Review on Israel-nato Relations

Over the years NATO has worked with countries across the world to foster and develop strategic partnerships which allow the organisation to support its global allies and to project its power beyond Europe. One country that NATO has developed a close relationship is Israel which is officially recognised as being a Major Non-Member Partner (MNMP). Events in the Middle-East have made it more important than ever for NATO to work alongside nations such as Israel, especially in regards to intelligence-sharing and counterterrorism operations. However, the relationship is not without controversy thanks to Israel’s stance towards the Palestinians and its occupation of the West Bank, something which has drawn criticism from many of NATO’s European members.

At the heart of the topic is the question of how far, if at all, NATO should look to deepen its relationship with Israel and what conditions might be attached to such a deal. The topic also aims to encourage delegates to consider NATO’s role in global security outside of its traditional sphere of influence, particularly at a time when many NATO members are facing a growing threat from Islamist extremism. In addition to this, delegates will also need to consider the implications of further cooperation with Israel for international agreements such as the Iran Nuclear Deal and for the alliance’s commitment to collective defence.

Israel’s relations with the United Nations, as the most important international organisation, illustrate this situation well. The Jewish state’s right to exist was confirmed by the General Assembly in November 1947 when it approved the partition of Palestine by a two-thirds majority. Later, as UN membership expanded and the Cold War caused both superpowers to compete for the loyalty of new members, things changed. No country has been censured more often either by the General Assembly or by the Security Council. Indeed, frequently the only thing that stood between Israel and still more condemnation was the United States. Nor has Jerusalem ever been able to secure a seat on the Security Council for itself.

On the face of it, Israeli relations with NATO ought to be better. Founded only a year after Israel, NATO was made up of Christian states, with, from 1952, one exception – Turkey. No NATO member had a fundamental quarrel with the existence of the Jewish state, and most had voted in favour of its creation. Furthermore, Israel’s own values have always been liberal – albeit, initially with a strong socialist twist – and democratic. Partly for this reason, partly because Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion feared his country would find itself isolated in the event of another World War, Jerusalem took a pro-Western stance in the Cold War. For this, of course, there was a price to pay. The more pro-Western Jerusalem’s position, the more problematic its relations with the Eastern Bloc.

During the 1950s, many Israelis believed themselves in mortal danger from the surrounding Arab world. Looking for allies, they would have loved their country to join NATO or at least become an affiliate member.