In addition to other articles Israel Studies, 16.2 (fall 2011) has two special sections which should serve as important sources for scholars and students.
The first, Israel and International Humanitarian Law is especially pertinent to issues raised regarding the rules of engagement with hostile populations and in war zones. Amichai Cohen and Stuart A. Cohen focus on the growing influence within Israeli political and public life of several institutions, governmental and non-governmental, whose respect for international law is based on their perception of the intrinsic legitimacy of that corpus and examine the influence exerted by the IDF’s International Law Branch, especially with reference to targeted killings. Gerald M. Steinberg examines the influence of NGO activity in the political conflict, and on Israeli foreign and security policy in particular. Hilly Moodrick-Even Khen examines questions pertaining to whether Israel has a right to self-defense in Gaza or in the West Bank?, what legal regimes should apply in Gaza and in the West Bank? She discusses the differences and similarities of the legal status of these two territories.
The second, The Kibbutz, focuses on new perspectives marking the first century since the establishment kibbutz. Eliezer Ben-Rafael maintains that renewal has helped many kibbutzim from a sudden threat of economic and demographic catastrophe. At the same time, kibbutzim today represent a society at risk – not so much because of a threatening environment, but due to their dependence on themselves and their members. Raymond Russell, Robert Hanneman, Shlomo Getz provide an overview of the changes that have taken place in the kibbutzim since 1990 and assesses their significance. The number of kibbutz members has stagnated for decades, while nonmembers are the only portion of the kibbutz population that shows dynamic growth. Yael Darr analyzes the place of kibbutz children's literature in the internal kibbutz discourse during the fervent 1940s and 1950s. She demonstrates that alongside the expected glorification of communal ideology, some texts also evoked deliberations and frustrations – at times even piercing criticism – regarding the principles of communal upbringing, especially the marginalization of the family institution.
