As the global climate crisis accelerates, cities around the world are grappling with an increasingly urgent question: how can local governments protect communities, infrastructure, and ecosystems from the rising tide of environmental disruption? This May, Stanford University will bring that question to the forefront with a landmark event examining how two dynamic and diverse cities — Los Angeles and Tel Aviv-Yafo — are responding to the climate challenge from the ground up.

Taking place May 29–30, 2025, and hosted by the Visiting Fellows in Israel Studies program at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law (CDDRL) and the Environmental Social Sciences department at Stanford’s Doerr School of Sustainability, “Climate Resilience and Local Governmental Policy: Lessons from Los Angeles and Tel Aviv” will be the largest academic conference ever held on Israel’s climate policy. The two-day event will convene experts from both cities to explore how local institutions are building equitable, sustainable, and adaptive systems to confront growing environmental risks.
 

As part of its 2025 Winter Webinar Series, the Visiting Fellows in Israel Studies program at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law (CDDRL) hosted a webinar featuring Dr. Yoav Heller in conversation with Amichai Magen. Heller is founder and Chairman of The Fourth Quarter, a grassroots Israeli civil society initiative dedicated to rebuilding centrist politics and generating a cohesive vision for Israeli society. 

Raised in Nigeria, the United States, and Northern Israel, Heller always held a dream of bringing together disparate communities. Heller noted that conflict between Hamas and Israel in May 2021 saw ensuing rifts between Arab-Israelis and Jewish-Israelis, though Magen argued that not only did Arab-Israelis largely ignore Hamas’s encouragement to attack their Jewish neighbors, but that Israeli-Arabs felt more connected to Israel than ever after the October 7th Hamas attack, which targeted Christian and Muslim Arab-Israelis, as well as Jews. Heller also argued that top-down politics increasingly fail to address core societal concerns in the country, as politicians focus on the limited desires of their interest groups, and, because of polarization, aim for zero sum. Thus, he founded The Fourth Quarter.

Heller argued that current polarization in Israel is not primarily over policy, but over identity. Ideologically, Israelis are becoming less polarized, but their emotional attachments to their identity keep them at odds. Heller cited research showing that although Israelis claim unwillingness to compromise on policy because they feel they would be compromising their identities, when presented with concrete compromises, they express acceptance of those compromises.

Pointing to Mancur Olson’s theory that says small groups with narrow political agendas tend to defeat broad groups with disparate agendas, Magen asked how The Fourth Quarter will incentivize politicians’ focus on shared interests. Heller responded that citizen buy-in is imminent, as tragedy brings people together and leads to centrism. In this case, October 7 showed Israelis that Israel broke its promise to never again see mass murder of Jews. Political change, however, will take time. Israel needs new leaders who will come from the grassroots movement. Already, there are 300 diverse leaders throughout Israel working to build up The Fourth Quarter’s following from diverse populations.

During the Q&A, Heller discussed foreign relations. He noted that The Fourth Quarter does not have official foreign policy positions or positions on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. However, Heller says the word “peace” must reenter Israeli discourse. Long-term peace activism, rather than quickly implementing patchwork solutions, will achieve peace. 

Heller ended by saying that hope means imagining a better future and taking actions to achieve it. He cited The Fourth Quarter’s About page, which starts, “After Israel’s establishment, Ben Gurion was asked if he was satisfied … He answered: Ask me when the State of Israel is 75 years old. Or when the children born then no longer meet Holocaust survivors or the founding generation. At that point, assuring the righteousness of our path will require redefinition, based not on what was, but on what will be.”

On February 26, the Visiting Fellows in Israel Studies program at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law (CDDRL) was pleased to host Ambassador Stuart E. Eizenstat for a talk on his new book, The Art of Diplomacy. Eizenstat’s distinguished career in Washington, spanning five decades, included his work as a former ambassador to the European Union and as Deputy Secretary of the Treasury. He spoke with Stanford faculty and students about the importance of diplomacy and the dangers of isolationism. Drawing from personal experience and examples from close colleagues such as Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, Eizenstat identified the attributes and strategies necessary for diplomacy. Leaders engaged in diplomacy require “unsympathetic empathy,” courage, and intellect. They must know the other side’s history and culture, come to negotiations prepared, and possess stamina — both mental and physical — for months-long or years-long negotiations.

