Israel Studies, Volume 10, Number 3, pp 225-245 [Guy Ben-Porat, Netanyahu’s Second Coming; A...

8/9/2019 Israel Studies, Volume 10, Number 3, pp 225-245 [Guy Ben-Porat, Netanyahus Second Coming; A Neoconservative

1/21

225

B-

h g g?

U til recently neoconservatism seemed remotely p p. w p k f h f hwkh f-g p f k k g . J 1999 wk f h k h wf h h pp gh J- h g K h gfh f . K f f x g wh g h h z h fw h

xp h -

kg . h h pp w g ff h wh hgg g x k k h p f g pz z fh wf h- fg p.

U p -k h p h f w ffh

w g p g. Bh . p hghgh h k p h

neocons hold in the Pentagon and the White House and describe A webf [h] h pp f . - pp hghgh h p h h w j f wh w g ph. T h wk f p11 h hwkh fg p wh g pp g wh h ph economics to form a new policy paradigm. While neoconservatism is

essentially an American phenomenon, its influence, both political and h U pw p p


2/21

226 isra el studies volume 10 number 3

associated with globalization, stretches beyond its original boundaries p p f h p h -. f xp h p f h h f p k f hp-g .

T pp f h wk h fl f pkg f f pw p

w w p p g g g g. xp h w p p . w g -

f h gh h h h p p p . f hgg g x f pp w g h p hgh ff h f h h f f F Bjh. pfi h f h p f h p p 2000 h -kg f w p : p kg z. q - g g pp f

many previously associated with the left who were indifferent (or at timespp) f hwkh . T p f g

wh h hw k p h fh gh p. T fi p f h wk

w h f p. T p w p clarify the neoconservative agenda. Te third part will describe the sources - p p .

IDEAS, POLIICS, AND POLICY PARADIGMS

T f p - p h g . pp fi h w h h hp xp h f p hg.Studies of ideational variables engage with questions such as how ideas gainp p. Hw gz

? hw fl p h? h fi h ff pph h xp h f fl p. T fi h h -k pw wh xg p p f h g.


3/21

h g 227

approach focuses on institutional arrangements and the way in whichbureaucracies facilitate the adoption and implementation of new ideas. Teh pph h wk x h p f hturn ideas into policy. Tus: to become policy, ideas must link up with pol-h z f f p. pw. g p f k f pp p f pp.

- p w p p g wf h pf h g h p

. pg g f p h h p k p hp p g . B p p-g k h fi pg Kh fi j hg pg hf. T pg hf f f h f w pg f pw h p wparadigms. Te study of the relation between ideas and politics requires theexamination of the way ideological schemas are used in democratic politics

-- h pp g hw pp q p g.

Material changes or the discrediting of existing ideas by politicalg p p p p p f w . Tp f gz p p p xp fl hp h p hgh ff p - g. w promoted by interested parties are adopted by policy-makers and society at

g z p . h fl f p p q. T fl f p h gh fi wh xg g xg

wh p hg h gz f p p p h g f h h x g h k .

T hg f p pg k h -

f xp wh w f f p pf h h hg. T hg hf h h f hg h p h w f w and, on the other hand, of political entrepreneurs that promote ideas.


4/21

228 israel studies volume 10 number 3

hp pg wp p jf f- gwh p f p-g h f h . T p f hg f pto explain the diffusion of ideas that serve a powerful group but alsoj w g. k h hg hg p hpp h f g p.

p g - w p pk h p. T p p

f h p pg. Tk k gf f h p g fp f g g h . Tp p h f g f p h g. T f g f hk kp h f p p gfg gf h k p. p h 1970 fxp g h gh hg f h Bh - p p

h hf f K pg. T fp p hw q f g h- f h . p f hp p h f w g hg f p ww f pp f pg p ph h fw.

NEOCONERVAISMAN OLDNEW IDEA

gp f ( f hf x k) h h 1960 f -- p wh w w p f wh w hwkh fg pperceptions, opposition to the 1960s counterculture, and support for Israel. h 1990 f h f h h xh f g h hgh-w k h p

pp p. T g f -conservatism, wrote Norman Podhoretz, in a 1996 eulogy for neocon- w pg f g wg p- h g h 1960


5/21

h g 229

h ffi. B fi pg k fwg h fg . Bh h f 9/11 h w q.

