The start of the twenty-first century saw many changes in the way war was being conducted. Alongs... more The start of the twenty-first century saw many changes in the way war was being conducted. Alongside war at sea, in the air, and on land, there is now psychological warfare (referred to as psywar), which has proven to be an extremely powerful military dimension. The power of psychological warfare is a result of the revolution in information and communication in the first years of the current century: the Internet, instant global communications, smartphones, and social media. All these channels have become arenas for warfare and powerful influencers on leaders, militaries, and entire populations. Historically, democracies have been reticent about employing psychological warfare for a number of reasons, but in recent years, they have been unable to ignore its existence and have increasingly been making use of it. However, in contrast with other forms of warfare for which there are international ethical rules, there is no ethical regulation of psychological warfare. This article assesses the challenges and dilemmas facing democratic countries in their use of psychological warfare and for the first time offers proposals for ethical rules toward that end by way of an Israeli test case: the long-term use of psychological warfare by the Israel Defense Forces.
ATHENS JOURNAL OF MASS MEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS, 2021
The terms perestroika (literally, "transformation") and glasnost (literally, "tran... more The terms perestroika (literally, "transformation") and glasnost (literally, "transparency ") refer to the social change that took place in the Soviet Union in the late 1980s. Then USSR leader, the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU, Mikhail Gorbachev, introduced perestroika as a necessary action to improve the nation’s economy and its international relations. Glasnost was meant to promote effective discussions regarding the country’s existing problems and shortcomings. However, only a few years following their instatement, both processes did not improve the sociopolitical situation. On the contrary, they led to the country’s collapse. This article seeks to answer why gracious intentions, meant to actualize the hopes and dreams of the Soviet people, eventually resulted in tremendously difficult times. Special attention is paid to the role of the Soviet media, which became a catalyst for many social problems. The authors raise the issue of the ...
Abstract Troops with special skills have typically played strategic and tactical roles as valuabl... more Abstract Troops with special skills have typically played strategic and tactical roles as valuable components of conventional military organizations. The start of World War II marked a change, wherein special forces (SF, as they were referred to in Britain, and special operational forces [SOF] in the United States) were separated and played roles distinct from conventional military forces. Recently, Finlan (2019) advanced the notion that since the start of World War II, three unique, punctuated ages of SOF have existed, reflecting various political-military needs and realities. First-age SOF were largely restricted to operations behind enemy lines, aiding the conventional forces. Second-age SOF fought in proxy wars, with and against guerrilla forces, and engaged in aiding political ends when nuclear realities rendered direct military confrontations between world powers too risky to contemplate. The advent of extremist ideology-related terrorism initiated a rethinking of the role of SOF and their initial mobilization to combat this growing threat. Third-age SOF became invaluable in the global fight against terrorism. This paper advances this theory by further delineating differences between the three ages and providing in-depth evidence supporting the soundness of the construct.
We are also thankful to TÜBİTAK (The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey), wh... more We are also thankful to TÜBİTAK (The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey), which provided funding to support the conference and the ensuing proceeding publications. This proceeding book represents a selection of papers from the conference the conference. We would also like to thank all participants of the conference, whose presentations and discussions played a crucial role in shaping the structure of this proceeding book. We would like to especially thank the following scholars for their contribution to this proceeding
ABSTRACT The content of mass information in any society is closely linked to the patterns of its ... more ABSTRACT The content of mass information in any society is closely linked to the patterns of its political development. A typical example of this concerns the modern Russian media, which have been influenced particularly by their embeddedness with the authorities. Indeed, the Russian media have served as the mouthpiece of the country’s political leaders, and this fact has left a significant imprint on media coverage. To understand the symbiotic relationship between Russian political leaders and media, this article focuses on the Syrian Civil War, which is currently one of the most important issues on the international political agenda. The Russian government’s role in the conflict over the last several years has affected the Russian media’s tremendous interest in this topic. Nonetheless, Moscow’s participation in the war was determined uniquely by how the communication sphere related the conflict to its audience so that its involvement in the Syrian imbroglio was not an objective reflection of reality. Guided by the political interests of the authorities, the Russian media created an emotionally oriented story, which intended to advance an extremely positive interpretation of Russia’s role in this conflict in the minds of the audience. Therefore, in terms of propaganda, these media acted not as “pure” promoters of the state’s will, but rather as its “interpreters.” This study highlights how leading Russian publications approach this agenda and the consequences this fact has for the Kremlin’s political priorities. The authors come to a definite conclusion regarding Russian media’s unconditional dependence on the political priorities of modern Russian society. It was crucial for the Kremlin that the media present a positive view of Moscow’s involvement in the conflict given that Russia’s military presence in Syria caused a very controversial reaction throughout the world and led to increased tensions and contentious disputation between Russia and many Western countries. Therefore, the Kremlin needed to justify its policies and did so through manipulating the Russian public by means of a large-scale propaganda campaign conducted through the Russian media. This phenomenon is pivotal to understand not only the case of Russia’s involvement in Syria but also contemporary international media development.