Eizenstat shared how his connection to Israel has inspired some of his teaching. He described how Jimmy Carter’s incremental progress and knowledge of his fellow negotiators allowed him to drive the Camp David Accords. In his stories about the Oslo Accords, he also highlighted the utility of back channels in negotiations.

Outlining the role of leverage in diplomacy, Eizenstat noted that whereas positive leverage involves giving the other side what they want, negative leverage includes actions such as sanctions and military support. He argued that sanctions are ineffective in the current era and that military force should come as a last resort. Offering analyses of the War in Afghanistan, the Iraq War, the Gulf War, and the war in Gaza, Eizenstat described successful and unsuccessful uses of war in diplomacy. If resorting to war, leaders must prioritize national interests, stay equipped to change their plans, have good intelligence, understand local alliances and advantages, and establish post-war strategies.

During the question and answers portion of the seminar, Eizenstat spoke about deterrence, credibility, and strategic decision-making in international conflicts, referencing Obama's red line in Syria, Kennedy’s Cuban Missile Crisis strategy, and the current situation in Ukraine. He also emphasized the roles public opinion and public pressure play in diplomacy, noting that they are far more powerful in democracies.

You can listen to the audio of Ambassador Eizenstat's presentation below:

For decades, we tended to think about the Middle East as a region of the world perpetually trailing behind the arc of history — unable to arrive at democracy, economic interdependence, cooperative regionalism, and peace. But what if the Middle East is not a laggard, but a laboratory for 21st-century geopolitics? What if we approach the Middle East through a different lens, as an arena where global and regional powers (United States, Russia, China, Iran, Israel, Egypt, Turkey, etc.) compete to shape a new political order, offering us invaluable insights into the possible futures of global politics?

Geopolitics in the 21st-Century Middle East will explore the actors, trends, and dynamics that created the modern Middle East and shape it today and provide possible scenarios for the future. Featuring experts from across Stanford and the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law, as well as experts from other institutions, the course starts with a historical overview of the formation of the modern Middle East. It will also analyze the role of states, authoritarianism, and violent non-state actors in the region. The course will then examine how various countries — Egypt, Iran, Israel, Lebanon, and Turkey, for example — approach the deep transformations taking place in the Middle East. Toward the end of the course, students will consider scenarios for the future, including how the Middle East intersects with broader changes in the international system. Finally, the course will discuss prospects for resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and evaluate whether the current tumult in the Middle East could create unexpected opportunities for broader regional peace.

Guest lecturers include Ali Yaycıoğlu (Director, Abbasi Program in Islamic Studies, Stanford), Lisa Blaydes (Professor in Political Science and Senior Fellow, Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, Stanford), Amichai Magen (Visiting Professor and Fellow in Israel Studies, Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, Stanford), Hanin Ghaddar (Senior Fellow, Linda and Tony Rubin Program on Arab Politics, Washington Institute), Cole Bunzel (Hoover Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford), Hesham Sallam (Senior Research Scholar, Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law, Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, Stanford), Ayça Alemdaroğlu (Associate Director, Program on Turkey, Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, Stanford), Abbas Milani (Director, Hamid and Christina Moghadam Program in Iranian Studies, Stanford), Benjamin Miller (Professor of International Relations, University of Haifa), and Ghaith al-Omari (Rosalinde and Arthur Gilbert Foundation Senior Fellow, Washington Institute).

As part of its 2025 Winter Webinar Series, the Visiting Fellows in Israel Studies program at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law (CDDRL) hosted a webinar featuring Eugene Kandel in conversation with Amichai Magen. Kandel, the former head of Israel’s National Economic Council and a professor of economics and finance at Hebrew University, is the co-founder of the Israel Strategic Futures Institute (ISFI). The talk focused on Kandel’s work at ISFI in diagnosing what Kandel and his colleagues identify as internal existential risks for Israel, and the policy ideas generated by ISFI in response to those risks.

