Jump to content

Talk:Foreign relations of Israel

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Attempts to bias entries on Wikipedia

[edit]

Something to be watchful for? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-x2DFnGI9Ac Outofthebox (talk) 03:44, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No Diplomatic Relations vs Non Recognition of Statehood

[edit]

There needs to be clearer distinction between no diplomatic relations and not recognising Israel as a state. I cant speak for any other countries, but in Malaysia I strongly believe that the official stand is recognition of the state of Israel to the pre 1967 borders, but with no diplomatic relations. This is based on statments of government officials and the fact that even the official Malaysian atlases have Israel on the map (though with disputed territorial boundaries clearly indicated). I propose that every state in the list of countries not recognising israel's statehood be accompanied with a citation in which the non recognition is clear and obvious.

Because of this, I am changing Malaysia from non recognition to no diplomatic relations.-BaronVonchesto BaronVonchesto 15:30, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You removed Malaysia from the wrong list, I have corrected this. Outback the koala (talk) 02:47, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chad

[edit]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/2/hi/middle_east/4382039.stm According to this Chad and Israel agreed to establish relations between each other; the problem is that I couldn't find any further news releases on the subject. So should Chad be added on the list of countries with whom Israel has diplomatic relations? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Krotx (talk • contribs) 21:08, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Countries with no relations

[edit]

Could we get a list of the nations which do not have any diplomatic relations with Israel? -Tim Rhymeless (Er...let's shimmy) 00:28, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

-

From what I can tell off the Foreign Ministry of Israels website. These are the current nations that have no diplomatic relations with Israel. [1]

Afghanistan, Algeria, Bangladesh, Comoros, Djibouti, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Malaysia, Maldives, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, and Yemen.

I think thats all of them....can you double check for me, or is it fine to just put the list up now? -Xineoph Fine? 6:46, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

--

According to Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs website, these countries can also be included on the list above:

Bahrain, Bhutan, Brunei, Chad, Cuba, Guinea, Mali, Morocco, Niger, and North Korea.

Taiwan and Western Sahara do not have diplomatic relations with Israel either, but they are not recognized as independent by most countries. Montenegro has recently declared independence, which has already been recognized by Israel, but both countries have not yet established formal diplomatic relations. Dave 12:15, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Current statement in the Diplomatic Relations section is "All Lusophone countries, including the African ones of Guinea Bissau, Equatorial Guinea, Mozambique and Cape Verde, maintain diplomatic relations with Israel." Equatorial Guinea is not a Lusophone country. It was a colony of Spain prior to independence. It does recognize Isreal. Two Lusophone African nations were left out of the statement - - Both Angola & Sao Tome and Principe were Portuguese colonies in Africa. Both recognize Israel. Chastwn (talk) 09:31, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Hey, someone has provided completely false information(with no links) in relation to Pakistan's recognition of Israel. Pakistan has clearly stated that any recognition of Israel is only possible after a 'two state’ solution to the Israel-Palestinian problem, which obviously is not the case at the moment. And all this can be verified at the respective Israeli, Pakistani foreign ministry websites as none of them have any diplomatic relations whatsoever. I was hoping some one could fix this, thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.133.71.141 (talk) 14:32, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As of October 27, 2018, Oman now recognizes (but does not have diplomatic relations with) the State of Israel. Emet781 (talk) 16:14, 29 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Frikkin' huge templates

[edit]

Is it really necessary to have both of these on here? They are obnoxiously large and overbearing for this article. I also have no idea how to get the word "diplomatically" out from behind the map picture without it moving down. --TJive 10:50, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I dont know how to sort out the templates or make it so the text starts from the top like it should do, so I've added the cleanup tag. 82.21.150.24 00:56, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The article is a formatting nightmare and I don't know how to fix it. --TJive 12:44, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chris McGreal

[edit]

McGreal is an unreputable unencyclopedic source: [2]. ←Humus sapiens ну? 09:36, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CAMERA is the unreputable, biased source and I won't bother reading what smear job they have to do upon McGreal. The Guardian newspaper, on the other hand, is a world newspaper with circulation in millions and there is absolutely no reason that you can reject a feature article from it as unreliable.
What actual facts are you rejecting, anyway? You should only remove the information that you think is incorrect, not the entire thing. And most of this stuff should be common knowledge to people aware of SA-Israel relations. Deuterium 09:41, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"smear job" is what you are trying to do here. ←Humus sapiens ну? 09:45, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Here is a third source - an excerpt from a book on Israel's foreign relations - that confirms the relationship and the nuclear program: [3]
Do you also reject the FAS as an unreliable source, too, given that they document the SA-Israel connection regarding the nuclear program? Deuterium 09:46, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That you rejected CAMERA but present that political blog as credible tells a lot. Please try to find a better source than that. ←Humus sapiens ну? 11:34, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've marked that section POV because it describes only a small area of a complex phenomenon. It seems that certain editors are only interested in dirt on the subject omitting everything else. ←Humus sapiens ну? 18:29, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Well why don't you add info on the "complex phenomenon" so that we understand the context better. The section may be incomplete. It is not POV. --Burgas00 19:50, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for such precious advice. Until this is fixed, the tag stays. ←Humus sapiens ну? 20:29, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I understand issues related to Israel are important to you and that you feel that there is an international conspiracy against this country. This is a very common attitude among a small number of nationalist wikipedians. However, putting an NPOV tag on every historical fact which may possibly put Israel in a bad light is not a solution on wikipedia. I assure you German wikipedians do not put NPOV tags on the section of the History of Germany article related to the holocaust. Despite the fact that it was, in your words, "a small area of a complex phenomenon".

Unless you can clearly explain why you feel this is NPOV the tag should be removed. --Burgas00 23:57, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is not about me. Please review WP:CIV, WP:NPA and WP:NPOV.
I am not here to educate you, but in the spirit of goodwill I'll explain: the relations between these two countries is not limited to the allegations added here by POV pushers. I find your bringing the Holocaust into this and other unrelated discussions [4] highly distasteful and uncivil. ←Humus sapiens ну? 01:16, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The relations between these two countries is not limited to the allegations added here by POV pushers.

That is not an explanation. Expand on the article if you like, consider it a stub, but it is not POV. This was a controversial part of Israel's foreign policy. --Burgas00 10:13, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Misquoting

[edit]

Here is what User:Deuterium adds [5]: "The countries developed a joint arms industry and a shared secret nuclear program" and here is a quote from his own source [6]: "available evidence argues against significant cooperation." Please explain. ←Humus sapiens ну? 07:03, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since you take that source so seriously, why do you keep trying to delete it?
Secondly, you are blatantly misrepresenting the source by only including part of the sentence. The whole sentence reads as thus:
A common question is whether Israel provided South Africa with weapons design assistance, although available evidence argues against significant cooperation.
So the sentence fragment you are pretending is evidence against a joint programme only applies to "weapons design assistance".
While you're reading that source, why don't you also read these sentences (reproduced in full):
Faced with sanctions, South Africa began to organize clandestine procurement networks in Europe and the United States, and it began a long, secret collaboration with Israel. These secret dealings for technology, knowledge, material, and equipment were designed to meet South Africa's armaments needs as effectively and economically as possible.
Who's misquoting now? Deuterium 07:07, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You. This doesn't say anything about "joint arms industry and a shared secret nuclear program". And now I quoted your own source but your remove the quote saying "citations that are being suppressed". Itchy fingers? ←Humus sapiens ну? 07:10, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Also, let us see you add the quote about "clandestine procurement networks in Europe and the United States" in articles on foreign relations of the US and Europe. ←Humus sapiens ну? 07:12, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No, you were clearly misrepresenting the article by using only part of that sentence. Why can't you admit it?
You are also claiming I was removing quotes from my own source, when in fact you removed the whole citation at least once [7]
As for what quotes show there were a joint arms industry and shared secret nuclear programme, how about these from the Guardian article --
The biggest secret of all was the nuclear one. Israel provided expertise and technology that was central to South Africa's development of its nuclear bombs. Israel was embarrassed enough about its close association with a political movement rooted in racial ideology to keep the military collaboration hidden.
Vorster's visit laid the ground for a collaboration that transformed the Israel-South Africa axis into a leading weapons developer and a force in the international arms trade. Liel, who headed the Israeli foreign ministry's South Africa desk in the 80s, says that the Israeli security establishment came to believe that the Jewish state may not have survived without the relationship with the Afrikaners.
Furthermore, please don't post confrontational material on my talk page such as "you were caught" Deuterium 07:34, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
We are talking about this edit of yours: [8]. Your text in question is: "The countries developed a joint arms industry and a shared secret nuclear program", but the source you're quoting says: "A common question is whether Israel provided South Africa with weapons design assistance, although available evidence argues against significant cooperation." [9] Deuterium, you wrote the opposite to your own source.
I strongly reject your charge of "blatantly misrepresenting the source" - unlike you, I quoted within the context: [10]. FYI, quoting a part of a sentence within the context is perfectly fine. So yes, you were caught and so far you have no good explanation: instead you chose to pile on irrelevant details and to cover your misbehavior by attacking me. ←Humus sapiens ну? 08:02, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It is bemusing to see that in the light of the above User:Deuterium still continues to add the text contradicting his own source: [11]. ←Humus sapiens ну? 03:47, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vela Incident