Neoconservatism is probably less of an organized and institutionalized f p f figures described it. Te revulsion against the counterculture of the of the1960 w j f h h f pp-nents e t t at t e great institutions o t e i era communityuniversities,h h pf h . g w p

American and Western values, including capitalism: they defiantly revivedh p f gg pg h h p w f h pg wh h g w; h h wg f g f f f h w g wkg .

h j h Hk f hroad to serfdom and their reluctance toward the welfare state wasrelated to their concern for its moral corruption, the possibility that

incentives to work would be undermined by the availability of welfare ben-fi h gwh h ph g w fl wh . q h p-p h h p p wh h p .

fg p p hwkh p g g p p - [h] h g h p p -

. U g pp w xp f f z hf h j h p f p -. F h f p h pp f h h p f f k f f hgh p g fh g g.

Neoconservative influence was wielded through various channels

such as the Heritage Foundation or the American Enterprise Institute() whh j f-p k F f p g fl p-kg. T g g whh h p


6/21

230 israel studie s volume 10 number 3

positions in government, seemed like the peak of the movement thatp h - g. Kp Kk-patrick, Elliot Abrams, Richard Perle, Eugene Rostow, Kenneth Adel- h p w pp hgh-kg fg pp. B h F K hz h wk p ffi . TNew Republicw hf h k ph w kg g. p for Reagans military buildup and his anti-communist foreign policy,p .

p hz ph when warning against the lingering influence of the counterculture: Who h w f h w p h p h pg wh g ? h - f x h hh hpp? h p g h gw hgh ? hsummed, for satisfaction over a just war well fought, and a time for rejoic-g f h h w h g f h h . hw

hgh p h j f hw () f 1997 p g hp wh f k h -f fwz wh p k p h Bh .

T f g . Bh p 11 h w qg .

decade of neoconservative argument, debate, and policy papers, previously

g w fg p h h f f wh wh h pp f h f p-p- k h f h pp x fevil. It was argued that the Bush revolution in foreign policy rests on twof. T fi h w h f p f h h h pw hg h q h w.

p gp f fl pk f p g h pw gg h ff g h h f g . Bhhf. f w p h -


7/21

h g 231

g p h w h. p h h p f p p p pg hffwg :

h h f wh w wg

p h wh pp f wh w: wg w

on terror groups and to seek to end or transform governments that supported

h p h pg h fh wh h

whwh k h p 11.

ff g g f kg h f hf : pg h g h hpg

f pph p.

T wh p f - h f f w h w pg w g.h h h ( -) fgpolicy, it is argued, the principles articulated by neoconservatives are deeply h p p.

Te renewed power of neoconservatism seems to be the result of politi- g h whh h w f f. 1996 Foreign Affairs, K Kg g hk pg p Cuba, or China, for instanceultimately intended to bring about a changef g. h w j h B pp w w h w p p h hg h f p-

11. w p supported by many traditional conservatives and to push forward Americasp f h f h k f U fh w p. f g ff f - f h 1990 h ff h g pp p p w h wf.

Te economy, however, might be an important question for the future

of neoconservatism and its popular support. Te future survival of neocon-servative doctrine, according to Stelzer, is crucially dependent on their abil-ity to eliminate the contradiction between foreign policy goals and domes-tic policy. Specifically, the interventionist unilateral policy that would


8/21


p pw w h hgh hh g w x.

ISRAEL CONSERVAISM AND E RIG

T w gh f p g etween aw s an oves, respective y, ga vanize y t e war o 1967

whh k h Bk h z p h Hg . 1970 p q

become the major divisive issue in Israeli society that overshadows all otherdebates, including the economic. What is described as the right in Israel, g f ff p h ghfi h f h pp by the commitment to a greater Israel and opposition to territorial compro-mise. Tis confusion was strengthened by the association gradually formedw p gwh pz h p fk pp h f f h p .