ABSTRACT There is really no significant difference between the various forms of mass persuasion m... more ABSTRACT There is really no significant difference between the various forms of mass persuasion methods, though the terminology used may vary. Analyzing basic elements of political marketing and psychological operations (PSYOP)—beyond the basics of audience/message/channel—shows a similarity of techniques and procedures. An analysis of the PSYOP campaign of the Islamic organization Hamas against Israel in the past decade demonstrates that there is a striking similarity between political marketing and PSYOP (formerly known as “propaganda”). This is not mere theoretical hairsplitting; it is an important understanding that democracies should pay careful attention to when they contemplate their survival strategies.
The present special issue aims to raise questions about intellectuals, those members of society w... more The present special issue aims to raise questions about intellectuals, those members of society who are typically expected to engage in fruitful questioning of social mores.
A key contribution of 18th-century Enlightenment thought to modern culture was the special status associated with a university degree. The mode of thinking which corresponds to this development is still prevalent today. A university alumna holding a degree in the humanities—and, historically beginning at a somewhat later date, also one holding a degree in the social sciences—automatically achieves the halo of a gatekeeper in our society. Yet at the same time, in our era, political violence also draws considerable support from influential intellectuals. Intellectuals in the last three centuries have in different ways expressed their support for political violence, even identifying with it ideologically and emotionally. Intellectuals have even provided the perpetrators of violence with a legitimacy of sorts at different junctures, while the perpetrators of violence themselves have in turn cited humanistic values to advance their perverted worldviews and to obtain a grounding for them.
The present issue's main goal is to point toward a general approach to the question of why violence and terror hold such a powerful appeal for intellectuals. As the reader will see, the volume's contributors indeed suggest a variety of explanations for this phenomenon.
The claim has become commonplace that every theoretical argument must be verified, even deconstructed. Performing this work is part of what defines the role of intellectuals. Even so, we are not always ready to embrace the notion that the very bases of deconstruction themselves must be deconstructed. Very rarely have representatives of the intellectual elite who endorsed or justified acts of terror themselves actually reached the point where they viewed their own ideas critically, or where they went so far as to condemn their own former attitudes (among the few intellectuals who did do this are George Orwell and Arthur Koestler, 1 as well as other disillusioned communists of the early 1950s).
Reality is fast-changing, while conceptions change slowly, if at all. When the proponents of an ideology are confronted with a situation that negates their views, there is usually a short silence, after which the discussion continues in terms virtually unchanged. In our opinion, behind the theoretical discussions on topics relating to philosophy, society, and the state, there is a layer of myths and utopian thinking settled deep within the subconscious, which issue forth in the form of novel ideas.
here is really no significant difference between the various forms of mass persuasion methods, th... more here is really no significant difference between the various forms of mass persuasion methods, though the terminology used may vary. Analyzing basic elements of political marketing and psychological operations (PSYOP)—beyond the basics of audience/message/channel—shows a similarity of techniques and procedures. An analysis of the PSYOP campaign of the Islamic organization Hamas against Israel in the past decade demonstrates that there is a striking similarity between political marketing and PSYOP (formerly known as “propaganda”). This is not mere theoretical hairsplitting; it is an important understanding that democracies should pay careful attention to when they contemplate their survival strategies.