[edit]

Removing: first, it is a rumor. Second, let's remember that our subject is Foreign relations of Israel. So, what is the relation here? ←Humus sapiens ну? 08:50, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you kidding me? The article is basically denying that any relationship between South Africa and Israel existed and rubbishes the 2 token sources which suggest the contrary. And you are telling me that joint nuclear tests are irrelevant to the foreign policy of Israel? --Burgas00 13:05, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nuclear tests conducted by Israel are somewhat relevant to the foreign policy of Israel. Unexplained flashes in the Indian ocean, alleged by some anonymous authors to possibly be a nuclear test in which Israel may or may not have participated, with or possibly without the cooperation of other nations, one of which may or may not be South Africa, and all of this without a shred of evidence - is a speculative conspiracy theory, perhaps worthy of a Hollywood movie, but one which has no place in an Encyclopedia. Isarig 16:46, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Isarig is correct. See WP:RS & WP:V. ←Humus sapiens ну? 03:49, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is well known that Israel and South Africa developed their nuclear programme together. Who else would Israel get its nuclear weapons from? The US? India? I dont think so. Whatever, Im not going to argue over this.--Burgas00 13:00, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't you mean the other way round ? According to rumors/reports, Israel developed its nuclear weapons with the aid of France. Amoruso 13:19, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I believe Israel would require no or very little help from the outside (except for some raw materials) to develop a nuclear weapon. ML

While is technically "well known" Israel has nuclear weapons and probably intentionally spread the rumor around, It keeps nuclear ambiguity, Therefore noone can accuse it of having them without basically calling Israel liars. So i believe it has very little to do with foreign relations as noone would dare without a mountainload of proof. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.223.233.45 (talk) 19:11, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Source please

[edit]

"The reason for the relationship was largely due to the fact that after the Six Day War in 1967, most African countries broke diplomatic ties with Israel." - Who says this was the reason? ←Humus sapiens ну? 03:02, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Foreign relations pages

[edit]

Please see Israel-Venezuela relations and Israel-New Zealand relations. They could both use the perspectives of Israelis. There appears to be a revived movement to merge the Israel-Ven relations page into Foreign relations of Venezuela so I urge other users to vote against this. Respectfully, Republitarian 19:13, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I must emphasize that foreign relations do not only consist of political relationships between elected leaders or diplomatic recognitions. The people of a country and their actions themselves contribute to a great deal how a country is perceived by the international community. In the case of Israel, it must be pointed out that the Isreali people and Jewish organizations are very active internationally through providing and coordinating aid to developing countries and areas affected by natural catastrophes. Isreal wants peace and works for peace mostly through its people. This is often forgotten, and unfortunately Isreal does not have the reputation it deserves simply because, the press focuses on negative news. I find it very regretful that my addition to "foreign relations of Israel" was quickly deleted. Anyhow, here again: In addition to official diplomatic relations, Israel enjoys an excellent international reputation for coordinating substantial humanitarian aid to developing nations and areas affected by natural catastrophes. This includes direct volunteering by Israeli citizens in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and the ongoing support for Haiti.[2] ML — Preceding unsigned comment added by Osterluzei (talk • contribs) 17:22, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:Avraham, User:Jayjg, User:Humus sapiens

[edit]

Why are you replacing this

According to David Albright of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, "Faced with sanctions, South Africa began to organize clandestine procurement networks in Europe and the United States, and it began a long, secret collaboration with Israel." although he goes on to say "A common question is whether Israel provided South Africa with weapons design assistance, although available evidence argues against significant cooperation." [1]
  1. ^ "South Africa and the affordable bomb". Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. 1994-08. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)

with this

According to David Albright of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, "... available evidence argues against significant cooperation."

Surely the larger quote is more accurate and representative of what he actually says in the paper, rather than a misrepresentative sentence fragment? The sentence fragment is not evidence against a joint programme but only applies to "weapons design assistance".

Secondly, why did you remove the fact that Chris McGreal wrote in the Guardian? That's a relevant fact regarding the credibility of the story; he did not self-publish his article.

Thirdly, why did you restore the sentence "Israeli ambassadors spoke publicly against racism in apartheid South Africa." despite the fact there are no citations that ambassadors did do such a thing?

Fourthly, why did you replace "Israel developed a relationship with South Africa during the 1970s and 1980s." with "There are controversial claims that Israel developed a relationship with South Africa during the 1970s and 1980s."? Are you denying that Israel and South Africa did have a relationship during the 70s and 80s, against the many sources in the article? Do you have sources that claim this?

Thank you, Deuterium 00:55, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Recognition of Israel

[edit]

Many of the countries listed as having no formal diplomatic ties with Israel have, in fact, formally recognised Israel as a state, including some major Arab countries. I'm sorry I haven't found the actual citation yet. Perhaps somebody should research this as I feel it deserves a mention.

I wonder what's the criteria for recognition here. Do we look for official declaration? Tunisia, Morocco and other countries accept Israeli tourists bearing Israeli passports on a regular basis. That it counts as recognition? According to the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Israel is recognized by 164 countries in 1998, and by 159 countries in 2003. I don't know what they criteria are, and why they report a decrease of 5 countries within 5 years (as far as I know, none of the countries which recognize Israel have been organized in a federation during this period). DrorK (talk) 18:33, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chad's recognition of Israel

[edit]

This: [12] would seem to indicate that Chad recognizes Israel... am I mistaken? KazakhPol 05:54, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Based on that, they tried to 2 years ago but still not listed as such on the Israeli government website. That-Vela-Fella 16:49, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Taiwan's recognition of Israel

[edit]

I think Taiwan recognises Israel (they do cooperate on many matters). In Taiwan's case diplomatic recognition is usually a one way street (Taiwan recognises Britain, but Britian doesn't recognise Taiwan) Kransky 10:43, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is a "Taipei cultural and economical delegation" in Tel Aviv. When I called there, they introduced themselves in Hebrew as the Taiwanese consulate in Israel. I believe that's the standard arrangement for countries which have formal diplomatic relations with the PRC. DrorK (talk) 18:25, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some nation i added

[edit]

indonesia, some country do not and some how do not even put the israel in the world map and theres only palestine. I think that should be mention in the article.--60.52.25.23 10:38, 23 March 2007 (UTC) Could you clarify what you propose us to do? Canutethegreat 22:21, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Pakistan incorrect information

[edit]

Hey, some one has provided completely false information(with no links) in relation to Pakistan's recognition of Israel. Pakistan has clearly stated that any recognition of Israel is only possible after a 'two state’ solution to the Israel-Palestinian problem, which obviously is not the case at the moment. And all this can be verified at the respective Israeli, Pakistani foreign ministry websites as none of them have any diplomatic relations what so ever. I was hoping some one could fix this, thank you. http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/pakistan/2005/pakistan-050902-irna01.htm

This statement "Both Israel and Pakistan are former British colonies that were established as states" is nonsense. Israel was never a colony of the British. Palestine was never a British colony. Pakistan was technically not a colony of the British, but a nation created as a consequence of independence of India of which Pakistan was part. In any case, what I gather the author tried to establish is a relationship that never existed, or worse, establish some equivalence to the establishment of each state. Mulp (talk) 23:37, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't be just a List of Bilateral Relations

[edit]

A list is useful, be we also have categories and templates for that. Most of this articles should be deleted or split out to inididual articles for bilateral realtions. This article shoudl deal with trends and general characteristics. Kevlar67 (talk) 20:33, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

T.R.N.C.

