceZanotti, Jim2011-05-31
-
Turkey-U.S. Defense Cooperation: Prospects and Challenges [April 8, 2011]"Congress and the Obama Administration are seeking to manage longstanding bilateral and North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)-based defense cooperation with Turkey at a time when a more independent Turkish foreign policy course and changes in regional security conditions are creating new challenges for both countries. Defense cooperation rooted in shared threat perceptions from the Cold War era and built on close U.S. ties with the Turkish military leadership now must be reconciled with a decline of the military's political influence in Turkish society and some negative turns in Turkish popular sentiment toward the United States over the past decade. At the same time, Turkey's importance as a U.S. ally has arguably increased on issues of global significance in its surrounding region that include Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. In early 2011, Turkey's regional role has arguably become even more prominent--exemplified by its significant involvement politically and militarily on the question of NATO's intervention in Libya. How Congress and the Administration manage defense cooperation with Turkey in this evolving context is likely to have a significant bearing on U.S. national security interests, as well as on both U.S. and Turkish calculations of the mutual benefits and leverage involved in the cooperative relationship. Some officials and analysts believe that, in at least some respects, the United States needs Turkey more than Turkey needs the United States. Others counter that claims of Turkish leverage over the United States are exaggerated."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceZanotti, Jim2011-04-08
-
U.S. Security Assistance to the Palestinian Authority [June 24, 2009]"Since shortly after the establishment of limited Palestinian self-rule in the West Bank and Gaza Strip in the mid-1990s, the United States has periodically provided assistance to the Palestinian Authority (PA) for civil security and counterterrorism purposes. Following the death of Yasser Arafat in late 2004 and the election of Mahmoud Abbas as his successor as PA President in early 2005, then-U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice created the office of U.S. Security Coordinator (USSC) for Israel and the Palestinian Authority to help reform, train, and equip PA security forces which had been personally beholden to Arafat and his political allies. Previous Israeli-Palestinian efforts at security cooperation collapsed during the second Palestinian intifada that took place earlier this decade. Since Hamas gained control of the Gaza Strip in June 2007, Lieutenant General Keith Dayton, head of the USSC since November 2005, has helped with the 'gendarmerie-style' training of West Bank-based PA security personnel. As of June 2009, 400 Presidential Guardsmen and 1,700 National Security Forces troops have been trained at the Jordan International Police Training Center (JIPTC) near Amman. All troops, new or already serving, are vetted for terrorist links, human rights violations, and/or criminal records by the State Department, Israel, Jordan, and the PA before they are admitted to U.S.-sponsored training courses at JIPTC."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceZanotti, Jim2009-06-24
-
Israel and Hamas: Conflict in Gaza (2008-2009) [January 15, 2009]"On December 27, 2008, Israel launched a major military campaign dubbed 'Operation Cast Lead' against the Palestinian Islamist militant group Hamas in the Gaza Strip in order to counter Palestinian rocket fire and, more broadly, to significantly weaken all aspects of Hamas rule in Gaza. On January 3, 2009, Israel began a ground offensive into Gaza intended to eliminate Hamas's willingness or capability to launch rockets at Israeli towns and cities. As of January 14, Israeli bombings and ground forces had reportedly killed over 1,000 Palestinians, while 13 Israelis had been killed by Palestinian rockets and attempts to counter the ground invasion. [...]. U.S. President-elect Barack Obama will likely be compelled to address the Gaza situation directly at the outset of his administration. The incoming 111th Congress may be called upon to increase various forms of assistance to Israel, to the Palestinian Authority headed by President Mahmoud Abbas, and to Palestinian civilians in order to support a sustainable post-conflict order that guarantees Israel's security and attends to the needs of the Palestinian humanitarian situation. The Gaza crisis constitutes a conundrum for all involved. [...]. Linking the cessation of violence in and around Gaza with international enforcement of a truce or a broader regional security initiative may be possible, but, at present, no proposed solution appears straightforward. This report will be updated as necessary to reflect further developments."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceSharp, Jeremy Maxwell; Migdalovitz, Carol; Zanotti, Jim2009-01-15
-
U.S. Foreign Aid to the Palestinians [August 12, 2010]"Since the signing of the Oslo Accord in 1993 and the establishment of limited Palestinian self-rule in the West Bank and Gaza Strip in 1994, the U.S. government has committed over $3.5 billion in bilateral assistance to the Palestinians. Since the death of Yasser Arafat in November 2004, U.S. assistance to the Palestinians has been averaging about $400 million a year. During the 1990s, U.S. foreign aid to the Palestinians averaged approximately $75 million per year. Despite more robust levels of assistance this decade, Israeli-Palestinian conflict and Hamas's heightened role in Palestinian politics have made it more difficult to implement effective and lasting aid projects that serve U.S. interests. [...] Because of congressional concerns that, among other things, U.S. funds might be diverted to Palestinian terrorist groups, much of this aid is subject to a host of vetting and oversight requirements and legislative restrictions. Experts advise that PA [Palestinian Authority] stability appears to hinge on improved security, economic development, Israeli cooperation, and the continuation of high levels of foreign assistance. The possibility of a consensus or unity government to address the problem of divided rule among Palestinians could lead to a full or partial U.S. aid cutoff if Hamas is included in the government and does not change its stance toward Israel. Even if the immediate objectives of U.S. assistance programs for the Palestinians are met, lack of progress toward a politically legitimate and peaceful two-state solution could undermine the utility of U.S. aid in helping the Palestinians become more cohesive, stable, and self-reliant over the long term."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceZanotti, Jim2010-08-12