The content of mass information in any society is closely linked to the patterns of its political... more The content of mass information in any society is closely linked to the patterns of its political development. A typical example of this concerns the modern Russian media, which have been influenced particularly by their embeddedness with the authorities. Indeed, the Russian media have served as the mouthpiece of the country’s political leaders, and this fact has left a significant imprint on media coverage. To understand the symbiotic relationship between Russian political leaders and media, this article focuses on the Syrian Civil War, which is currently one of the most important issues on the international political agenda. The Russian government’s role in the conflict over the last several years has affected the Russian media’s tremendous interest in this topic. Nonetheless, Moscow’s participation in the war was determined uniquely by how the communication sphere related the conflict to its audience so that its involvement in the Syrian imbroglio was not an objective reflection of reality. Guided by the political interests of the authorities, the Russian media created an emotionally oriented story, which intended to advance an extremely positive interpretation of Russia’s role in this conflict in the minds of the audience. Therefore, in terms of propaganda, these media acted not as “pure” promoters of the state’s will, but rather as its “interpreters.” This study highlights how leading Russian publications approach this agenda and the consequences this fact has for the Kremlin’s political priorities. The authors come to a definite conclusion regarding Russian media’s unconditional dependence on the political priorities of modern Russian society. It was crucial for the Kremlin that the media present a positive view of Moscow’s involvement in the conflict given that Russia’s military presence in Syria caused a very controversial reaction throughout the world and led to increased tensions and contentious disputation between Russia and many Western countries. Therefore, the Kremlin needed to justify its policies and did so through manipulating the Russian public by means of a large-scale propaganda campaign conducted through the Russian media. This phenomenon is pivotal to understand not only the case of Russia’s involvement in Syria but also contemporary international media development.
The Middle East is one of the ‘unreliable links’ in the international security system. This becam... more The Middle East is one of the ‘unreliable links’ in the international security system. This became apparent once Iran began developing its nuclear program decades ago, and in recent years, the program has reinforced the challenges to international security. The steps taken by the UN and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) as well as US sanctions have not yet achieved positive results. Although Russia formally supported these sanctions, its political interests and attitude to Iran differ significantly from that of the United States and its allies. Russia seeks to consolidate its position in the region, challenging American policies. This article investigates political contradictions regarding the implementation of Iran’s nuclear strategy and observes the position of the Russian print media as a source of information. Despite the active development of online news in Russia, print media continue serving as a popular information source in the country. This holds especially true for local officials, who are responsible for making government decisions, thus determining our increased interest in these forms of media. The Russian press, when covering the ‘Iranian nuclear issue,’ do not serve as unbiased sources of information, but suggest propaganda influence, albeit flavored with thorough knowledge of the political situation.
Relations between Russia and Israel seem to be better than ever. In recent years, the two countri... more Relations between Russia and Israel seem to be better than ever. In recent years, the two countries have signed twenty intergovernmental agreements. The legal framework for their cooperation is improving, and bilateral ties are visible in many new fields of activity.1 In his speech at the annual conference of the Israeli charitable foundation Keren HaYesod in 2019, Russian President Vladimir Putin noted that the relationship between Russia and Israel had reached its most dynamic stage ever, thanks to a “constructive dialogue.”2 In turn, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu claimed that the relations between Israel and Russia were “remarkable.”3 On the eve of a meeting in Jerusalem of representatives of Russia, the United States, and Israel on security issues, he further stressed that Jerusalem highly values good relations with Moscow.4
Over the past ten years, Netanyahu has made more official visits to Moscow than his predecessors, as well as most other foreign leaders. In January 2020, when Putin participated in the unveiling of a monument in Jerusalem honoring the heroes of besieged Leningrad, he thanked Israel for preserving the memory of the war and of the accomplishments of the Soviet people.5
The commission of inquiry into the events of military engagement in Lebanon in 2006 asserted that... more The commission of inquiry into the events of military engagement in Lebanon in 2006 asserted that Israeli special forces were improperly deployed during the Second Lebanon War. In this article, Yair Ansbacher and Ron Schleifer explore why the Israeli special operations forces’ (SOF) contribution to campaigns have been marginal, using the 2003 US deployment of SOF in Iraq as a point of comparison. They aim to identify and define the most effective deployment modes of modern SOF in war, and explain the changes that Israeli SOF must undergo to enhance future performance.