[edit]

I have removed the following text about the TRNC:

Israel recently gave de-facto economic regocnition to it.[13]

This statement does not seem to be supported by the source. Nor am I certain that it makes sense for Israel to de facto recognize it: either Israel recognizes it or it doesn't. The actual source suggests: "The move sends diplomatic signals that Israel is considering acceptance of the Turkish breakaway state founded in 1983 and recognized only by Turkey." I'm not so sure about this, since there appear to be no official statements to back anything up. So, since it appears quite speculative, I suggest holding off until more concrete sources emerge. Silly rabbit (talk) 12:29, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BBC survey

[edit]

According to a BBC World Service poll [14] (see also BBC article), Israel was the least popular country in the world at least at the time of the poll. I want to avoid jumping to conclusions, so I decided to ask here because I don't know about the quality of the survey. Where would this information best fit in, or is it suitable at all? Everyme (was Dorftrottel) (talk) 15:20, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently, there were also other surveys with similar result: [15] Everyme (was Dorftrottel) (talk) 15:33, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It would fit nowhere, as this is not a beauty contest, nor some variant of American Idol. okedem (talk) 16:05, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No... it's information from a reliable source that may be included on Wikipedia. Also note that I'm asking where this info would be most suitable. Also consider WP:NPOV. Everyme (was Dorftrottel) (talk) 16:11, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not everything a reliable source says should be written here. This shouldn't, because it's nothing but a silly survey, and this isn't a popularity contest (what is this, highschool?). And NPOV has nothing to do with this. This is a bit of reason needed to edit an encyclopedia (regardless of the survey's results, it's just not encyclopedic information; even if Israel was the most popular country according to the survey, I'd still tell you it has no place here). Why are you even accusing me (and that's what you're doing) of POV? What's the grounds for that? Me disagreeing with you? okedem (talk) 16:25, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Popularity contest? It's a large survey about how Israel is seen in the world. Sorry for the NPOV jab, that was uncalled for. Everyme (was Dorftrottel) (talk) 16:28, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Still, that's what it is, a popularity contest. This article is about foreign relations, meaning relations with foreign countries. If there's an article specifically discussing Israel's image in the public's eyes, then maybe this will fit there. okedem (talk) 16:53, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That's why I asked instead of just editing away. I still wouldn't call this a popularity contest though, and even if it were, what speaks against a simple formulation regarding a primary source? Everyme (was Dorftrottel) (talk) 17:20, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
ASF has nothing to do with this. We're discussing relevance, not formulation. And this simply isn't relevant to this article, probably not to any article on Wikipedia. There are trillions and trillions of facts in the world. The vast majority of which aren't worth mentioning, including most silly public surveys. okedem (talk) 18:02, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Silly surveys or surveys of the silly public? Ne'ermind, I get your point. Everyme (was Dorftrottel) (talk) 23:15, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it should be included, I mean the same argument can be used against the pro-Israelis for stating that Israel is the most democratic yadda in the region #jees this isnt a popularity contest guys!'.86.138.248.126 (talk) 00:02, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Erm... whatever. This is not about pro or contra Israel at all, please avoid such language and sentiments. It's just a bit of information that may or may not be incorporated here or elsewhere in a fully neutral fashion sometime, but not now. Everyme (was Dorftrottel) (talk) 05:12, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

United Kingdom?

[edit]

Why is the UK not included in this article? As far as I know, we have strong relations with Israel since its inception, which we helped to create through the British Mandate of Palestine. It is puzzling that there is not a subsection devoted to the UK.

Indeed strange, but not due to any editorial decision. Anyone (you, perhaps?) is welcome to add such a section. okedem (talk) 13:49, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am a British Jew and would love to see a UK-Israel relations featured on a separate page. I know nothing of wikipedia, though, which means I really cannot help edit (certainly not editing well, at least) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.231.181.33 (talk) 16:48, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Which countries to add?

[edit]

Many of the sections on countries are helpful (expands more on just simply "recognizes/doesn't recognize"), but are some necessary? (For example, the UAE section: "The United Arab Emirates does not recognize the state of Israel." This can be said for several other countries (and is, in more detail). I'd clean it up, but not having an editorial history with this controversial topic (as all topics dealing with Israel inherently are), I'd feel better mentioning it here and letting those who are doing most of the work on this take a look at which sections need to be in the article. (I agree that most should stay). --Canuckguy (talk) 13:06, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

israel is not the 9th largest recipient of US foreign aid

[edit]

It is in fact listed as the first in every source i find. of course, Iraq and Afghanistan might be getting more US money now, but so far I have found no concensus for whether to include this "aid" (and its magnitude) or not. In any event, im removing the statement, hopefully someone can find support to write the actual aid to israel from america. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.164.176.104 (talk) 04:04, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Acceptance of Israeli passports

[edit]

I've just made a small - but not minor - edit: "If a passport shows any evidence of travel to Israel, barring a diplomatic passport, the holder is forbidden entry to the majority of Arab and Muslim states". I've changed that to "some" instead of "the majority" - there is no source as to show if it's half of them (anyhow, is there any definition of what's exactly an Arab or Muslim state?) or more or less... Some Arab and Muslim states do actually accept the entry of Israelis (with Israeli passports), as Morocco does, for example (okay, I'll look up a source for that). The only two states I know for sure reject any passport with the slightest trace of an Israeli visit are Syria and Lebanon. Probably Saudi Arabia does, too. Israeli officials told me - I know, that's OR - that I shouldn't be afraid of being stamped at the entry "because unless Syria and Lebanon, most Arab states nowadays would let you pass with an Israeli stamp". Anyhow, sources are needed badly. I'll start looking, anybody around to help? --Ilyacadiz (talk) 00:22, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you count the Arab and Muslim countries which except IL passport, you'll see it is less than 50%. DrorK (talk) 19:41, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Israel–Italy relations

[edit]

I think this article needs to be removed. It has more links than actual content, and less information than most stud articles. Colonel Marksman (talk) 23:45, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed WikiProject - Bilateral relations

[edit]

There is now a upstart WikiProject to establish a concensus about WP's International bilateral relations articles, including "X-Y (country) relations" articles, at Wikipedia:Centralized discussion/Bilateral international relations. Interested parties should add their names at Wikipedia:WikiProject International relations/Bilateral relations task force if they wish to play a part in the discussions or have an Interest in this going forward. Thank you for your attention. CaribDigita (talk) 23:02, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]


IL - US

[edit]

Excuse me, but the first state to recognize the Israel as an independednt state was USSR. Here at Israel every school child knows it.Kreecher (talk) 13:58, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The US was the first to recognize Israel de-facto (11 minutes after the declaration), and de-jure a few months later. The USSR recognized it de-jure 3 days after the declaration. okedem (talk) 15:45, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

France-Israel relations

[edit]

There ought to be more information on France–Israel relations. France often appears to have an independent foreign policy with regards to Israel, which in some ways contrasts to the United States, a country that is often perceived as having a favourable bias towards Israel. ADM (talk) 20:45, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Contradiction on Taiwan (ROC)