-
U.S. Foreign Aid to the Palestinians [June 25, 2012]"Since the establishment of limited Palestinian self-rule in the West Bank and Gaza Strip in the mid-1990s, the U.S. government has committed over $4 billion in bilateral assistance to the Palestinians, who are among the world's largest per capita recipients of international foreign aid. […] From FY2008 to the present, annual U.S. bilateral assistance to the West Bank and Gaza Strip has averaged nearly $600 million, including annual averages of approximately $200 million in direct budgetary assistance and $100 million in non-lethal security assistance for the PA [Palestinian Authority] in the West Bank. […] Because of congressional concerns that, among other things, funds might be diverted to Palestinian terrorist groups, U.S. aid is subject to a host of vetting and oversight requirements and legislative restrictions. U.S. assistance to the Palestinians is given alongside assistance from other international donors, and U.S. policymakers routinely call for greater or more timely assistance from Arab governments in line with pledges those governments make. Even if the immediate objectives of U.S. assistance programs for the Palestinians are met, lack of progress toward a politically legitimate and peaceful two-state solution could undermine the utility of U.S. aid in helping the Palestinians become more cohesive, stable, and self-reliant over the long term."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceZanotti, Jim2012-06-25
-
Turkey: Background and U.S. Relations [April 27, 2012]"Congress has an active role to play in shaping and overseeing U.S. relations with Turkey, and several Turkish domestic and foreign policy issues have significant relevance for U.S. interests. This report provides background information on Turkey and discusses possible policy options for Members of Congress and the Obama Administration. U.S. relations with Turkey-a longtime North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) ally-have evolved over time as global challenges to U.S. interests have changed. Turkey's economic dynamism and geopolitical importance-it straddles Europe, the Middle East, and Central Asia and now has the world's 16th-largest economy-have increased its influence regionally and globally. Although Turkey still depends on the United States and other NATO allies for political and strategic support, growing economic diversification and military self-reliance allows Turkey to exercise greater leverage with the West. […] Congressional interest in Turkey is high with respect to the following issues: 1) Addressing ongoing change in the Middle East by coordinating policies and using Turkey's regional example to influence political outcomes in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere; counter Iranian influence; and preserve stability; 2) The decline in Israel-Turkey relations and how that might affect U.S.-Turkey defense cooperation, including arms sales to counter the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK), a U.S.-designated Foreign Terrorist Organization; and 3) A potential congressional resolution or presidential statement on the possible genocide of Armenians by the Ottoman Empire (Turkey's predecessor state) during World War I."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceZanotti, Jim2012-04-27
-
Israel: Possible Military Strike Against Iran's Nuclear Facilities [August 28, 2012]"Several published reports indicate that top Israeli decisionmakers are seriously considering whether to order a military strike on Iran's nuclear facilities, and if so, when. […] For Congress, the potential impact--short- and long-term--of an Israeli decision regarding Iran and its implementation is a critical issue of concern. By all accounts, such an attack could have considerable regional and global security, political, and economic repercussions, not least for the United States, Israel, and their bilateral relationship. […] The current Israeli government, President Barack Obama, and many Members of Congress have similar concerns about Iran's nuclear program. They appear to have a range of views on how best to address those shared concerns. Iran maintains that its nuclear program is solely for peaceful, civilian energy and research purposes, and U.S. intelligence assessments say that Iran has not made a decision to build nuclear weapons. However, Iran continues to enrich uranium in militarily hardened sites and questions remain about its nuclear weapons capabilities and intentions. […] This report has many aspects that are the subject of vigorous debate and remain fully or partially outside public knowledge. […] This is an update of a report dated March 28, 2012. However, the only updated material is the initial section entitled 'Developments from Late March to September 2012.'"Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceZanotti, Jim; Katzman, Kenneth; Gertler, Jeremiah . . .2012-08-28
-