T w h gh

h h p wh kg. Z wh Z Jk f h gh . B h f - h wh h p.More importantly, the Likud party, the offi cial heir to revisionism, iscomprised of several groups and adopted electoral strategies that reinforced . p

were Herut, the revisionist party committed to territorial maximalism and

w pp w - f. h h w p h ff p h hh pp h p (p) wf g 1977 f h fi w h .

h h k f k h p f h p f h -g w g h p f h . Th k p f pp g h 1977 f h ffl Jw f -p

f h pph. h p pp h p f hwk pp f h ffl .T k h p f pp w pf p k g f zh Jw w h p


9/21

h g 233

mobilize a majority of these voters. In the 1977 elections, the Likud coupled hwkh fg p p wh p f f hpp f h g . f hw w h w h p h f f h h hh k. h h f p f p pz p w f g p - fi f Jwh g- g f

Jw . w w

h w h h h (1984) h (19771984) g (1996).

p f k k ffi h g f f gg h p wh gp p w wh h. T f fh k f xp w wh h w p f reforms, especially its proposals for a reduction of government subsidies on . h Bg hf w

j h f p fwg h Jk

p f gh g h g pj h g p ghh. T ghhw pj g -1970 w h k g hxp h pj pk 90 ghh small towns, and approximately 600,000 people. Te government was alsoable to mobilize the Jewish diaspora to contribute to the project that aimed p p w f h k. T k hf w h

j . z p h k 1977 w p p f g pp f h H (h federation, a stronghold of MAPAI) and also was clumsily executed so that pz g h .

T h pp f k z w w h f-f- p h h - k. T g px xp h g h p f h

Labor party (pre-statehood through 1977) the more moderate foreignpolicy agenda of the Labor party and, since the 1980s, and the partys adop- f g gh f h f .Uk p wh ffi w pg


10/21


p 1985 h xp-g h h f h g xp fg p p.

T hgg pp f pp gg hhp h w w w p f w p f . f h f h gh f f fl pfg h - 1970 p upper middle-classes, have been exposed to foreign influence. Te so-calledAmericanization o Israe i society inc u e t e intro uction o consumer-

h p f- h p . F f h 1950 w g ffl wh h p fg fl pgg p h g h of motor vehicles, electric appliances, and later mobile phones and internet. B h 1990 h hg w kg.

f f h w h wgg wh gh w g w k

h () fl j g - wh h pg f h p. T f h 1990p hg h p f g hw h pp g.

h w gwg g z h g w p and more tolerant society. What marred the successful economic reforms o

1985 was t e continuation o t e con ict an t e rising costs o maintainingh p f h p h pg(the Intifada) in 1987. Te business community and its allies gradually came h gwh p h z fh h f h fl.

T 1992 f h p wh pf the need to normalize Israel through peace and criticized the irrational- f h k fg p w g f h f h hgg . T p w fl h

k xhg: w f h wh h p k p 3.5 p f h h h 7 p. h h x vary in their political views, explained one economic analyst, in the stock


11/21

h g 235

k h w g . F h f hleft (the Labor) means higher chances for conflict resolution. Indeed, the p g f g wh h and the latter provided strong support for the peace process. Rabin, wroteone liberal commentator in a eulogy shortly after the assassination, learned k f h. g [h pf] h w p .

NEANYAE ELECION

g h x f gh f k . Bj -h wh p g p f h f h p wh wh k - g:g pp h g k. B f h f 1996 h hk p p. T p g

h fw w g h gh h f h p f . f h p g h p h w q w h . h ffi h pp- h g h h g g wh h h . pp g ( 1996 or Prime Minister were separated from party elections) the Likud adopted

p- g p.h g w p h 1993 k g h . T p f g h g f h f U hf f k q h pp h w h w g: g gh Jw h f h x

wh h p p p f h w . h p f pw w w

to dictate its terms for peace and force its neighbors to reckon with it. Muchlike other neoconservatives Netanyahu had personal contacts with, his con-p f p p h gh h w f K-k p


12/21


. T g w h p - .

Te victory of Netanyahu was based not on a constituency that sharedh g wh w h h h k g z g hpeace process. Te Likuds campaign captured the support of those leaningw h p g p h pan Peres as ess patriotic an ess concerne wit t e Jewis essence o t e. w pg g p h g w

J g Jw.

h w wg p h f f Jpp h h f Jwh h p h hfuture of the Jewish people is safer with the Likud. Tus, the Labor-Meretzalliance with its liberal pro-peace agenda united an opposition made of the p f hx g zh w g

who resented the agenda they perceived as elitist and self-serving. NachumB h f h w h p h w p h .

w f h h [] gh h Jwh . . . . w f h

hg. f h f g f gz

. T f wh j h f wh h p

h whh h h h.

g pp f . 1996 hg gp

ea e y Ric ar Per e, a centra gure in contemporary neoconser-vatism, produced a document titled A Clean break. Labor Zionism,the document argued, was Israels large problemefforts to salvageIsraels socialist institutionswhich included pursuing supranational g pg p p h hg w h g f h g p h p g pp. h w g h h wh w w f h w

p h h gg p g -g Z h g p f whh f. w wh Businessweek f h h wxp h :


13/21

h g 37

T p h fi h h h -

ister who is genuinely committed to free markets as a No.1 Priority. And this

wh kg hg p . . . T hg

hg k h h h h

h h .