[edit]

This article states that the Republic of China (a.k.a. Taiwan) doesn't recognize Israel. However, the colored map shows that Taiwan and Israel do recognize each other. The issue of whether or not Taiwan recognizes Israel was discussed above, inconclusively. Whichever the answer is, an article should not contradict itself. I don't have the knowledge as to which way it should be changed, so can anybody find any evidence as to which is true? Remember that despite how China's "One China Policy" works, Taiwan could still be recognizing Israel without Israel recognizing Taiwan. What to do? (Ejoty (talk) 07:06, 28 January 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Omm omm omm bhagabate badudevaya namah omm omm. Nam mmo aa di da phatt... Namm mo aa di dda phatt.. Sudippurohit (talk) 08:32, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Omm omm omm Bhagabate basudevaya namah Omm iscon namah aamim amigm aameen Sudippurohit (talk) 08:32, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Israel–Nicaragua relations

[edit]

I noticed on the nice world map that, as of January 2009, Nicaragua no longer recognizes Israel. I can find no other information in the article (or anywhere else on wikipedia) about this. I think at least a sentence deserves to be written about this. Anybody have a source? --Tea with toast (talk) 00:03, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First, two corrections. The map is not about recognition but about diplomatic relations. The fact that there were once relation actually implies recognition. Second, the map says June 2010, not January 2009. As to the facts themselves, they are correct, Nicaragua suspended diplomatic ties in June 2010 in response to the Gaza flotilla raid. I added a line about this to the article (by the way, a google search on "Nicaragua suspends relations with Israel" is all it took to find a source) --Muhandes (talk) 06:11, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Inaccuracies in map

[edit]

There are a number of countries shown on the map in orange (as never having had diplomatic realtions with Israel) which should be colored yellow (as formerly having such diplomatic relations). These are Cuba (until 1973), Niger (renewed relations severed in 2002), Guinea (until 1967), Chad (until 1972) and Mali (until 1973). Davshul (talk) 23:26, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So this article really, really sucks. And from the tone of it, it must have been written by the Israeli Min. of Foreign Affairs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.68.197.211 (talk) 01:41, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please be specific in how the page can be improved. What is specifically biased in your view? Outback the koala (talk) 04:41, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to the above inaccuracies, the latest version of the map (updated December 28, 2010) incorrectly shows that Turkey-Israel diplomatic relations were severed in 2010. Although such relations are somewhat cool, as indicated in the text, they have not been severed. Davshul (talk) 16:28, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have now posted an updated map to reflect the above. Davshul (talk) 19:16, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Cyprus-Israeli Relations

[edit]

Someone must create a separated new article of Israeli Cyprus relations which are excessively strong! Cyprus-Israeli relations are the most improved relations between countries for the last two years and are based between the both hatred of Turkey, new gas extraction agreements, visits of Ministers of Foreign affairs between the two countries etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Worldglobal (talk • contribs) 17:11, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Israel Unrecognition

[edit]

So, if 22 countries don't recognize Israel, what would take its place? There's no other claimant over all of Israel's sovereign territory. I'm just confused because if Israel really wasn't a nation, then what would take its place? 97.96.65.123 (talk) 21:44, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

They don't necessarily have to recognise another state as possessors of the land to not recognise Israel. Most if not all recognise Palestine, so maybe they want the State of Palestine there. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 06:20, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Turkey Recognition

[edit]

Over the last few days there have been several attempts to add unsourced information to the Turkey section, namely that Turkey has been the first Muslim country to recognize Israel. This contrasts with a sourced and reliable statement that appears in the section. I believe that we are all mature enough to abide by Wiki rules or at least have a civil discussion, but if this goes on protected status will be requested. This is true for any edit war of this nature. PluniAlmoni (talk) 22:12, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cook Islands and Niue?

[edit]

I believe both these territories have their foreign affairs managed by New Zealand. They have no "diplomatic relations" of their own. Should they be removed from the list? Eliyohub (talk) 22:17, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Niue would appear to have no capacity under its constitution to establish diplomatic relations and although Cook Islands has a limited number of diplomatic missions abroad, its external affairs are generally handled by New Zealand. I am accordingly removing both territories from the list in the article. Davshul (talk) 09:19, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

israel mongolia relations?

[edit]

any info about that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.177.218.55 (talk) 14:38, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

South Sudan

[edit]

what is the position of South Sudan? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.125.216.218 (talk) 16:24, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:India - Israel military cooperation.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

[edit]
An image used in this article, File:India - Israel military cooperation.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 22:11, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nuclear ambiguity

[edit]

I added some information about Israel's policy of nuclear ambiguity, and it was deleted twice. It is very relevant in this page. Need not be long, given that there is a separate page about it. Please don't delete without discussing it first on this page. Nescio vos (talk) 20:14, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is an article about the 'Foreign relations of Israel' - not its nuclear policy or its military. Articles about 'Foreign relations of X' don't typically discuss their nuclear capability or strategy in the lead, not even when it is in a similar situation to Israel - for example see Foreign relations of Iran or Foreign relations of South Africa. If your material was deleted twice, that means it has no consensus, so you probably should not be re-adding it to the article. Jeff Song (talk) 23:01, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The second time I did not put it in the lead, but in the body of the article, and it still got deleted. If you look at Foreign relations of Iran you will see that there are various mentions of its nuclear program or that it aims to be a nuclear power. There are also a few mentions of things nuclear in Foreign relations of the United States. Nescio vos (talk) 14:39, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The two mentions of nuclear-related stuff on in Foreign relations of the United States tie the US's foreign relations with a specific country to that country's nuclear polices. They are not a generic discussion of the US's nuclear policy, which is what you are trying to add here. As I wrote above, if multiple editors have reverted you, you should seek consensus for your edit ohere first, rather than continuing to edit-war it into the article. Jeff Song (talk) 21:25, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:UNu-Dayan.jpg Nominated for Deletion

[edit]
An image used in this article, File:UNu-Dayan.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 18:55, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Malaysia

[edit]

The section on Malaysia has been tagged with Template:Recentism because it gives a shallow presentation of the history Israel's relations with Malaysia. All it is is a hodgepodge of Haaretz blogs and other recent news reports relating to an event that gives no insight to the reader as to what the history of Israel's relations with Malaysia have been. If it isn't trimmed or otherwise contextualized to adequately reflect what should be an encyclopedic narration of these two countries' bilateral interactions over the years, then it may as well be removed altogether. Anyway, there's now a dedicated article on Israel–Malaysia relations making the information here both a misleading summary and extraneous.—Biosketch (talk) 06:28, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Poor image of Israel abroad

[edit]

I am sure that this will not be welcome but this information from Haaretz should be introduced in the article. As well as the official reaction of the Israeli government, if any. 81.247.182.61 (talk) 17:58, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Has there been any more extensive coverage than that? That source is essentially a guy's blog, after all, and WP:NOT#NEWS advises against the inclusion of information that lacks enduring notability, which would seem to be the case with the poll in question.—Biosketch (talk) 18:25, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Add a separate section on the Energy Triangle

[edit]

The Energy Triangle in the Eastern part of the Medditerenean consists of Greece, Israel and Cyprus and is predicted to lead to greater economic and diplomatic collaboration between the three countries. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kotsia2 (talk • contribs) 19:49, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

any information about israel - brunie relations?

[edit]

??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.182.110.162 (talk) 11:21, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

any information about israel - brunie relations?