U.S. Foreign Aid to the Palestinians [October 7, 2011]"Since June 2007, these U.S. policy priorities have crystallized around the factional and geographical split between the Fatah-led Palestinian Authority (PA) in the West Bank and Hamas in the Gaza Strip. Some U.S. lawmakers have taken action since August 2011 to delay the obligation of certain types of already-appropriated FY2011 U.S. aid to the Palestinians, largely due to Palestinian efforts to seek greater international support of Palestinian statehood outside of negotiations with Israel. Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Chairman and Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas submitted an application for Palestinian state membership in the United Nations on September 23, 2011, and the Security Council is expected to vote on the matter in the fall of 2011. Additionally, a May 2011 agreement between Fatah and Hamas has raised concerns among some Members of Congress about continuing U.S. budgetary and security assistance to a PA government that could be subject to the approval of a U.S.-designated Foreign Terrorist Organization (Hamas) that claims to reserve the right to violently oppose Israel's existence. Prospects for implementation of the agreement remain unclear. From FY2008 to the present, annual U.S. bilateral assistance to the West Bank and Gaza Strip has averaged over $600 million, including annual averages of over $200 million in direct budgetary assistance and over $100 million in non-lethal security assistance for the PA in the West Bank. Additionally, the United States is the largest single-state donor to the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA). However, whether UNRWA's role is beneficial remains a polarizing question, particularly with respect to its presence in Hamascontrolled Gaza."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceZanotti, Jim2011-10-07
-
U.S. Foreign Aid to the Palestinians [November 9, 2011]"Since the establishment of limited Palestinian self-rule in the West Bank and Gaza Strip in the mid-1990s, the U.S. government has committed over $4 billion in bilateral assistance to the Palestinians, who are among the world's largest per capita recipients of international foreign aid. […] Since June 2007, these U.S. policy priorities have crystallized around the factional and geographical split between the Fatah-led Palestinian Authority (PA) in the West Bank and Hamas in the Gaza Strip. Some U.S. lawmakers have taken action since August 2011 to delay the obligation of some already-appropriated FY2011 U.S. aid to the Palestinians, largely due to Palestinian efforts to seek greater international support of Palestinian statehood outside of negotiations with Israel. Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Chairman and Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas submitted an application for Palestinian state membership in the United Nations on September 23, 2011, and the Security Council is expected to vote on the matter in the fall of 2011. Additionally, a May 2011 agreement between Fatah and Hamas has raised concerns among some Members of Congress about continuing U.S. budgetary and security assistance to a PA government that could be subject to the approval of a U.S.-designated Foreign Terrorist Organization (Hamas) that claims to reserve the right to violently oppose Israel's existence. Prospects for implementation of the agreement remain unclear. […] Even if the immediate objectives of U.S. assistance programs for the Palestinians are met, lack of progress toward a politically legitimate and peaceful two-state solution could undermine the utility of U.S. aid in helping the Palestinians become more cohesive, stable, and self-reliant over the long term."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceZanotti, Jim2011-11-09
-
Palestinian Initiatives for 2011 at the United Nations [September 23, 2011]"Many Members of Congress are actively interested in the question of possible U.N. action on Palestinian statehood. Congress could try to influence U.S. policy and the choices of other actors through the authorization and appropriation of foreign assistance to the Palestinians, the United Nations, and Israel and through oversight of the Obama Administration's diplomatic efforts. Changes to aid levels may depend on congressional views of how maintaining or changing aid levels could affect U.S. leverage and credibility in future regional and global contexts. Officials from the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and Palestinian Authority (PA) are taking action in the United Nations aimed at solidifying international support for Palestinian statehood. On September 23, 2011, at the opening of the annual session of the General Assembly, PLO Chairman and PA President Mahmoud Abbas submitted an application for Palestinian state membership to the U.N. Secretary-General--on the basis of the armistice lines that prevailed before the Arab-Israeli War of 1967 (the '1967 borders')--in order to bring about a Security Council vote on whether to recommend membership. […] Although Abbas maintains that he seeks an eventual return to U.S.-backed Israel-PLO negotiations on a more equal basis, an upgrade of the Palestinians' status at the U.N. also could facilitate subsequent efforts to apply greater pressure on Israel, especially if the PLO gains greater ability to present grievances in international courts--such as the International Court of Justice (ICJ) or International Criminal Court (ICC). Whether U.N. action or its aftermath would make Israel more or less willing to offer concessions in a negotiating process remains unclear, especially in light of ongoing regional political change and the volatility and possible deterioration of Israel's political and military relationships with Egypt and Turkey."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceZanotti, Jim; Browne, Marjorie Ann2011-09-23
-