Te neoconservative agenda that included a mixture of nationalism,civi rig ts, an a ree mar et economy was i cu t to imp ement ue tothe structure of the coalition Netanyahu was dependent upon, the dynamicso Israe i-Pa estinian re ations an t e wor context. e support Netan-

yahu enjoyed from the soft rightSephardic and traditionalistseemedinitially to provide a safety belt that secured his position. Te rulingof this rainbow coalition, however, proved diffi cult, and the Netanyahugovernment had not completed its term before being ousted. First, Netan-yahu oscillated between the more moderate position of the Likud thatacknowledged the need to make some compromises and the hard linepositions in his party and the coalitions. o this was added an Americanadministration that cooperated with the previous government on the Osloaccords and pressured the new government to continue negotiating with

the Palestinians. In his maneuvers between the different demands and pres-sures, Netanyahu was portrayed as inconsistent and, consequently, lostmuch of his credibility. Necessity forced Netanyahu in his tenure as PrimeMinister to withdraw from the West Bank city of Hebron and sign the WyeAgreement that committed to a withdrawal from a further 13 percent of theWest Bank. Neoconservatives have gradually accepted the need for territo-ria compromise to protect existing va ues an remo e t e greater Israeideology along with what was described as more hawkish-pragmatic lines,

inspire y t e neoconservative approac to t e Co War in t e US.h h - fl p h g h g hg w ffi .

wh h f h p p w h h p w h . T p f g z w ffi pp h k-p. T w p p:h g ph p wh w g f h w Bh pg h w g f h

f U. h w p h f gallocations for their constituencies, but there was strong antagonismw h g h h Bh h -z h g.


14/21


x p gh h g-ernment to a collapse in 1999 with the call for new elections. Te incumbenth h f h ffi whh h - w h f h g w p-. h f h h p h h Bk fw h g f h k hp h f h p j k neoconservatism. But, it was in is come ac as a Minister o Finance t ath g k p.

NEANYAS RERN

Netanyahus almost accidental nomination as Minister of Finance in 2003,a result of a re-shuffl e tactic of Prime Minister Sharon that moved him fromh f Fg ff h j p f . T f F w h h hwkh h- p p g

pp f gfi . T f - w p g g h f pw hh h ffi w 2003 wh w g x h p f - p pg. T hgg w x hgg x h g ff x g gh.

I eas o not oat ree y an are o ten supporte y t in tan s t atz h g k h p-k h p g. T h w h h -1990 J h Jwh- p wh h pp h Jwh -yahu supporters to promote the ideas of privatization and market economy,coupled with a hawkish foreign policy position and Zionism. Tus, a policypp h h ph 1996 wh f f h f fi wg x

g . h pj hwwas the translation of various conservative and neo-liberal classics that werep g Bk Fh Hk F


15/21

h g 239

g Kh p f . h pp f h hp h f h wh pp w p p ppp h k f h p p. T f h h p hwkh p h h w h Hg F h p .

w k wh h w gx B w g p f h w p . Tg x w p w p p p p

2000 h fwg f f h p h -. T p f h k f wh w g p ff h h hfw g h h p p w . T kg h w p z gwh w p p.h p h pp f F h h p xp:

hk h h p f kg pwh h . T h f

. f g f h k -

h f . . h g

p pw p

g h fi p. T p

step for economic recovery, accept the security problem, are growth promot-

g p. T p p g gwh x

.

h pp w g h hgon the dangers of unlimited sovereignty that supposedly became clear afterp 11 2001:

h h f w g f w -

g f h ? h w h -

wh w f ph h

w? . B g w p j h: f h h f h .

T w h h f w.