[edit]

any info on the matter? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.182.110.162 (talk) 11:24, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Libertarian party USA

[edit]

"Especially since the end of the Cold War, American libertarians have questioned the support and aid given to Israel by the United States, consistent with libertarian opposition to foreign aid in general. As the Libertarian Party (U.S.) notes, "There is great wisdom in remaining disconnected from the problems facing other nations, especially when these problems are complicated and have negative consequences for getting involved." [1]" I removed that from the United States section. WP:SOAP Wikipedia is not a soapbox. Consider making a blog if you wish to advocate for the Libertarian Party. WP:GEVAL Including those views here would solely stand to legitimize them. The views are out of place here. They certainly aren't notable.Serialjoepsycho (talk) 00:40, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Davis, Andrew. "End Aid to Israel and the World." January 2009. http://www.libertarianpeacenik.com/articles/2011/davisonisrael.html

Turkey and Iran

[edit]

The article currently says of both Iran and Turkey that they were the first Muslim-majority country to recognise Israel. Intelligent Mr Toad (talk) 16:30, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 9 external links on Foreign relations of Israel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:26, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Foreign relations of Israel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:31, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Guinea

[edit]

Press reports indicate that Israel and Guinea reestablished diplomatic relations on July 20, 2016. http://www.timesofisrael.com/after-49-years-israel-renewes-diplomatic-ties-with-guinea/ This page needs to be updated appropriately. One-Off Contributor (talk) 17:15, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Foreign relations of Israel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:55, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 16 external links on Foreign relations of Israel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:15, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not having diplomatic relations vs. non-recognition

[edit]

This article simply messes the two. For instance, the map claims North Korea and Cuba does not recognize Israel, which is definitely not true, there are tourists from Israel in North Korea and Cuba who go there without troubles using Israeli passports. This article seems a piece of anti Cuba and anti-DPRK propoaganda.--Reciprocist (talk) 14:34, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Map Update for Nicaragua March 2017

[edit]

With the reestablishment of diplomatic relations between Nicaragua and Israel on 29 March 2017 [1] [2], the map attached to this article needs to be updated. One-Off Contributor (talk) 17:01, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://www.jta.org/2017/03/29/news-opinion/israel-middle-east/israel-and-nicaragua-to-re-establish-diplomatic-ties
  2. ^ http://mfa.gov.il/MFA/PressRoom/2017/Pages/Israel-and-Nicaragua-to-re-establish-diplomatic-relations-29-March-2017.aspx
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 21 external links on Foreign relations of Israel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:02, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Foreign relations of Israel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:48, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Foreign relations of Israel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:16, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 August 2017

[edit]

Flags of Colombia and Kosovo should be removed, since they are not necessary or used for the rest of countries in this article.--181.10.75.46 (talk) 08:39, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 13:47, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 30 August 2017

[edit]

The article currently contains 2 different references, both labeled with the id "autogenerated1" - This causes a citation error making the article appear in Category:Pages with duplicate reference names. I request that the following changes be made to remove the error and distinguish the two references (changes are highlighted in red):

<ref name="autogenerated1">{{cite web|url=http://www.smi.uib.no/pao/hawas.html|title=Turkey and Israel|publisher=Smi.uib.no|accessdate=5 June 2010}}</ref>
should be changed to
<ref name="turkeyandisreal">{{cite web|url=http://www.smi.uib.no/pao/hawas.html|title=Turkey and Israel|publisher=Smi.uib.no|accessdate=5 June 2010}}</ref>
and
<ref name=autogenerated1>{{cite web|url=http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-Ed-Contributors/China-Israel-relations-are-bound-to-blossomHE-GAO-YANPING-347495|title=China-Israel relations are bound to blossom H.E. GAO YANPING|work=The Jerusalem Post - JPost.com}}</ref>
should be changed to
<ref name=jerusalempost>{{cite web|url=http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-Ed-Contributors/China-Israel-relations-are-bound-to-blossomHE-GAO-YANPING-347495|title=China-Israel relations are bound to blossom H.E. GAO YANPING|work=The Jerusalem Post - JPost.com}}</ref>

This should fix the citation error and also make it easer for later contributors to reference the two sources should they be needed at a different place in the article. Respectfully, InsaneHacker (💬) 16:28, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done I've even gone a step further and renamed "autogenerated2" to "middlekingdom". jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 19:47, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Foreign relations of Israel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:53, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please add to main page

[edit]


Thanks.

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Foreign relations of Israel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:25, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Grammatical Corrections

[edit]

I noticed a couple of grammatical issues in the United Arab Emirates section I have noted my changes with Italics.

Relations are typically tense. No Israeli citizens has beenallowed entry following the assassination of Mahmoud Al-Mabhouh even if trying to enter using a foreign passport. The United Arab Emirates does not recognize Israel as a state, and the two countries do not have diplomatic or economic relations. More recently relations have improved to the extent that Israel has decided to open an office in Abu Dhabi, albeit only as a mission to the International Renewable Energy Agency.

Dondville (talk) 19:41, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 September 2018

[edit]

Kosovo is not Serbia 82.114.78.73 (talk) 12:30, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done Article doesn't say it is. Fish+Karate 12:31, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How many UN states do not recognize Israel? 30 or 29?

[edit]

It is said in the beginning of the article that "30 UN member states do not recognize Israel. These include 17 members of the Arab League <...> A further 9 are members of Organisation of Islamic Cooperation <...> Other countries which do not recognize Israel include Bhutan, Cuba and North Korea.

So: 17 members of Arab league + 9 OIC countries + 3 other countries = 29 countries. Thus, how many countries do not recognize Israel, 29 or 30?

Also later in the article it is said that Israel does not have diplomatic relations with 31 countries. I think the article needs some clarification and maybe some data should be updated. Evgeny smirnov (talk)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 April 2019

[edit]

I propose adding the following text at the end of the passage about under subheading "Rwanda:"

In January 2019, transportation ministers of Israel and Rwanda announced plans to inaugurate regular Air Rwanda flights to Israel.[1] Then, in April 2019, Israel opened an embassy in Kigali.[2] E8QLx4L (talk) 12:32, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Done LittlePuppers (talk) 04:36, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Bachner, Michael (January 7, 2019). "Israel, Rwanda to open direct flight between countries 'within months'". The Times of Israel. Retrieved April 1, 2019.
  2. ^ Lazaroff, Tovah (April 1, 2019). "Israel Opens First Embassy in Rwanda". The Jerusalem Post. Retrieved April 1, 2019.

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 May 2019

[edit]

I propose removing the link to Israel on the first word in this articleHelloimahumanbeing (talk) 13:50, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, the bold restatement of the title shouldn't contain wikilinks. However, "Israel" isn't the name of the article, so the correct thing to do here per MOS:TITLEABSENTBOLD is to remove the bold emphasis from the word Israel. I have completed this, which means the link can stay where it is as the first mention of Israel in the article. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 15:17, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Add the whole legend to the map of Israel/Palestine recognition

[edit]

Please add the whole legend (like in the description of the file) to that file in the article. It will violate nothing and just will explain coloring of the map. The legend might be expandable/collapsible so as not to disturb article's reading.--Joél be back (talk) 14:13, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bolivia announces renewal of diplomatic ties

[edit]

Source: [16]

Can someone update the map?

Thanks, —Ynhockey (Talk) 22:34, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's not the only one - this one too: File:CountriesRecognizingIsrael2018.svg Here come the Suns (talk) 22:45, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Text and several maps in this article still need to be edited as of 18 December 2019 to reflect change in status on Bolivia. One-Off Contributor (talk) 05:04, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Note: These map images are served from Commons and are only editable from there (save if we keep local copy, which we don't want to do). Please request for it to be updated at Commons:Graphic Lab/Map workshop – Ammarpad (talk) 07:38, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Omm group of auerobindo and shreema...