U.S. Foreign Aid to the Palestinians [January 18, 2013]"Since the establishment of limited Palestinian self-rule in the West Bank and Gaza Strip in the mid-1990s, the U.S. government has committed over $4 billion in bilateral assistance to the Palestinians, who are among the world's largest per capita recipients of international foreign aid. Successive Administrations have requested aid for the Palestinians to support at least three major U.S. policy priorities of interest to Congress: [1] Preventing terrorism against Israel from Hamas and other militant organizations. [2] Fostering stability, prosperity, and self-governance in the West Bank that inclines Palestinians toward peaceful coexistence with Israel and a 'two-state solution'. [3] Meeting humanitarian needs. Since June 2007, these U.S. policy priorities have crystallized around the factional and geographical split between the Fatah-led Palestinian Authority (PA) in the West Bank and Hamas in the Gaza Strip. Informal congressional holds delayed disbursement of various portions of FY2011 aid to the Palestinians, until the Obama Administration obligated this assistance despite a reportedly remaining hold. Holds reportedly remain attached to already-appropriated FY2012 U.S. aid. The holds appear to be largely a response to and anticipation of Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) initiatives in the United Nations and other international forums aimed at increasing international recognition of Palestinian statehood outside of negotiations with Israel. The holds occur at a time of ongoing structural budgetary crisis in the Palestinian Authority (PA)-- exacerbated by a number of factors--that could threaten stability, especially in the West Bank. Additionally, some Members of Congress remain concerned about a possible 'consensus' PA government whose composition would require Hamas approval. New conditions on aid from FY2012 relating both to potential U.N.-related initiatives and a potential consensus PA government have carried over into FY2013. Some Members of Congress have proposed additional conditions in anticipation of possible future steps by the PLO to make legal action possible--including at the International Criminal Court (ICC)--against perceived Israeli violations of various international laws and norms."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceZanotti, Jim2013-01-18
-
Turkey: Background and U.S. Relations [January 17, 2012]"Congress has an active role to play in shaping and overseeing U.S. relations with Turkey, and several Turkish domestic and foreign policy issues have significant relevance for U.S. interests. This report provides background information on Turkey and discusses possible policy options for Members of Congress and the Obama Administration. U.S. relations with Turkey--a longtime North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) ally--have evolved over time as global challenges to U.S. interests have changed. Turkey's economic dynamism and geopolitical importance--it straddles Europe, the Middle East, and Central Asia and now has the world's 16th-largest economy--have increased its influence regionally and globally. Although Turkey still depends on the United States and other NATO allies for political and strategic support, growing economic diversification and military self-reliance allows Turkey to exercise greater leverage with the West. These trends have helped fuel continuing Turkish political transformation led in the past decade by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and the Justice and Development Party (AKP), which has Islamist roots. Future domestic political developments may determine how Turkey reconciles respect for democratic views that favor Turkish nationalism and traditional Sunni Muslim values with protection of individual freedoms, minority rights, rule of law, and the principle of secular governance. Debate on issues such as the status of Turkey's ethnic Kurdish population, the civil-military balance, the role of religion in public life, and heightened concern over press freedom could coalesce in 2012 around a proposal for a new constitution. Congressional interest in Turkey is high with respect to the following issues: [1] Addressing ongoing change in the Middle East by coordinating policies and using Turkey's regional example to influence political outcomes in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere; counter Iranian influence; and preserve stability; [2] The decline in Israel-Turkey relations and how that might affect U.S.-Turkey defense cooperation, including arms sales to counter the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK), a U.S.-designated Foreign Terrorist Organization; and [3] A potential congressional resolution or presidential statement on the possible genocide of Armenian"Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceZanotti, Jim2012-01-17
-
Israel: 2013 Elections Preview [January 8, 2013]"Close U.S.-Israel relations drive congressional interest in upcoming elections for Israel's 120-seat Knesset (parliament), scheduled for January 22, 2013. Israeli leadership decisions may have profound implications for matters of high U.S. priority, including potential threats from Iran and its non-state allies (such as Hezbollah and Hamas), issues of ongoing Israeli-Palestinian dispute, and political change in neighboring Arab states. The composition of a probable new coalition and government led by Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu could significantly influence Israeli decision[-]making, politics, and relations with the outside world, including the United States. In turn, this could affect U.S. popularity, credibility, and--ultimately--national security vis-à-vis the Middle East and more broadly."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceZanotti, Jim2013-01-08
-
Israel: Background and U.S. Relations [November 7, 2012]"Since Israel's founding in 1948, successive U.S. Presidents and many Members of Congress have demonstrated a commitment to Israel's security and to maintaining close U.S.-Israel defense, diplomatic, and economic cooperation. U.S. and Israeli leaders have pursued common security goals and have developed close relations based on common perceptions of shared democratic values and religious affinities. U.S. policymakers often seek to determine how regional events and U.S. policy choices may affect Israel's security, and Congress provides active oversight of the executive branch's dealings with Israel and the broader Middle East. Some Members of Congress and some analysts criticize what they perceive as insufficiently critical support of Israel. Other than Afghanistan, Israel is the leading recipient of U.S. foreign aid and is a frequent purchaser of major U.S. weapons systems. The United States and Israel maintain close security cooperation - predicated on a U.S. commitment to maintain Israel's 'qualitative military edge' over other countries in its region. […] Israel's perceptions of security around its borders have changed since early 2011 as several surrounding Arab countries - including Egypt and Syria - have experienced political upheaval or transition. Of particular concern to Israel is the durability of its 33-year-old peace treaty with Egypt, where a new Islamist-led government may become more reflective of popular sentiment that includes anti-Israel strains. Israeli leaders continually call for urgent international action against Iran's nuclear program, and have hinted at the possibility of a unilateral military strike against Iran's nuclear facilities."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceZanotti, Jim2012-11-07