The Russian media frequently wrote about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (1996–99, 2009... more The Russian media frequently wrote about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (1996–99, 2009–21), analysing his role in Middle Eastern affairs, especially with regard to Palestinian-Israeli relations, the Syrian civil war, and the Iranian nuclear programme. Examining Netanyahu’s image in the Russian press is crucial not only for understanding the political priorities of twenty-first-century Russian media but also for investigating Moscow’s role in international politics given its keen interest in the Middle East.
Troops with special skills have typically played strategic and tactical roles as valuable compone... more Troops with special skills have typically played strategic and tactical roles as valuable components of conventional military organizations. The start of World War II marked a change, wherein special forces (SF, as they were referred to in Britain, and special operational forces [SOF] in the United States) were separated and played roles distinct from conventional military forces. Recently, Finlan (2019) advanced the notion that since the start of World War II, three unique, punctuated ages of SOF have existed, reflecting various political-military needs and realities. First-age SOF were largely restricted to operations behind enemy lines, aiding the conventional forces. Second-age SOF fought in proxy wars, with and against guerrilla forces, and engaged in aiding political ends when nuclear realities rendered direct military confrontations between world powers too risky to contemplate. The advent of extremist ideology-related terrorism initiated a rethinking of the role of SOF and their initial mobilization to combat this growing threat. Third-age SOF became invaluable in the global fight against terrorism. This paper advances this theory by further delineating differences between the three ages and providing in-depth evidence supporting the soundness of the construct.
The start of the twenty-first century saw many changes in the way war was being conducted. Alongs... more The start of the twenty-first century saw many changes in the way war was being conducted. Alongside war at sea, in the air, and on land, there is now psychological warfare (referred to as psywar), which has proven to be an extremely powerful military dimension. The power of psychological warfare is a result of the revolution in information and communication in the first years of the current century: the Internet, instant global communications, smartphones, and social media. All these channels have become arenas for warfare and powerful influencers on leaders, militaries, and entire populations. Historically, democracies have been reticent about employing psychological warfare for a number of reasons, but in recent years, they have been unable to ignore its existence and have increasingly been making use of it. However, in contrast with other forms of warfare for which there are international ethical rules, there is no ethical regulation of psychological warfare. This article assesses the challenges and dilemmas facing democratic countries in their use of psychological warfare and for the first time offers proposals for ethical rules toward that end by way of an Israeli test case: the long-term use of psychological warfare by the Israel Defense Forces.
ATHENS JOURNAL OF MASS MEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS, 2021
The terms perestroika (literally, "transformation") and glasnost (literally, "tran... more The terms perestroika (literally, "transformation") and glasnost (literally, "transparency ") refer to the social change that took place in the Soviet Union in the late 1980s. Then USSR leader, the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU, Mikhail Gorbachev, introduced perestroika as a necessary action to improve the nation’s economy and its international relations. Glasnost was meant to promote effective discussions regarding the country’s existing problems and shortcomings. However, only a few years following their instatement, both processes did not improve the sociopolitical situation. On the contrary, they led to the country’s collapse. This article seeks to answer why gracious intentions, meant to actualize the hopes and dreams of the Soviet people, eventually resulted in tremendously difficult times. Special attention is paid to the role of the Soviet media, which became a catalyst for many social problems. The authors raise the issue of the ...