Kandel began his analysis by pointing out the fact that the post-Cold War era has been one of spectacular economic success for Israel. The country entered 2022 with a budget surplus, record employment, and low public debt. But this, Kandel believes, is an increasingly precarious, indeed unsustainable reality. Describing a deep demographic shift towards the Haredi (ultraorthodox) and religious-nationalist population, as well as growing structural weaknesses in Israel’s economy and government, Kandel warned that Israel could face a "run on the country" if it did not provide the most productive parts of its population with guarantees that their values would be protected.

Kandel outlined the three incompatible ideological groupings found in Israeli society. One group believes in Jewish liberal democracy, one is primarily Hasidic and believes in the Torah’s centrality, and one desires a non-Jewish country for all citizens. Disproportionate population growth in the Hasidic group puts liberal democracy at risk, while Hasidic citizens rely heavily on social services, which will soon be unsustainable.

Drawing on examples in Northern Ireland, Switzerland, and Belgium, Kandel proposes a professional, easily replaceable, non-political government. Every Israeli citizen would be a member of one of three "Alumot"—a word meaning clusters—each with their own constitutions, taxes, social services, and elections. Changes in government would require consensus from all three Alumot. Since citizens would choose their Alumot freely and could even switch between them, the Alumot serving members would be motivated to improve citizens’ lives and economic conditions.

Magen countered that Kandel's proposals wrongly gave up on a shared Israeliness that - with all its difficulties - has proven highly successful in the past seven and a half decacdes, and that the Alumot idea is politically impractical. Kandel and Magen discussed how the current issues with Israeli society, namely its division, are the same limiting factor in adapting a new political system. They also discussed how Jews outside Israel can help the Israeli government thrive, and how Israel needs to address its internal conflicts if it has a realistic prospect of successfully managing its external challenges.

A full recording of the conversation can be viewed below.

As part of its 2025 Winter Webinar Series, the Visiting Fellows in Israel Studies program at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law (CDDRL) hosted a webinar featuring Ari Shavit in conversation with Amichai Magen. One of Israel's most seasoned and informed journalists and political analysts, Shavit is also the author of the New York Times bestseller My Promised Land: The Triumph and Tragedy of Israel (2013). In the aftermath of the October 7th Hamas attack, Shavit was one of the first to grapple with the strategic causes and consequences of the attack and subsequent war, publishing a short book on the subject in the spring of 2024, titled Existential War: From Catastrophe, to Victory, to Revival (2024) [Hebrew]. 

Taking Existential War as the starting point for their conversation, Magen and Shavit discussed how a combination of Israeli complacency, miscalculations vis-a-vis Hamas, internal divisions, and overreliance on defensive technologies allowed the October 7th attacks to occur. They discussed Ze’ev Jabotinsky’s 1923 essay, The Iron Wall, and David Ben-Gurion's national defense strategy as a means of understanding the contemporary struggle between Iran and its proxies, on the one hand, and Israel and its allies, on the other hand. Shavit outlined Israel’s past successes and the need to update Jabotinsky’s and Ben-Gurion's strategic doctrines for 21st-century realities. For Shavit, Iran poses the greatest threat to stability and safety in the Middle East and the West. Magen and Shavit also discussed the future of Gaza and Syria, the roles that Turkey, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia play in the region, and the risk that the weakening of the Iran-led Shi'a axis could be replaced by a Syria-centered radical Sunni axis in the Middle East. Against this background, it is imperative that the United States work closely with Israel and pragmatic Sunni Arab countries in the region — most importantly, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, and the UAE — to shape a new regional framework for the Middle East.

A full recording of the conversation can be viewed below.

Lore has it that the late President Ronald Reagan loved telling “the one about the pony.” In his rendition of the story, the parents of twin brothers—one a diehard pessimist, the other an eternal optimist—consulted a psychologist who recommended a unique experiment. On the twins’ next birthday the pessimist was shown into a room packed with the most expensive gifts the parents could afford, while the optimist was invited into a room full of horse manure. An hour later, when the parents checked on the pessimist, he complained bitterly about some arcane detail in one of his expensive gifts. In contrast, when they cautiously opened the door to check in on the optimist, they found him digging joyfully through the manure. “Mom! Dad! This is incredible!” the optimist shouted with glee. “With all the shit piled up in this room, there’s got to be a pony!”

Read the full article in Persuasion.