[edit]

Omm omm omm Bhagabate basudevaya namah Omm omm omm omm Bhagabate basudevaya namah... Sudippurohit (talk) 08:30, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


The style of writing in Lebanon/ Israel section

[edit]

The paragraph mixes things when it uses 'jew' instead of 'Israeli' The disapproval rates are against Israeli, and not against jews, true there is a mix between the two within non educated slices, but Lebanese citizens do not have same attitude toward a Jewish person from France or USA (who doesn't carry an Israeli passport) and an Israeli citizen (who is referred to Zionist, in reference or Zionist movement that established Israel. I advise updating this section by replacing 'jew' with 'Israeli' for accuracy. This mistake might not be innocent because Israeli tend to mask things here as anti-Semitic to get bias and sympathy. Mhd196 (talk) 18:11, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Takwan

[edit]

Taiwan is shown as having no relations with Israel on the map but is not listed. List Taiwan. BrendanKennedy (talk) 07:24, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In fact Taiwan has an embassy in Israel so this map needs to change. BrendanKennedy (talk) 07:35, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 6 August 2020

[edit]

The "open borders" in the second sentence of the introduction should be changed to "legal border crossings". I am pretty sure that no one could just walk over those borders especially considering the current geopolitical situation in the region. StellarHalo (talk) 10:11, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are right to object, but I don't like "legal border crossings" either. Legal under which law? Anyway it is unsourced so I'm removing it. Zerotalk 10:19, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Maldives

[edit]

According to the following source, the Maldives in fact do not have foreign relations with Israel: https://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-warns-israelis-to-leave-crisis-racked-maldives/amp/

In fact, the full relations were never re-established after being severed in the 1980's. There were recently 3 bilateral agreements that did not amount to full relations (there was no accredited Israeli ambassador to the Maldives and vice versa), and these were later annulled. The entry, including the map, should be accordingly updated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.64.206.209 (talk) 14:42, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

UAE should be colored

[edit]

UAE should be colored on the map, since now there's mutual recognition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.142.8.6 (talk) 02:30, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Too soon; there is an agreement for mutual recognition but the official signing has not yet occurred. Zerotalk 05:29, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

UAE: This sentence in the first paragraph of the article is clearly wrong - as is seen by the apposition of "peace" and "non-recognition": "A peace agreement between the United Arab Emirates and Israel was announced on 13 August 2020, ending decades of non-recognition from UAE." These two states have never been at war (https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/the-circle-of-peace/), this is just the president's not very precise language for the general public. (see however, the official statement here where there is no mention of a "peace agreement": https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/joint-statement-united-states-state-israel-united-arab-emirates/) These two countries will establish normal diplomatic ties... And of course there is a big (!) difference between war and non-recognition... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:DF:5F4F:8718:E96F:2A5F:9603:D0DA (talk) 09:08, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kosovo

[edit]

Press articles dated September 4, 2020 indicate that Kosovo and Israel will recognize each other, which would require an update to the article and its graphics. Sources: https://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-kosovo-to-be-first-muslim-majority-nation-to-open-jerusalem-embassy/, https://www.timesofisrael.com/serbia-to-move-embassy-to-jerusalem-mostly-muslim-kosovo-to-recognize-israel/.One-Off Contributor (talk) 18:29, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bahrain September 2020

[edit]

Based on press accounts concerning possible normalization on September 11, 2020 (https://www.timesofisrael.com/bahrain-to-establish-full-diplomatic-relations-with-israel-trump-announces/#gs.fven4y), an update may be needed.One-Off Contributor (talk) 17:27, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 11 September 2020

[edit]

In the introduction section, it should be 18 out 22 Arab league countries not 19. Plus update Bahrain section! 220.89.224.191 (talk) 19:49, 11 September 2020 (UTC) 220.89.224.191 (talk) 19:49, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Partly done: Changed number of Arab League countries not recognising. Please make a specific edit request, with sources, for the Bahrain section. Danski454 (talk) 23:37, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 12 September 2020

[edit]

In the introduction, the 18 of the 22 members of the Arab League include Palestine instead of Bahrain! For Bahrain section, this source for normalizing relations. 220.89.224.191 (talk) 00:26, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Already done Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:25, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The UN member states non-recognition count should be updated

[edit]

The UN member states non-recognition count was not updated since the UAE and Bahrain have recognized Israel in a move to normalize relations [1] Both countries, the UAE and Bahrain are full UN member states. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.142.6.45 (talk) 09:00, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Too soon. They have not recognised Israel, they have only said that they intend to. Zerotalk 14:49, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
And now it has occurred. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/15/uae-bahrain-and-israel-sign-historic-accords-at-white-house-event-formal-relations-trump-netanyahu One-Off Contributor (talk) 19:05, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Michael Crowley; David M. Halbfinger (11 September 2020). "Bahrain Will Normalize Relations With Israel, in Deal Brokered by Trump". The New York Times.

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 September 2020

[edit]

Per WP:LAYOUT, the update message box should go before the image. JsfasdF252 (talk) 06:39, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

JsfasdF252, could you tell me where? HeartGlow (talk) 13:24, 16

September 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:26, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

UAE & Bahrain, also recognition count

[edit]

Due to Bahrain and the UAE recognising Israel, the number of countries recognising it is 164. And, updates within the page about Arab league members that doesn't recognise Israel (Bahrain) and so on.

 Already done Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:25, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Countries that have no diplomatic relations with Israel

[edit]

Israel does not currently maintain diplomatic relations with the Maldives (though the latter does recognize the State of Israel). Previous diplomatic relations lasted between 1965 and 1974, and were then suspended. During the 1990's they indeed improved, culminating in the signing of 3 mutual agreements, however they never developed into full diplomatic relations. In fact, as mentioned on the Israel-Maldives relations section and wiki entry, even the aforementioned agreements were ultimately dissolved in 2014. See sources: https://mfa.gov.il/mfa/pressroom/2011/pages/maldive_foreign_minister_visiting_israel_17_may_2011.aspx and https://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-warns-israelis-to-leave-crisis-racked-maldives/amp/.

The entry's first paragraph (as well as footnote 1) should therefore be amended: "Israel has diplomatic relations with 161 of the other 192 UN member states as of September 2020.[1] Israel maintains full diplomatic relations with two of its Arab neighbours, Egypt and Jordan, after signing peace treaties in 1979 and 1994 respectively. In 2020, Israel signed agreements establishing diplomatic relations with two other Arab countries, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates. Thirty one UN member states do not have relations with Israel: 17 of the 21 UN members in the Arab League (Algeria, Comoros, Djibouti, Iraq, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia and Yemen), 10 other members of Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Brunei, Indonesia, Iran, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Niger and Pakistan), Bhutan, Cuba, North Korea and Venezuela.[2]"

The diplomatic relations map should also be amended accordingly to reflect the Maldives as having previous diplomatic relations with Israel (painted green with the year 1974 attached).

Under the section Diplomatic Relations, the first paragraph should read: "After the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, Israel was subjected to Arab League boycotts and attempts to diplomatically isolate the state. As of 2020, Israel has diplomatic ties with 161 out of the other 192 member states of the United Nations, as well as with the Holy See, Kosovo, the Cook Islands and Niue.[1] Some other countries recognize Israel as a state, but have no diplomatic relations. Several countries once had diplomatic relations with Israel, but have since broken or suspended them (Cuba and Venezuela in Latin America, Mauritania in the Arab League, Mali and Niger in non-Arab Africa, the Maldives in Southern Asia and Iran until the Islamic revolution). In addition, a number of countries (all members of the Arab League) that at one time had formal economic ties (primarily trade offices) with Israel, which fell short of full diplomatic relations, have severed such ties (Morocco, Oman, Qatar and Tunisia)."

The section Member States of the United Nations should also be amended ("As of 2020, 31 United Nations member states do not maintain diplomatic relations with Israel..."), and "the Maldives (1965-1974)" should be added under South and Central Asia.

The Maldives section should read along the lines of: "Israel and the Maldives established diplomatic relations in 1965, but these were suspended in 1974. Relations between the two countries has started to warm up when a new government came into power in the Maldives in 2008. The president of Maldives, Mohamed Nasheed announced that he would like to establish diplomatic relations with Israel, and the countries have signed 3 bilateral agreements. However, the renewed relationship has never developed into full diplomatic relations."

