Today, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is known as a powerful alliance to promotes the freedoms and security of its members by establishing equal political and military standards. Since 1994, NATO has initiated the Mediterranean dialogue, and Israel is one of the non-NATO countries interested in developing such international relationships. Although Israel could benefit from joining this organization, there are serious controversies that should not be ignored.
The reasons for choosing Israel as a NATO applicant are closely connected to the ambiguity of the situation. First, this country is located outside the North Atlantic region, and the extension of the boundaries for peaceful relationships is always beneficial. Second, Israel is known for its multiple conflicts and short-term wars. NATO may be a solution for the population to stop damaging military activities and establish international peace. Finally, there is no clear position about the worth of the cooperation between Israel and NATO at the moment. Regardless of common self-differentiation and non-discrimination goals, Israel cannot offer a lot to the NATO members, and NATO is not able to meet all expectations.
NATO-Middle East interaction may be developed in a variety of ways. It is the responsibility of the alliance to support its members in all military and political disagreements. The example of the Israel wars shows that the country is usually involved in short-term conflicts, and NATO needs time for analysis and strategic planning. Such interaction with the Middle East does not bring evident benefits for Israel due to its inconsistency. Besides, NATO maintains equality concepts and human freedoms, and Israel continues committing human rights abuses because of geographical causes. Therefore, the consideration of ambitious and expanded cooperation must be enhanced in this dialogue.
Israel is a small country in the Middle East, known for its beaches and diverse population. On the north, the country’s neighbor is Lebanon, on the east – is Syria, and Jordan, on the south – is Egypt, and the Mediterranean Sea is on the west. The length of the coastline is 273 km, its maritime claims include 12 nm of the territorial sea and its continental shelf covers to exploitation depth. Natural resources include timber, natural gas, and sand. In some regions, copper ore, phosphate rock, and magnesium bromide may be found. There are three major directions in land use: 23% for agriculture, 7% for forests, and 70% for other purposes, depending on human interests and needs. Current environmental issues are desertification, restricted freshwater resources, air pollution, and the production of chemical fertilizers. Israel is characterized by limited arable land because more than half of the country is a desert area with poor water resources.
Israel has a highly technological free market, and the access to solid natural resources allowed surviving several economic crises. In addition, the country is known for its prudent fiscal policy. Even though there is an uncertain security situation that hurts the gross domestic product (GDP) growth (between 2-3% only), its resilient banking sector focuses on the regulation of national and international business relationships.
Major agricultural products are citrus, vegetables, dairy products, and cotton. Crude oil (390 bbl/day) and natural gas (9.826 billion cu m) are the best production achievements. As well as many European and Asian countries, Israel is challenged by trade deficits from time to time, but the tourism industry and service exports compensate for losses. Israel’s export partners in equipment, diamonds, chemicals, and textiles are the United Kingdom, China, and Hong Kong. Import of raw and military equipment, fuels, and grain is from Britain, China, and Switzerland. America is the largest trade partner for Israel in terms of telecommunication equipment and agricultural products. This economic cooperation promotes positive cultural and scientific exchanges.
The role of military authorities must be underlined in the country since the regulations of administrative and territorial relationships between the 1960s and 1970s. Both men and women are obliged to military service in Israel, and their fit for military service is about 1,500,000 per gender group. Today, the Israel Defense Forces, along with ground forces, air forces, and naval forces, include more than 173,000 active personnel. These numbers are crucial for controlling the international boundaries (disputes with the West Bank and Gaza Strip under the Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement). Multiple attempts are made to build a seamline in the West Bank region and control social discontent in the Gaza Strip. The population of the country is diluted by about 14,000 citizens from Eritrea, 8,000 from Ukraine, and 442 stateless individuals. However, regarding the current crises and conflicts, these numbers may be dramatically changed.
One of the issues that should be mentioned in the possible cooperation between NATO and Israel is the creation of a nuclear planning group. Regarding the recent NATO achievements, the main goal of this group is to develop and specify policies associated with nuclear forces and constantly review the positions of the official participants. At this moment, the Israeli government continues improving its nuclear weapons program based on its arsenal includes about 90 plutonium-based warheads. However, the country prefers to support an opaque position, under which the leaders do not want to deny or confirm their nuclear power intentions. Israel does not find it necessary to hide its opportunity to create solid nuclear weapons due to the access to the required natural resources. At the same time, it is not the only country that demonstrates its attempts to introduce some weapons to the Near East. Therefore, the chosen position may be considered a serious nuclear threat that is poorly investigated by other countries. To reduce the number of unexpected decisions from Israel, NATO and other countries’ neighbors are interested in enhancing nuclear weapon tests.