Abstract Troops with special skills have typically played strategic and tactical roles as valuabl... more Abstract Troops with special skills have typically played strategic and tactical roles as valuable components of conventional military organizations. The start of World War II marked a change, wherein special forces (SF, as they were referred to in Britain, and special operational forces [SOF] in the United States) were separated and played roles distinct from conventional military forces. Recently, Finlan (2019) advanced the notion that since the start of World War II, three unique, punctuated ages of SOF have existed, reflecting various political-military needs and realities. First-age SOF were largely restricted to operations behind enemy lines, aiding the conventional forces. Second-age SOF fought in proxy wars, with and against guerrilla forces, and engaged in aiding political ends when nuclear realities rendered direct military confrontations between world powers too risky to contemplate. The advent of extremist ideology-related terrorism initiated a rethinking of the role of SOF and their initial mobilization to combat this growing threat. Third-age SOF became invaluable in the global fight against terrorism. This paper advances this theory by further delineating differences between the three ages and providing in-depth evidence supporting the soundness of the construct.
We are also thankful to TÜBİTAK (The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey), wh... more We are also thankful to TÜBİTAK (The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey), which provided funding to support the conference and the ensuing proceeding publications. This proceeding book represents a selection of papers from the conference the conference. We would also like to thank all participants of the conference, whose presentations and discussions played a crucial role in shaping the structure of this proceeding book. We would like to especially thank the following scholars for their contribution to this proceeding
ABSTRACT The content of mass information in any society is closely linked to the patterns of its ... more ABSTRACT The content of mass information in any society is closely linked to the patterns of its political development. A typical example of this concerns the modern Russian media, which have been influenced particularly by their embeddedness with the authorities. Indeed, the Russian media have served as the mouthpiece of the country’s political leaders, and this fact has left a significant imprint on media coverage. To understand the symbiotic relationship between Russian political leaders and media, this article focuses on the Syrian Civil War, which is currently one of the most important issues on the international political agenda. The Russian government’s role in the conflict over the last several years has affected the Russian media’s tremendous interest in this topic. Nonetheless, Moscow’s participation in the war was determined uniquely by how the communication sphere related the conflict to its audience so that its involvement in the Syrian imbroglio was not an objective reflection of reality. Guided by the political interests of the authorities, the Russian media created an emotionally oriented story, which intended to advance an extremely positive interpretation of Russia’s role in this conflict in the minds of the audience. Therefore, in terms of propaganda, these media acted not as “pure” promoters of the state’s will, but rather as its “interpreters.” This study highlights how leading Russian publications approach this agenda and the consequences this fact has for the Kremlin’s political priorities. The authors come to a definite conclusion regarding Russian media’s unconditional dependence on the political priorities of modern Russian society. It was crucial for the Kremlin that the media present a positive view of Moscow’s involvement in the conflict given that Russia’s military presence in Syria caused a very controversial reaction throughout the world and led to increased tensions and contentious disputation between Russia and many Western countries. Therefore, the Kremlin needed to justify its policies and did so through manipulating the Russian public by means of a large-scale propaganda campaign conducted through the Russian media. This phenomenon is pivotal to understand not only the case of Russia’s involvement in Syria but also contemporary international media development.
ABSTRACT There is really no significant difference between the various forms of mass persuasion m... more ABSTRACT There is really no significant difference between the various forms of mass persuasion methods, though the terminology used may vary. Analyzing basic elements of political marketing and psychological operations (PSYOP)—beyond the basics of audience/message/channel—shows a similarity of techniques and procedures. An analysis of the PSYOP campaign of the Islamic organization Hamas against Israel in the past decade demonstrates that there is a striking similarity between political marketing and PSYOP (formerly known as “propaganda”). This is not mere theoretical hairsplitting; it is an important understanding that democracies should pay careful attention to when they contemplate their survival strategies.
The present special issue aims to raise questions about intellectuals, those members of society w... more The present special issue aims to raise questions about intellectuals, those members of society who are typically expected to engage in fruitful questioning of social mores.
A key contribution of 18th-century Enlightenment thought to modern culture was the special status associated with a university degree. The mode of thinking which corresponds to this development is still prevalent today. A university alumna holding a degree in the humanities—and, historically beginning at a somewhat later date, also one holding a degree in the social sciences—automatically achieves the halo of a gatekeeper in our society. Yet at the same time, in our era, political violence also draws considerable support from influential intellectuals. Intellectuals in the last three centuries have in different ways expressed their support for political violence, even identifying with it ideologically and emotionally. Intellectuals have even provided the perpetrators of violence with a legitimacy of sorts at different junctures, while the perpetrators of violence themselves have in turn cited humanistic values to advance their perverted worldviews and to obtain a grounding for them.