 Done Some news articles claimed that the Maldives established diplomatic relations with Israel in 2009,[17] and that in 2014 the Maldives canceled the agreements but didn't fully sever relations.[18] However, direct government sources from both countries during that period[19][20] and currently[21][22] state that the countries don't have diplomatic relations, so it seems that those news articles misinterpreted the situation. As you wrote, the agreements from 2009 didn't develop into full diplomatic relations. I corrected the article and map. Heitordp (talk) 03:45, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 September 2020

[edit]
Flushing Girl (talk) 02:30, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I want to edit the Kosovo article on the Foreign relations of Israel article and I want to place it below Italy. Israel and Kosovo have now recognized each other on 4 September 2020 and have established full diplomatic relations. Just let me edit that article. Thanks. 21, September 2020, 22:30 (UTC) talk User:Flushing Girl

 Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone will add them for you. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 02:53, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Sudan needs an update

[edit]

2601:602:9200:1310:E988:4346:3E73:1A14 (talk) 01:39, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 October 2020

[edit]

You should update Sudan in the whole article! 36.230.208.154 (talk) 14:32, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Asartea Trick | Treat 14:37, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 October 2020 Sudan Update

[edit]

Sudan needs a subsection; it needs to be removed as not having any relations with Israel in the first paragraph stating the 17 out of 21 UN members states; it is now 16 out of 20. And it needs to be removed from the sub of a subsection titled: No diplomatic relations; Member states of the United Nations. 72.229.44.69 (talk) 21:26, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done This is premature. There is talk about it but no formal relations yet. Zerotalk 09:54, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 December 2020

[edit]

Change " Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah," to " Hassan Nasrallah, the secretary general of Hezbollah" MojtabaZer (talk) 16:29, 3 December 2020 (UTC)  Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit extended-protected}} template. Please establish consensus on the talk page first. Secretary general can have a different meaning within various organizations and might not match with the leadership role, so simply saying leader might make more sense for this page. It does say Secretary General on Nasrallah's page. Swil999 (talk) 09:46, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Morocco 2020

[edit]

Morocco may need to be updated. https://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-and-morocco-to-establish-full-official-relations-trump-announces/ One-Off Contributor (talk) 17:16, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Morocco still needs to be updated on the map "World map showing status of Israel's diplomatic relations." One-Off Contributor (talk) 04:15, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bhutan

[edit]

From 12th December, Bhutan and Israel have developed diplomatic relations[1], so can someone add content regarding that here? Master Sam 77 (talk) 16:58, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-israel-establishes-diplomatic-relations-with-bhutan-1.9367355

Additional source to confirm: https://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-inks-deal-establishing-diplomatic-relations-with-bhutan/ One-Off Contributor (talk) 23:41, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New category

[edit]

I think we need a new category the for map. Some countries have had frozen their relationship with Israel as well as withdrawn their recognition (e.g. Iran,...), while others have only frozen the relationship but still recognize Israel. Should we keep them in a same category or separate the two? Sesroh Fo Maerd I (talk) 22:07, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 December 2020

[edit]

The 2 countries listed are only Bahrain and the UAE in the first paragraph. Update for Morocco and Sudan. Impossiblegend (talk) 09:08, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

They are already mentioned.--Watchlonly (talk) 17:04, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 December 2020 (2)

[edit]

Please put together the first three isolated sentences in lede into a single paragraph.--Watchlonly (talk) 17:03, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Already done? I don't see them. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 13:14, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, thank you. I have other two edit requests in different articles in relation to this topic (1, 2). Could you take a look at them?--Watchlonly (talk) 16:14, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 26 January 2021

[edit]

Change Bhutan on the SECOND map. Israel and Bhutan established relations a few months ago. Impossiblegend (talk) 14:38, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 17:13, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Israel established full diplomatic relations with Bhutan for the first time on 12th December 2020. [1] [2] Hope this sources are reliable.

 Already done , looks like the map was updated. In the future these requests should be made on the talk page of the image, rather than this page. Thanks. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:17, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.jpost.com/international/israel-normalizes-ties-with-bhutan-651904
  2. ^ https://www.reuters.com/article/israel-bhutan-idUSKBN28M0NK

Merger proposal

[edit]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was not to merge. Selfstudier (talk) 17:59, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal to merge Arab states–Israeli alliance against Iran into Foreign relations of Israel. None of the article sources give the fact of this "alliance" together with a list of it's "members" so the article is lacking a foundational source. If it exists, it is not clear when it was founded or what its objectives are, only that some states might have some reason to fear or dislike Iran. Most of the sources talk singly about this or that or several states disliking Iran and therefore having some reason to cooperate with Israel but a confluence of interests is not the same as an alliance. Note that the list of members has fluctuated over the life of the article. A recent delete proposal resulted in keep in the sense of "do not delete" ie the material ought not to be lost and a merge considered. Several editors suggested a merge with Foreign relations of Israel and therefore this proposal is recommended.