-
Israel: Possible Military Strike Against Iran's Nuclear Facilities [September 28, 2012]"Several published reports indicate that top Israeli decisionmakers are seriously considering whether to order a military strike on Iran's nuclear facilities, and if so, when. Twice in Israel's history, it has conducted air strikes aimed at halting or delaying what Israeli policymakers believed to be efforts to acquire nuclear weapons by a Middle Eastern state--destroying Iraq's Osirak reactor in 1981 and a facility the Israelis identified as a reactor under construction in Syria in 2007. Today, Israeli officials generally view the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran as an unacceptable threat to Israeli security--with some describing it as an existential threat. This report analyzes key factors that may influence Israeli political decisions relating to a possible strike on Iranian nuclear facilities. These include, but are not limited to, the views of and relationships among Israeli leaders; the views of the Israeli public; U.S., regional, and international stances and responses as perceived and anticipated by Israel; Israeli estimates of the potential effectiveness and risks of a possible strike; and responses Israeli leaders anticipate from Iran and Iranian-allied actors--including Hezbollah and Hamas--regionally and internationally. For Congress, the potential impact--short- and long-term--of an Israeli decision regarding Iran and its implementation is a critical issue of concern. By all accounts, such an attack could have considerable regional and global security, political, and economic repercussions, not least for the United States, Israel, and their bilateral relationship. It is unclear what the ultimate effect of a strike would be on the likelihood of Iran acquiring nuclear weapons. The current Israeli government, President Barack Obama, and many Members of Congress have similar concerns about Iran's nuclear program. They appear to have a range of views on how best to address those shared concerns. Iran maintains that its nuclear program is solely for peaceful, civilian energy and research purposes, and U.S. intelligence assessments say that Iran has not made a decision to build nuclear weapons. However, Iran continues to enrich uranium in militarily hardened sites and questions remain about its nuclear weapons capabilities and intentions."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceZanotti, Jim; Katzman, Kenneth; Gertler, Jeremiah . . .2012-09-28
-
Turkey: Background and U.S. Relations [February 2, 2012]"Congressional interest in Turkey is high with respect to the following issues: 1) Addressing ongoing change in the Middle East by coordinating policies and using Turkey's regional example to influence political outcomes in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere; counter Iranian influence; and preserve stability; 2) The decline in Israel-Turkey relations and how that might affect U.S.-Turkey defense cooperation, including arms sales to counter the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK), a U.S.-designated Foreign Terrorist Organization; and 3) A potential congressional resolution or presidential statement on the possible genocide of Armenians by the Ottoman Empire (Turkey's predecessor state) during World War I."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceZanotti, Jim2012-02-02
-
Palestinian Initiatives for 2011 at the United Nations [October 24, 2011]"Many Members of Congress are actively interested in the question of possible U.N. action on Palestinian statehood. Congress could try to influence U.S. policy and the choices of other actors through the authorization and appropriation of foreign assistance to the Palestinians, the United Nations, and Israel and through oversight of the Obama Administration's diplomatic efforts. Changes to aid levels may depend on congressional views of how maintaining or changing aid levels could affect U.S. leverage and credibility in future regional and global contexts. [...] This report provides information on the U.N. framework and process for options being discussed, including overviews of the following topics: the United Nations and recognition of states, observer status in the United Nations, and the criteria and process for United Nations membership. The report also analyzes the prospects for avoiding further U.N. action by reaching an Israel-PLO (Palestine Liberation Organization) agreement to resume negotiations, as well as the possibility of a compromise U.N. resolution that could set forth parameters for future Israeli-Palestinian negotiations but stop short of addressing the question of Palestinian statehood beyond expressing aspirations. It is difficult to predict the potential future implications of U.N. action on Palestinian statehood. Some observers speculate that tightened Israeli security with respect to the West Bank and Gaza and popular unrest or civil disobedience among Palestinians could ensue, depending on various scenarios."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceZanotti, Jim; Browne, Marjorie Ann2011-10-24
-