The present issue's main goal is to point toward a general approach to the question of why violence and terror hold such a powerful appeal for intellectuals. As the reader will see, the volume's contributors indeed suggest a variety of explanations for this phenomenon.
The claim has become commonplace that every theoretical argument must be verified, even deconstructed. Performing this work is part of what defines the role of intellectuals. Even so, we are not always ready to embrace the notion that the very bases of deconstruction themselves must be deconstructed. Very rarely have representatives of the intellectual elite who endorsed or justified acts of terror themselves actually reached the point where they viewed their own ideas critically, or where they went so far as to condemn their own former attitudes (among the few intellectuals who did do this are George Orwell and Arthur Koestler, 1 as well as other disillusioned communists of the early 1950s).
Reality is fast-changing, while conceptions change slowly, if at all. When the proponents of an ideology are confronted with a situation that negates their views, there is usually a short silence, after which the discussion continues in terms virtually unchanged. In our opinion, behind the theoretical discussions on topics relating to philosophy, society, and the state, there is a layer of myths and utopian thinking settled deep within the subconscious, which issue forth in the form of novel ideas.
here is really no significant difference between the various forms of mass persuasion methods, th... more here is really no significant difference between the various forms of mass persuasion methods, though the terminology used may vary. Analyzing basic elements of political marketing and psychological operations (PSYOP)—beyond the basics of audience/message/channel—shows a similarity of techniques and procedures. An analysis of the PSYOP campaign of the Islamic organization Hamas against Israel in the past decade demonstrates that there is a striking similarity between political marketing and PSYOP (formerly known as “propaganda”). This is not mere theoretical hairsplitting; it is an important understanding that democracies should pay careful attention to when they contemplate their survival strategies.
The content of mass information in any society is closely linked to the patterns of its political... more The content of mass information in any society is closely linked to the patterns of its political development. A typical example of this concerns the modern Russian media, which have been influenced particularly by their embeddedness with the authorities. Indeed, the Russian media have served as the mouthpiece of the country’s political leaders, and this fact has left a significant imprint on media coverage. To understand the symbiotic relationship between Russian political leaders and media, this article focuses on the Syrian Civil War, which is currently one of the most important issues on the international political agenda. The Russian government’s role in the conflict over the last several years has affected the Russian media’s tremendous interest in this topic. Nonetheless, Moscow’s participation in the war was determined uniquely by how the communication sphere related the conflict to its audience so that its involvement in the Syrian imbroglio was not an objective reflection of reality. Guided by the political interests of the authorities, the Russian media created an emotionally oriented story, which intended to advance an extremely positive interpretation of Russia’s role in this conflict in the minds of the audience. Therefore, in terms of propaganda, these media acted not as “pure” promoters of the state’s will, but rather as its “interpreters.” This study highlights how leading Russian publications approach this agenda and the consequences this fact has for the Kremlin’s political priorities. The authors come to a definite conclusion regarding Russian media’s unconditional dependence on the political priorities of modern Russian society. It was crucial for the Kremlin that the media present a positive view of Moscow’s involvement in the conflict given that Russia’s military presence in Syria caused a very controversial reaction throughout the world and led to increased tensions and contentious disputation between Russia and many Western countries. Therefore, the Kremlin needed to justify its policies and did so through manipulating the Russian public by means of a large-scale propaganda campaign conducted through the Russian media. This phenomenon is pivotal to understand not only the case of Russia’s involvement in Syria but also contemporary international media development.