16/21


T hwkh pp w wh h f h f w h ; whh hg hw w h f f h p and Jewish Israeli post-Camp David consensus, to shift concentration f. ff h g w g h k f ppg . h w f w pp g h f h - F p p f h h wh h h w p . p g pz g-

ment-owned companies, decreasing the public sector and forcing people to f wf wk g g.

h w h h w f hg p

f . T h h p. f

p h pp hg p gwg p

g g pp g h wh fi wf -

wk px f fg wk h p

. h p wh hkg p f f

this. ax rates in Israel are imaginary. ax cuts are one of the most important f h p.

Te neo-conservative economic agenda, in the temporary relative f h fi h gzg -canizing Israeli society and the bourgeoisie who grew more and more w pp px . T wf fi w p g f h

economic p an an t eir cuts raise an outcry rom t e ower c asses, manyf h k pp. h f h pph fzp J p g h g p g h g pfi g h

wh xp h h h w f wf p-w wh h wf fi gg wk h h gg h h wkg. p f p. g f wf g h w gwg p flgh. T

w h g w z h h wf g f g w fi wk w wh wk 200 k Jh wk.


17/21

h g 241

Netanyahu described himself as walking against the wind and, h g g h pp f k - h pph wh w h h w p. F 2003 j f h pp (57 vs. 31.5 p)pp h p. T w p 16 h h p g h q f whh h

as improved, deteriorated, or hasnt changed, compared with last year. On p w j g g policy a medium or failing grade. On the one hand, the oppositionp w p

h h h h w gg pp f w wh pp h p. T f h h 1990pp h p p p ff h wh h f F h p -g h gh . h h h g f p ff wh h h f gh

wh h gz h ffi w h h g w z h h pf .

CONCLSION

fl p-kg p p-adigms as a consequence of the political forces behind them and the w p . - f h p p -

tra tenetsnationa ism, aw is oreign po icy, an commitment tok fi h . Bh h w h p h ideas through think tanks and the media, and the historical circumstancesin which the breakdown of the peace process changed the basic alignmentsf p ww f pp f ideas. In this brief period, the peace and privatization agenda was split soh w f z; wh w f .

T p f h f g - pg hg. h h z fh g j p


18/21


p k h f fi hg h p pg hf f h . Timportant transformation described above was in the ability of Netanyahuto take advantage of the political conjunctures, fuse market econom- wh Hwkh fg ph g p pp f p p wh h f.

w - f w . T hwkhp p p

p wh h p f f -z ( f ) q fg p k wh h . T fg p -h 2000 k w h f f w p hp f whw f z. h U h f fg p h g- w x hg . hhg g h p p -gg gh p kg p h -

fg p p k h h wh f f hwkh-gh h f fh - .

otes

1. zh w T w New York Review of Books, 10

(2003) 50.2. Irving Kristol, Te Neoconservative Persuasion, Weekly Standard, 8

(2003) 47.3. See for example: Neil Nevitte and Roger Gibbins, Neoconservatism:

Canadian variations on an ideological theme? Canadian Public Policy, X(4) (1984)384394; F Whats Right: Te New Conservatism And What It Meansfor Canada ( 1996); Jff Bk Hard Right urn, the New Face ofNeo-conservativism in Canada ( 1999).

4. Shari Berman, Ideas, Norms and Culture in Political Analysis, Compara-

tive Politics, 33(2) (2001) 231250.5. James A. Walsh, When do ideas matter? Explaining the successes and fail-

f Th Comparative Political Studies, 33(4) (2000) 483516.6. h K p: T p f


19/21

h g 243

policy choices, in Peter Hall (ed), Te Political Power of Economic Ideas: Keynsian-ism Across Nations( J 1989) 8788.

7. H g g h Compara-tive Politics, 25 (1993) 27596.

8. T kp g h f K p h p w B hU B. h h T kp() Bringing the State Back In (w k 1985) 107163.

9. Mark Blyth, Any More Bright Ideas? Te Ideational urn of Comparative Comparative Politics, 29(2) (1997) 229250.

10. Shari Berman, Ideas, Norms and Culture in Political Analysis, Compara-

tive Politics, 33(2) (2001) 2312 0.11. H g g h .12. T -Kpp fl f:

h f h w International Organization,48(2) (1994) 185214.

13. B .14. H g g h .15. B .16. k f g p: h

p Review of International Political Economy, 4 (1997) 3.17. - f: T g f -p Governance, 13(1) (2000) 4562.