Somalia: Current Conditions and Prospects for a Lasting Peace [August 30, 2011]"In October 2002, the Inter-Governmental Authority for Development (IGAD) launched a peace process designed to end factional fighting in Somalia, led by the government of Kenya. In September 2003, the parties agreed on a Transitional National Charter (TNC). In August 2004, a 275-member Transitional Parliament was inaugurated in Kenya. In October 2004, parliament elected Abdullahi Yusuf Ahmed as the new president of Somalia. In June 2006, the forces of the Islamic Courts Union (ICU) took control of the capital, Mogadishu. During the six-month rule by the ICU, Mogadishu became relatively peaceful, but efforts to bring peace did not lead to a major breakthrough. On December 28, 2006, Ethiopian troops captured Mogadishu with little resistance from the ICU. The Ethiopian intervention led to more chaos and instability in Somalia. In January 2007, the Transitional Federal Government (TFG) came to the capital, Mogadishu, from Baidoa after the ouster of the ICU. Humanitarian, political, and security conditions continue to deteriorate across south-central Somalia. In the past two years, more than 22,000 civilians have been killed, an estimated 1.1 million people displaced, and 476,000 Somalis have fled to neighboring countries. In 2008, fighting between insurgent groups and Ethiopian-TFG forces intensified, and by late 2008, the TFG had lost control of most of south-central Somalia to insurgent groups. In January 2009, Ethiopian forces completed their withdrawal from Somalia. In late December 2008, President Yusuf resigned from office and left for Yemen."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceZanotti, Jim2011-08-30
-
Israel: Background and U.S. Relations [February 29, 2012]"Since Israel's founding in 1948, successive U.S. Presidents and many Members of Congress have demonstrated a commitment to Israel's security and to maintaining close U.S.-Israel defense, diplomatic, and economic cooperation. U.S. and Israeli leaders have pursued common security goals and have developed close relations based on common perceptions of shared democratic values and religious affinities. U.S. policymakers often seek to determine how regional events and U.S. policy choices may affect Israel's security, and Congress provides active oversight of the executive branch's dealings with Israel and the broader Middle East. Some Members of Congress and some analysts criticize what they perceive as insufficiently critical support of Israel. Other than Afghanistan, Israel is the leading recipient of U.S. foreign aid and is a frequent purchaser of major U.S. weapons systems. The United States and Israel maintain close security cooperation-- predicated on a U.S. commitment to maintain Israel's 'qualitative military edge' over other countries in its region. […] Israel's perceptions of security around its borders have changed since early 2011 as several surrounding Arab countries--including Egypt and Syria--have experienced political upheaval or transition. […] Israel perceives threats from Iran and from Iranian-sponsored non-state actors such as the Lebanese Shiite group Hezbollah, as well as Hamas and other Sunni Islamist Palestinian militants in Gaza. […] Recent regional developments and Israeli reactions to them have reinforced the political impasse between Israel and the Palestinians on core issues in their longstanding conflict, calling into question the land-for-peace formula that has guided years of efforts to resolve the Israeli- Palestinian conflict. […] Despite its unstable regional environment, Israel has developed a robust diversified market economy and a vibrant parliamentary democracy. Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and his Likud Party lead a coalition that is unusually stable relative to recent Israeli governments. […] Israel's political and social debates are being shaped in new ways by population increases within ultra-Orthodox and Russian-speaking communities and among Israel's Arab citizens and Jews of non-European descent." This report also includes a map and various tables.Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceZanotti, Jim2012-02-29
-
Israel: Possible Military Strike Against Iran's Nuclear Facilities [March 28, 2012]"Several published reports indicate that top Israeli decisionmakers now are seriously considering whether to order a military strike on Iran's nuclear facilities, and if so, when. Twice in Israel's history, it has conducted air strikes aimed at halting or delaying what Israeli policymakers believed to be efforts to acquire nuclear weapons by a Middle Eastern state--destroying Iraq's Osirak reactor in 1981 and a facility the Israelis identified as a reactor under construction in Syria in 2007. Today, Israeli officials generally view the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran as an unacceptable threat to Israeli security--with some viewing it as an existential threat. This report analyzes key factors that may influence current Israeli political decisions relating to a possible strike on Iranian nuclear facilities. These include, but are not limited to, the views of and relationships among Israeli leaders; the views of the Israeli public; U.S., regional, and international stances and responses as perceived and anticipated by Israel; Israeli estimates of the potential effectiveness and risks of a possible strike; and responses Israeli leaders anticipate from Iran and Iranian-allied actors--including Hezbollah and Hamas--regionally and internationally."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceZanotti, Jim; Katzman, Kenneth; Gertler, Jeremiah2012-03-28
-
U.S. Foreign Aid to the Palestinians [April 4, 2012]"Since the establishment of limited Palestinian self-rule in the West Bank and Gaza Strip in the mid-1990s, the U.S. government has committed over $4 billion in bilateral assistance to the Palestinians, who are among the world's largest per capita recipients of international foreign aid. Successive Administrations have requested aid for the Palestinians to support at least three major U.S. policy priorities of interest to Congress: 1) Combating, neutralizing, and preventing terrorism against Israel from the Islamist group Hamas and other militant organizations. 2) Creating a virtuous cycle of stability and prosperity in the West Bank that inclines Palestinians--including those in the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip-- toward peaceful coexistence with Israel and prepares them for self-governance. 