The Middle East is one of the ‘unreliable links’ in the international security system. This becam... more The Middle East is one of the ‘unreliable links’ in the international security system. This became apparent once Iran began developing its nuclear program decades ago, and in recent years, the program has reinforced the challenges to international security. The steps taken by the UN and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) as well as US sanctions have not yet achieved positive results. Although Russia formally supported these sanctions, its political interests and attitude to Iran differ significantly from that of the United States and its allies. Russia seeks to consolidate its position in the region, challenging American policies. This article investigates political contradictions regarding the implementation of Iran’s nuclear strategy and observes the position of the Russian print media as a source of information. Despite the active development of online news in Russia, print media continue serving as a popular information source in the country. This holds especially true for local officials, who are responsible for making government decisions, thus determining our increased interest in these forms of media. The Russian press, when covering the ‘Iranian nuclear issue,’ do not serve as unbiased sources of information, but suggest propaganda influence, albeit flavored with thorough knowledge of the political situation.
Relations between Russia and Israel seem to be better than ever. In recent years, the two countri... more Relations between Russia and Israel seem to be better than ever. In recent years, the two countries have signed twenty intergovernmental agreements. The legal framework for their cooperation is improving, and bilateral ties are visible in many new fields of activity.1 In his speech at the annual conference of the Israeli charitable foundation Keren HaYesod in 2019, Russian President Vladimir Putin noted that the relationship between Russia and Israel had reached its most dynamic stage ever, thanks to a “constructive dialogue.”2 In turn, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu claimed that the relations between Israel and Russia were “remarkable.”3 On the eve of a meeting in Jerusalem of representatives of Russia, the United States, and Israel on security issues, he further stressed that Jerusalem highly values good relations with Moscow.4
Over the past ten years, Netanyahu has made more official visits to Moscow than his predecessors, as well as most other foreign leaders. In January 2020, when Putin participated in the unveiling of a monument in Jerusalem honoring the heroes of besieged Leningrad, he thanked Israel for preserving the memory of the war and of the accomplishments of the Soviet people.5
The commission of inquiry into the events of military engagement in Lebanon in 2006 asserted that... more The commission of inquiry into the events of military engagement in Lebanon in 2006 asserted that Israeli special forces were improperly deployed during the Second Lebanon War. In this article, Yair Ansbacher and Ron Schleifer explore why the Israeli special operations forces’ (SOF) contribution to campaigns have been marginal, using the 2003 US deployment of SOF in Iraq as a point of comparison. They aim to identify and define the most effective deployment modes of modern SOF in war, and explain the changes that Israeli SOF must undergo to enhance future performance.
The Russian media frequently wrote about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (1996–99, 2009... more The Russian media frequently wrote about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (1996–99, 2009–21), analysing his role in Middle Eastern affairs, especially with regard to Palestinian-Israeli relations, the Syrian civil war, and the Iranian nuclear programme. Examining Netanyahu’s image in the Russian press is crucial not only for understanding the political priorities of twenty-first-century Russian media but also for investigating Moscow’s role in international politics given its keen interest in the Middle East.
Troops with special skills have typically played strategic and tactical roles as valuable compone... more Troops with special skills have typically played strategic and tactical roles as valuable components of conventional military organizations. The start of World War II marked a change, wherein special forces (SF, as they were referred to in Britain, and special operational forces [SOF] in the United States) were separated and played roles distinct from conventional military forces. Recently, Finlan (2019) advanced the notion that since the start of World War II, three unique, punctuated ages of SOF have existed, reflecting various political-military needs and realities. First-age SOF were largely restricted to operations behind enemy lines, aiding the conventional forces. Second-age SOF fought in proxy wars, with and against guerrilla forces, and engaged in aiding political ends when nuclear realities rendered direct military confrontations between world powers too risky to contemplate. The advent of extremist ideology-related terrorism initiated a rethinking of the role of SOF and their initial mobilization to combat this growing threat. Third-age SOF became invaluable in the global fight against terrorism. This paper advances this theory by further delineating differences between the three ages and providing in-depth evidence supporting the soundness of the construct.
Uploads
Papers by Ron Schleifer
A key contribution of 18th-century Enlightenment thought to modern culture was the special status associated with a university degree. The mode of thinking which corresponds to this development is still prevalent today. A university alumna holding a degree in the humanities—and, historically beginning at a somewhat later date, also one holding a degree in the social sciences—automatically achieves the halo of a gatekeeper in our society. Yet at the same time, in our era, political violence also draws considerable support from influential intellectuals. Intellectuals in the last three centuries have in different ways expressed their support for political violence, even identifying with it ideologically and emotionally. Intellectuals have even provided the perpetrators of violence with a legitimacy of sorts at different junctures, while the perpetrators of violence themselves have in turn cited humanistic values to advance their perverted worldviews and to obtain a grounding for them.