18. H g g h p . h : f g z gB Media, Culture and Society, 4 (1982) 111132.

19. g nraveling the Right(B 2001).20. Norman Podhoretz, Neoconservatism: A Eulogy, Commentary, 101

(1996) 3.

21. w z h w z TeNeocon Reader(w k 2004) 8.

22. hz : g.23. K T .24. hz : g.25. Adam Wolfson, Conservatives and Neoconservatives, Public Interest,

(2004) 3248.26. K T .27. Ibid.

28. hz T .29. f Te Neoconservatives: Te Men Who Are Changing American

Politics(w k 1980) 12.30. g 63.


20/21


31. hz : g.32. z h 13.

33. J Bh Current History, 102(2003) 367376.

34. w z g h h imes online 3 2004; J U: T Bh Fg Te Brookings Review, 21(4) (2003) 26.

35. Michael Lind, Te Weird Men Behind George W Bushs War, Newtatesman, 16(751) (2003) 1013.

36. Joshua Muravchik, Te Neoconservative Cabal, Commentary, 116(2)(2003) 2633.

37. Zachary Selden, Neoconservatives and the American Mainstream, PolicyReview, 124 (2004) 2939.

38. z Neoconservatism, 13.39. f .40. hz : g.41. Jh h h f Journal of Political

Ideologies, 7(2) (2002) 199220.42. h h T f 2003 g

hg h h h Te

Elections in Israel 2003 ( J 2004).43. h h h -p American Political Science Review, 93(2) (1999) 265277.

44. Mark essler, Te Political Right in Israel: Its Origins, Growth andpJournal of Palestine Studies, 15(2) (1986) 1255.

45. Jk f Jwh h f Iyunim Btkumat Yisrael, 14 (2004) 5192 [Hw].

46. Naomi Carmon, Neighborhood Rehabilitation in IsraelEvaluation ofOutcomes(Hf 1989) [Hw].

47. h h z h f f h

h hfi () Te New Israe (B 2000) 129159.

48. h g T z f kira Hodshit,89 (1993) 2039 [Hw].

49. Maoz Azaryahu, McIsrael? On the Americanization of Israel, Israeltudies, 5(1) (2000) 4165; U T p f pp-

: p-Z h g g : h hfi () Te New Israel: Peacemaking and Liberalization (w k 2000).

50. T f B pp.

51. k aaretz 6 1993.52. B- ? T w h

Double nternational Relations 19(1) (2005) 3962.53. zk Yedioth Aharono 7 1995.


21/21

h g 245

54. Jh h h f 199220.55. Reuven Hazan, Te Electoral Implications of Political Reforms: Te

h f h h p h hh Te Elections in Israel 199 ( J 1999).

56. Bj h A Place Among the Nations: Israel and the World(w k 1993) 320; k h Journal ofPalestine Studies, 26(1) (1996) 5869.

57. Laura Drake, Arab-Israeli relations in a New Middle East Order, in Jerry. gh () Te Political Economy of the Middle East( 1999).

5 . Ibid.59. Nachum Barnea, Peres Gave, Bibi ook, Yedioth Aharonot, May 31,

1996.60. hp://www..g/1.h : h 15 2005.61. Ibid.62. w Businessweek J 15 1997.63. h pzk h f B Foreign Affairs, 77(4) (1998)

1828.64. Jonathan Mandilow, Te Likud in the 1999 Elections: Te Race Into Fail-

h h h Te Elections in Israel 1999 ( J2001) [Hw].

65. h h f .66. J z h p aaretz 4 1996.67. H K T aaretz J 12 1998.68. h h w f h ff .

f xp H gh p : T g f Te New York Review of Books, 48 (g 9 2001) 13.

69. hp://h.g/1515151414.h : h 14 2005.70. Bj h w

g. Hw .Jewish World Review, J 23 2003.71. Benjamin Netanyahu, Interview with Guy Rolnik, Moti Basok and Merav

z Haaretz, h 21 2003.72. Bj h Yedioth Aharonot J 18 2003.73. : h 14 2005. hp://p...//p/px/

2003/fi/h2003.74. : h 14 2005. hp://p...//p/px/

2004/fi/J2004.pf75. f h 18 2003.76. f 8 2004.

Date post:	29-May-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	didi-remez
View:	218 times
Download:	0 times

Israel Studies, Volume 10, Number 3, pp 225-245 [Guy Ben-Porat, Netanyahu’s Second Coming; A...

Documents