3) Meeting humanitarian needs and preventing further destabilization, particularly in the Gaza Strip. […] Additionally, the United States is the largest single-state donor to the U.N. [United Nations] Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA). However, whether UNRWA's role is beneficial remains a polarizing question, particularly with respect to its presence in Hamas-controlled Gaza. Because of congressional concerns that, among other things, funds might be diverted to Palestinian terrorist groups, U.S. aid is subject to a host of vetting and oversight requirements and legislative restrictions. U.S. assistance to the Palestinians is given alongside assistance from other international donors, and U.S. policymakers routinely call for greater or more timely assistance from Arab governments in line with their pledges. Even if the immediate objectives of U.S. assistance programs for the Palestinians are met, lack of progress toward a politically legitimate and peaceful two-state solution could undermine the utility of U.S. aid in helping the Palestinians become more cohesive, stable, and self-reliant over the long term."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceZanotti, Jim2012-04-04
-
U.S. Foreign Aid to the Palestinians [August 29, 2011]"Since the establishment of limited Palestinian self-rule in the West Bank and Gaza Strip in the mid-1990s, the U.S. government has committed over $4 billion in bilateral assistance to the Palestinians, who are among the world's largest per capita recipients of international foreign aid. [...] Since June 2007, these U.S. policy priorities have crystallized around the factional and geographical split between the Fatah-led Palestinian Authority (PA) in the West Bank and Hamas in the Gaza Strip. A May 2011 power-sharing agreement between Fatah and Hamas has raised concerns among some Members of Congress about continuing U.S. budgetary and security assistance to a PA government that could be subject to the approval of a U.S.-designated Foreign Terrorist Organization (Hamas) that claims to reserve the right to violently oppose Israel's existence. Prospects for implementation of the power-sharing agreement remain unclear. Some observers question the extent to which Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza are likely to integrate their political decision making and security practices, and also question the credibility of the one-year timeline put forward for PA presidential and legislative elections. Furthermore, some U.S. lawmakers have raised the possibility that U.S. aid to the PA could be affected by Palestinian efforts to seek international recognition of Palestinian statehood outside of negotiations with Israel, particularly at the United Nations in the fall of 2011. [...] Because of congressional concerns that, among other things, funds might be diverted to Palestinian terrorist groups, U.S. aid is subject to a host of vetting and oversight requirements and legislative restrictions. U.S. assistance to the Palestinians is given alongside assistance from other international donors, and U.S. policymakers routinely call for greater or more timely assistance from Arab governments in line with their pledges."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceZanotti, Jim2011-08-29
-
U.S. Foreign Aid to the Palestinians [June 15, 2012]"U.S. aid to the Palestinians is intended to promote at least three major U.S. policy priorities of interest to Congress: 1) Combating, neutralizing, and preventing terrorism against Israel from the Islamist group Hamas and other militant organizations. 2) Creating a virtuous cycle of stability and prosperity in the West Bank that inclines Palestinians-including those in the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip- toward peaceful coexistence with Israel and prepares them for self-governance. 3) Meeting humanitarian needs and preventing further destabilization, particularly in the Gaza Strip."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceZanotti, Jim2012-06-15
-
Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress [December 2, 2010]"This report and its appendixes provide background information on Hamas, or the Islamic Resistance Movement, and U.S. policy towards it. It also includes information and analysis on (1) the threats Hamas currently poses to U.S. interests, (2) how Hamas compares with other Middle East terrorist groups, (3) Hamas's ideology and policies (both generally and on discrete issues), (4) its leadership and organization, and (5) its sources of assistance. Finally, the report raises and discusses various legislative and oversight options related to foreign aid strategies, financial sanctions, and regional and international political approaches. In evaluating these options, Congress can assess how Hamas has emerged and adapted over time, and also scrutinize the track record of U.S., Israeli, and international policy to counter Hamas. Hamas is a Palestinian Islamist military and sociopolitical movement that grew out of the Muslim Brotherhood. The United States, Israel, the European Union, and Canada consider Hamas a terrorist organization because of (1) its violent resistance to what it deems Israeli occupation of historic Palestine (constituting present-day Israel, West Bank, and Gaza Strip), and (2) its rejection of the off-and-on peace process involving Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) since the early 1990s. Since Hamas's inception in 1987, it has maintained its primary base of political support and its military command in the Gaza Strip--a territory it has controlled since June 2007--while also having a significant presence in the West Bank. The movement's political leadership is currently headquartered in exile in Damascus, Syria. Hamas receives assistance and training from Iran, Syria, and the Lebanese Shiite militant group Hezbollah."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceZanotti, Jim2010-12-02
-