The present issue's main goal is to point toward a general approach to the question of why violence and terror hold such a powerful appeal for intellectuals. As the reader will see, the volume's contributors indeed suggest a variety of explanations for this phenomenon.
The claim has become commonplace that every theoretical argument must be verified, even deconstructed. Performing this work is part of what defines the role of intellectuals. Even so, we are not always ready to embrace the notion that the very bases of deconstruction themselves must be deconstructed. Very rarely have representatives of the intellectual elite who endorsed or justified acts of terror themselves actually reached the point where they viewed their own ideas critically, or where they went so far as to condemn their own former attitudes (among the few intellectuals who did do this are George Orwell and Arthur Koestler, 1 as well as other disillusioned communists of the early 1950s).
Reality is fast-changing, while conceptions change slowly, if at all. When the proponents of an ideology are confronted with a situation that negates their views, there is usually a short silence, after which the discussion continues in terms virtually unchanged. In our opinion, behind the theoretical discussions on topics relating to philosophy, society, and the state, there is a layer of myths and utopian thinking settled deep within the subconscious, which issue forth in the form of novel ideas.
KEYWORDS: hamasisraelpsychological warfarePSYOP
Over the past ten years, Netanyahu has made more official visits to Moscow than his predecessors, as well as most other foreign leaders. In January 2020, when Putin participated in the unveiling of a monument in Jerusalem honoring the heroes of besieged Leningrad, he thanked Israel for preserving the memory of the war and of the accomplishments of the Soviet people.5
A key contribution of 18th-century Enlightenment thought to modern culture was the special status associated with a university degree. The mode of thinking which corresponds to this development is still prevalent today. A university alumna holding a degree in the humanities—and, historically beginning at a somewhat later date, also one holding a degree in the social sciences—automatically achieves the halo of a gatekeeper in our society. Yet at the same time, in our era, political violence also draws considerable support from influential intellectuals. Intellectuals in the last three centuries have in different ways expressed their support for political violence, even identifying with it ideologically and emotionally. Intellectuals have even provided the perpetrators of violence with a legitimacy of sorts at different junctures, while the perpetrators of violence themselves have in turn cited humanistic values to advance their perverted worldviews and to obtain a grounding for them.
The present issue's main goal is to point toward a general approach to the question of why violence and terror hold such a powerful appeal for intellectuals. As the reader will see, the volume's contributors indeed suggest a variety of explanations for this phenomenon.
The claim has become commonplace that every theoretical argument must be verified, even deconstructed. Performing this work is part of what defines the role of intellectuals. Even so, we are not always ready to embrace the notion that the very bases of deconstruction themselves must be deconstructed. Very rarely have representatives of the intellectual elite who endorsed or justified acts of terror themselves actually reached the point where they viewed their own ideas critically, or where they went so far as to condemn their own former attitudes (among the few intellectuals who did do this are George Orwell and Arthur Koestler, 1 as well as other disillusioned communists of the early 1950s).
Reality is fast-changing, while conceptions change slowly, if at all. When the proponents of an ideology are confronted with a situation that negates their views, there is usually a short silence, after which the discussion continues in terms virtually unchanged. In our opinion, behind the theoretical discussions on topics relating to philosophy, society, and the state, there is a layer of myths and utopian thinking settled deep within the subconscious, which issue forth in the form of novel ideas.
KEYWORDS: hamasisraelpsychological warfarePSYOP
Over the past ten years, Netanyahu has made more official visits to Moscow than his predecessors, as well as most other foreign leaders. In January 2020, when Putin participated in the unveiling of a monument in Jerusalem honoring the heroes of besieged Leningrad, he thanked Israel for preserving the memory of the war and of the accomplishments of the Soviet people.5