@Huldra, Steamboat2020, Sliekid, ImTheIP, Shrike, Vici Vidi, and Mr.User200: You recently participated in a discussion concerning the article Arab states–Israeli alliance against Iran which is now subject of this merge proposal.Selfstudier (talk) 16:01, 5 February 2021 (UTC) (Note, editor WikiCleanerMan also participated and has been advised on his talk page directly.)Selfstudier (talk) 16:54, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reject Proposal: @Selfstudier: I believe it's a noteworthy alliance that deserves it's own page. It is also sometimes referred to as a "Sunni-Israel" alliance. or "Israel Sunni Axis". I got a lot of search results for it.-- see 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10- you can google for more.--Steamboat2020 (talk) 19:07, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Search results are fine but every article needs a foundational source ie we need at least one source saying something like "Here is blah blah alliance between Israel and (list of members) that was set up on (date) to do (something)". We don't have that here, can you find one in that list of results? Until we have such a source, the article could just be complete fiction. eg I can write an article saying The Russo-Chinese alliance versus the US and find loads of sources saying how they both don't like the US and work together at the UN to frustrate the US etc etc but that does not mean that there is an alliance, right?Selfstudier (talk) 19:17, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The middle east is a very complex region and Israeli-Arab ties are an extremely delicate relationship. Going back to the first US-Iraq war, the US asked Israel (it's ally), not to join the coalition and to refrain from fighting back when they were attacked by Iraqi missles. Both the US and Iraq understood that an alliance with Israel could rally support on the "Arab Street" for Iraq. If you understand the region, you don't expect an alliance of this sort to be announced publicly. Inteligence reports of an alliance of this nature which are confirmed by the behavior of nations in question are sufficent.--Steamboat2020 (talk) 21:22, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No: This article, Foreign Relations of Israel, is a broad survey of all of Israel's foreign relations and serves as a launching page to more detailed articles about those relationships. The Arab states–Israeli alliance against Iran article is one of those related topics that certainly should be mentioned, and linked to from this article, but merging it into the article would be WP:UNDUE. --Chefallen (talk) 22:41, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If it isn't mentioned in this article, the simplest way to achieve that would be to merge, wouldn't it? After the irrelevant material is removed there would only be a few sentences left to merge. Just for info, here is what an experienced editor thought about this article in 2019!. I never even heard of it until I accidentally showed up at the article last November, at that time the article stated that the U.S. was a member and that it was a "military alliance". Hmm.Selfstudier (talk) 14:12, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think this article is a stub that can be expanded. Firstly, it's a notable development that marks a sea change in the previously almost monolithically hostile approach of Arab states towards Israel. Secondly, it's a fairly recent development and can be expected to continue to evolve. Finally, there are already scholarly journals, foreign policy think analysts and newspapers who have taken note of it. (A quick sampling that took only minutes to find: World Affairs Journal, Brookings Institute, The Council on Foreign Relations, E-International Relations, FP, Bloomberg news; and there are many more). So the Foreign Relations of the Israel article is an appropriate place to mention this developing change in Israel's foreign relations with Arab states, but it needs a link to an article which can be expanded with the background, history and development until now, and presumably future developments. --Chefallen (talk) 03:34, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the essence of what you are saying just that there is no "alliance" and there should not be an infobox of members implying that there is. If the article were merged here, one could start over with a proper analysis of the situation by editors who understand it instead of the random junk that's there now and then spin it out as, idk, "Winds of change in the Arab Israeli sphere" or some title that more accurately describes what's going on, a confluence of interests, there's no joint commitment to anything, no money is changing hands. This is not a "deal" like, say, the UAE/Israel agreement, not even close. And I'm sure you agree that it would have been more usual to have started and then spun out from here, rather than trying to fix the mess for something not even mentioned here.Selfstudier (talk) 11:35, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Selfstudier: In your initial merger proposal you wrote: "A recent delete proposal resulted in keep in the sense of "do not delete" ie the material ought not to be lost and a merge considered. Several editors suggested a merge with Foreign relations of Israel and therefore this proposal is recommended." However, in you comment above to @Chefallen you wrote that "If the article were merged here, one could start over with a proper analysis of the situation by editors who understand it instead of the random junk that's there now", which seems to imply that you don't want to keep the material in the article and that you are in essence seeking to just delete the article. Would you please clarify your stance and exactly what you are proposing to achieve with the merger and explain and how your proposal is compatible with the results of the recent delete proposal. --Steamboat2020 (talk) 22:13, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't said anything contradictory. Most of the material in the other article is not relevant, imagine if the article was merged here, what would you keep. Delete in the sense of do not delete means "keep relevant material somehow, usually in a merge". I didn't propose deletion, another editor did, probably it should have been merge to begin with (Iran proxy conflict might be another possible target, idk). Frankly, the other article is just a mess, if the idea of the thing is notable (ie some sort of axis or confluence of interest but not an alliance), then at a minimum it should be renamed and the material structured to reflect reality, not fiction. Again, if it is notable, why is not even mentioned in this article? Do you see the inconsistencies? Selfstudier (talk) 22:29, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Correct me if I am mistaken but the foundation of your argument is your belief that the entire basis of the article is a complete fabrication. You accept that the countries in question all share a common anti-iranian goal and that on some level they even coordinate their iranian opposition. However, you believe that this doesn't qualify as an "alliance". I think you are setting a very high bar for an alliance. One of the accepted definitions of an "alliance" is merely "a relationship based on an affinity in interests, nature, or qualities." I encourage you to look it up!. Nobody is saying that the article doesn't need a lot of work but I do believe the premise of the article is both sound and notable--Steamboat2020 (talk) 23:29, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know to which argument your refer, there are several. The foundation of my argument in respect of the other page is clear from the tags I have placed, namely there is no source for the existence of an alliance or of its membership and therefore the article fails WP:V. After some period of time has elapsed to permit the location of such a source, the infobox will be deleted (two other editors have already done this and it has been improperly restored). The argument for merging I already made above and it seems perfectly clear to me. I can't force you to merge it, however you are mistaken if you think this problem will simply go away by virtue of obstruction.Selfstudier (talk) 11:56, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There are more than enough references to “reports” of such an “alliance” by respectable media outlets. You are insisting upon a reference to an official government statement which is something that usually doesn’t happen with Israel/Arab relationships. The article doesn’t claim that it’s an alliance that has been officially declared. Quite the contrary, the alliance is referred to as “unofficial”. There are many pages on Wikipedia that are dedicated to things that are “widely believed” but have never been “officially” confirmed. For example see: Nuclear weapons and Israel. -- Steamboat2020 (talk) 14:42, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It says "unofficial" because I edited it that way before I realized that the entire thing is SYNTH. Just look at the list of members, even the article creator couldn't make his mind up who was a member and who wasn't and recently two more "members" were added, again synth. I am not asking for any official confirmation, I am asking for what WP usually asks for, a single source that states that there is an alliance and who is in it. Let me know when you find one.Selfstudier (talk) 16:15, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No: Selfstudier, you know where I stand on this already. All of this is a covert alliance. Here are two articles from the past three-four years 1, and 2. Here is also an Al Jazeera report showcasing the growing alliance that has been emerging for a while now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiCleanerMan (talk • contribs) 16:21, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What has that to do with whether it gets merged here? What do you mean by "covert"? Only you and a privileged few know about it? Yea, right.Selfstudier (talk) 17:39, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Edgars Rinkevics

[edit]

change ((Edgars Rinkevics)) to ((Edgars Rinkēvičs)) 2601:541:4580:8500:5850:E7C2:5CA5:D08B (talk) 21:23, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. ‑‑Volteer1 (talk) 12:29, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Brazil's official rejection of an Israeli ambassador

[edit]

"A longstanding dispute between Israel and Brazil is ongoing over Brazil's official rejection of a new Israeli ambassador because of his ties to the West Bank.[371]"(c) This dispute has been actually solved years ago. Please fix. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.186.84.72 (talk) 18:49, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 March 2022

[edit]

Change "Israel is represented in Dominica through its embassy in Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic.", to: Israel is represented in the Dominican Republic through its embassy in Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic YHK120 (talk) 19:35, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Dr.Pinsky (talk) 07:35, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Eva Peron

[edit]

please change ((Eva Peron)) to ((Eva Perón)) 2601:541:4580:8500:F174:6C:6B68:5B48 (talk) 16:04, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Done M16A3NoRecoilHax (talk) 17:20, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Update Ireland's and Israel's ambassadors

[edit]


  • What I think should be changed (format using {{textdiff}}):
    −
    As of 2016 the Israeli ambassador to Ireland is Zeev Boker and the Irish ambassador to Israel is Alison Kelly.
    		+
    The Israeli ambassador to Ireland is [Ophir Kariv] and the Irish ambassador to Israel is [Kyle O'Sullivan].
  • Why it should be changed: The page should reflect the current ambassadors.
  • References supporting the possible change (format using the "cite" button): [1] [2]


eyal (talk) 16:19, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Ambassador Kyle O'Sullivan - Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade". www.dfa.ie. Retrieved 1 April 2023.
  2. ^ "October - New Ambassadors present Credentials - Department of Foreign Affairs". www.dfa.ie. Retrieved 1 April 2023.
 Done Thanks for following the formatting guidelines, that is much appreciated. Actualcpscm (talk) 17:16, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 April 2023

[edit]

Set description to "Overview of the foreign relations of Israel" BaduFerreira (talk) 12:43, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Question: Do you mean short description? Lightoil (talk) 03:40, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done: Please see WP:SDNONE. "Foreign relations of X" is a sufficiently detailed title. a!rado🦈 (C✙T) 11:40, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Colombia is wrong

[edit]

Colombia stopped its relations witb israel Dr Abbas Mohammed El Andalusi (talk) 22:44, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

needs updating...hourly!!! 192.80.164.249 (talk) 16:40, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

South Africa not broked diplomatic relations with Israel.95.18.140.251 (talk) 13:35, 18 August 2024 (UTC)-[reply]

Belize

[edit]

On November 14 2023 belze announced it's cutting ties with israel because of the israel hamas war Fnfp (talk) 12:05, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Details about Belize is already added Leoneix (talk) 13:15, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]


  • What I think should be changed (format using {{textdiff}}): the diplomatic relations section
  • Why it should be changed: it has noticeable inaccuracies such as Nicaragua having the wrong date and reference
  • References supporting the possible change (format using the "cite" button):[1]

Underdwarf58 (talk) 06:59, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Closed @Underdwarf58, @Fnfp the request must be of the form "please change X to Y". Along with this give reliable and accessible sources to support your request. I couldn't access your sources in JSTOR of which I have access of.
And I don't get why a Hispanic report would include details about diplomatic relations between Nicaragua and Israel. Anyways, I have found a source at https://www.jstor.org/stable/48595314 which mentions the begining of relations between the two and the necessary changes in the article have been done. Leoneix (talk) 13:13, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Hispanic American Report - Volume 7, Issues 1-12. Stanford University, Hispanic World Affairs Seminar. 1954. p. 14.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Foreign_relations_of_Israel&oldid=1240952771"