Israel and the Palestinians: Prospects for a Two-State Solution [December 10, 2008]"One year after the formal renewal of direct talks at the November 2007 Annapolis Conference, Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) have been unable to come to terms on a final-status peace agreement, despite possible signs of progress. Differences between the two sides continue over core issues such as borders, security, settlements, the status of Jerusalem, refugees, and water rights, despite their mutual acceptance of the concept of a negotiated 'two-state solution' that would establish a Palestinian state alongside Israel in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip pursuant to the principle of 'land for peace.' Previously when talks have faltered, the parties eventually returned to the negotiating table. Yet, there are a growing number of key actors and observers expressing doubts that the very concept of a negotiated two-state solution can survive a process in which talks are put on hold and resumed an indefinite number of times without finality. Some observers dismiss these doubts as mere tactics meant to prod either or both parties to action. Prospects for a two-state solution appear more tenuous given uncertainties that a consensus supporting the peace process will hold in the face of upcoming leadership transitions in the United States and Israel and conflicting claims to Palestinian leadership."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceZanotti, Jim2008-12-10
-
U.S. Foreign Aid to the Palestinians [October 8, 2008]"U.S. aid to the Palestinians has fluctuated considerably over the past three years, largely due to Hamas's changing role within the Palestinian Authority (PA). After Hamas led the PA government for over a year, its forcible takeover of the Gaza Strip in June 2007 led to the creation of a non-Hamas government in the West Bank. Since then, the U.S. has dramatically boosted aid levels to bolster the PA and President Mahmoud Abbas vis-à-vis Hamas. In FY2008, Congress appropriated a total of $414.5 million in bilateral assistance to the Palestinians, the largest single year appropriation ever for the Palestinians. Because of congressional concerns that, among other things, U.S. funds might be diverted to Palestinian terrorist groups, much of this assistance is subject to legislative restrictions. For FY2009, an additional $200 million have already been appropriated for the Palestinians (with another $100 million requested by the Bush Administration). Experts advise that PA stability hinges on, now more than ever, improved security, economic development, Israeli cooperation, and the continuation of high levels of foreign assistance. This report will be updated as events warrant."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceZanotti, Jim2008-10-10
-
Turkey: Background and U.S. Relations [June 21, 2013]"As global challenges to U.S. interests have changed over time, U.S. relations with Turkey--an important ally since the Cold War era--have evolved. Congress appropriates relatively small amounts of military and security assistance for Turkey compared with past sums, but still plays an active role in shaping and overseeing U.S. relations with Turkey. Several Turkish domestic and foreign policy issues have significant relevance for U.S. interests. U.S. policymakers are closely observing the domestic unrest that began in late May 2013 and spread across Turkey in June to determine how it may impact U.S. interests (see 'June 2013 Protests and Their Implications' below). Gauging how U.S. and Turkish interests coincide has become increasingly complicated and dynamic."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceZanotti, Jim2013-06-21
-
Libya: Background and U.S. Relations [February 18, 2011]"Major anti-government protests broke out in Libya on February 15 and have since intensified, eliciting violent government responses. The demonstrations are in opposition to the 42-year regime of Libya's leader, Muammar al Qadhafi. As of February 18, some sources have reported that opposition forces have taken over areas of Benghazi, Libya's second-largest city, and its surroundings in Libya's northeastern Mediterranean region of Cyrenaica. […] Current U.S. policy concerns, in addition to those linked with the ongoing unrest, include ensuring Libya's positive contribution to the security and economic prosperity of North Africa and the Sahel, securing commercial opportunities in Libya for U.S. firms, and addressing persistent human rights issues. The Obama Administration is requesting $875,000 in FY2011 foreign assistance funding for Libya programs. This report provides background information on Libya and U.S.-Libyan relations; discusses Libya's political and economic reform efforts; and reviews current issues of potential congressional interest."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceBlanchard, Christopher M.; Zanotti, Jim2011-02-18
-
Israel: Background and U.S. Relations [July 22, 2014]"The initial section of this report provides ongoing information and analysis on the July 2014 Israel-Gaza conflict. Since Israel's founding in 1948, successive U.S. Presidents and many Members of Congress have demonstrated a commitment to Israel's security and to maintaining close U.S.-Israel defense, diplomatic, and economic cooperation. U.S. and Israeli leaders have developed close relations based on common perceptions of shared democratic values and religious affinities. U.S. policy makers often seek to determine how events and U.S. policy choices in the Middle East may affect Israel's security, and Congress provides active oversight of executive branch dealings with Israel and other actors in the region. Some Members of Congress and some analysts criticize what they perceive as U.S. support for Israel without sufficient scrutiny of its actions or their implications for U.S. interests. Israel is a leading recipient of U.S. foreign aid and is a frequent purchaser of major U.S. weapons systems. The United States and Israel maintain close security cooperation-- predicated on a U.S. commitment and legal requirement to maintain Israel's 'qualitative military edge' over other countries in its region. The two countries signed a free trade agreement in 1985, and the United States is Israel's largest trading partner. For more information, see CRS [Congressional Research Service] Report RL33222, 'U.S. Foreign Aid to Israel,' by Jeremy M. Sharp."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceZanotti, Jim2014-07-22