The development of geopolitical strategies in Israel is closely related to the activities of the current Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. This politician admits that Israel has to face multiple domestic struggles because of its unstable relationships with Iran. In fact, many other Arab countries want to stop this military conflict in the region. Therefore, the country expects support from other Middle East neighbors to obtain global opposition and avoid the threats that the Iranian government frequently prefers. NATO could play a leading role in the establishment of nuclear control in the Middle East. This organization strengthens its capabilities for defense and deterrence, and the possibility to disarm Iran and explain the need for non-proliferation could become a great benefit for Israel because of the lack of official data about its nuclear weapon presence. Nuclear threats in Israel cannot be ignored as it is one of the crucial steps in the promotion of international peace by NATO or other similar alliances.
The growth of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles, in particular, is commonly studied by the representatives of different nations. For Israel, they create several good opportunities to carry some chemical or biological weapons over different distances, which is beneficial for extremist groups. However, this threat terrorizes civilians and influences political relationships and national stability. Therefore, NATO’s and Israel’s geopolitical strategies are similar and directed to the establishment of safe environments for the locals and the lack of threats to neighbors.
The concept of safe and equal relationships with neighbors is high promoted by the leaders of many NATO and non-NATO countries, including Turkey and Egypt. As one of the oldest NATO members, Turkey holds a considerable part of American nuclear weapons. This decision served as a reliable backup for the United States to obtain support during the Cold War. The conflict with the Islamic State shows that Turkey could easily become a friend or a foe, relying on its nuclear reserves. Egypt has been invited to join NATO several times since 1994, but its leaders are not ready to support the international dialogue on equal conditions. The question about whether Egypt should possess nuclear weapons remains open today and is characterized by specific threats. However, compared to Israel which does not show its true intention to pursue nuclear weapons or not, Egypt shares its negative attitude toward such power. The main reasons that explain such a position of Egypt include peace with its neighbor, Israel, and security support from the United States.
However, from time to time, the chosen countries (Israel, Egypt, and Turkey) have to deal with potential nuclear threats. The issues that could bother the representatives of the Middle East are nuclear power control, the avoidance of military conflicts, and the strengthening of their regional interests. Regarding the analysis of recent political and social changes in the media and press, Israel can understand the importance of the chosen issues for Turkey and Egypt. However, the Israeli government should realize that the international positions of both countries are better compared to the local situation because of evident geographical supremacy, relationships with other countries, and foreign policies.
Close relationships between Egypt and Israel explain the similarities between attitudes toward nuclear weapons and threats. If Egypt starts discussing the possibility of a new nuclear weapons program, past hostility and distrust could be reignited between the states. Besides, the nuclear independence of Egypt might question the necessity of American support and protection in the global arena. Therefore, Israel and Egypt do not find it necessary to change their current nuclear neglect. However, Turkey demonstrates another position concerning the possession of nuclear powers, relying on the outcomes of its conflict with Iran. Turkey cannot allow Iran to obtain significant nuclear powers as it may lead to an aggressive foreign policy.
In the Mediterranean region, countries aim at establishing definite maritime boundaries and claims. Turkey has to deal with the impact of Greece and Cyprus and the necessity to respect their sovereignty under such conditions as sanctions and diplomatic isolation. NATO could spread its impact on the international relationships between the chosen countries. On the one hand, regardless of the strategies and action plans, both Egypt and Turkey have to investigate the opportunities of their neighbors, and NATO defines the criteria that include inequality and trust. On the other hand, being close to Egypt, Israel continues to experience pressure and control. Ceasefire obligations, nuclear control, and social isolation cannot be disregarded today. However, as soon as one of the Mediterranean countries breaks its promises or demonstrates neglect of responsibilities, it is normal to raise worries and invite additional facilities to control the situation. Nowadays, NATO does not have enough background to invite Egypt or Israel, but Turkey’s memberships and priorities play an important role in the international arena.
Bibliography
Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation. “Fact Sheet: Israel’s Nuclear Arsenal.”ArmsControlCenter. 2020. Web.
Central Intelligence Agency. “The World Factbook: Middle East: Israel.” CIA. 2020. Web.
Maher, Mohamed, and Irina Tsukerman. “Tensions Between Egypt and Turkey Are on the Rise.”The Washington Institute, 2019. Web.
North Atlantic Treaty Organization. “NATO Mediterranean Dialogue.”NATO. 2015. Web.
U.S. Department of State. “U.S. Relations with Israel.”State.gov. Web.