Home
Archives
Jerusalem Center Homepage
View the current issue
Jerusalem Center Videos
Additional Resources
Top Commentators:
- Elliott Abrams
- Fouad Ajami
- Shlomo Avineri
- Benny Avni
- Alan Dershowitz
- Jackson Diehl
- Dore Gold
- Daniel Gordis
- Tom Gross
- Jonathan Halevy
- David Ignatius
- Pinchas Inbari
- Jeff Jacoby
- Efraim Karsh
- Mordechai Kedar
- Charles Krauthammer
- Emily Landau
- David Makovsky
- Aaron David Miller
- Benny Morris
- Jacques Neriah
- Marty Peretz
- Melanie Phillips
- Daniel Pipes
- Harold Rhode
- Gary Rosenblatt
- Jennifer Rubin
- David Schenkar
- Shimon Shapira
- Jonathan Spyer
- Gerald Steinberg
- Bret Stephens
- Amir Taheri
- Josh Teitelbaum
- Khaled Abu Toameh
- Jonathan Tobin
- Michael Totten
- Michael Young
- Mort Zuckerman
Think Tanks:
- American Enterprise Institute
- Brookings Institution
- Center for Security Policy
- Council on Foreign Relations
- Heritage Foundation
- Hudson Institute
- Institute for Contemporary Affairs
- Institute for Counter-Terrorism
- Institute for Global Jewish Affairs
- Institute for National Security Studies
- Institute for Science and Intl. Security
- Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center
- Investigative Project
- Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs
- RAND Corporation
- Saban Center for Middle East Policy
- Shalem Center
- Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Media:
- CAMERA
- Daily Alert
- Jewish Political Studies Review
- MEMRI
- NGO Monitor
- Palestinian Media Watch
- The Israel Project
- YouTube
Government:
Back
(Harvard Law Review) UN Security Council Resolution 2334 reflects the modern rise of Palestinian lawfare: using law "to achieve...warfighting objective[s]" against Israel, according to a confidant of PA President Mahmoud Abbas. Having failed over the last half century to shift the balance of power through negotiations and armed resistance, the PA has turned to new battlefronts - including the Security Council and the International Criminal Court (ICC) - where it deploys international law to advance its territorial claims and further Israel's political isolation. Prior to 2334, the U.S. had consistently opposed PA lawfare. Its abstention on 2334 constitutes an unwelcome reversal, likely to entrench PA maximalism and thwart America's stated aim of "mov[ing] the parties closer to an agreement." By abstaining on 2334, the U.S. countenanced Palestinian irredentism. The result was to render peace an ever-distant dream.2017-06-21 00:00:00Full Article
U.S. Abstention on UN Security Council Resolution 2334 on Israel's Settlement Activities Distances Peace
(Harvard Law Review) UN Security Council Resolution 2334 reflects the modern rise of Palestinian lawfare: using law "to achieve...warfighting objective[s]" against Israel, according to a confidant of PA President Mahmoud Abbas. Having failed over the last half century to shift the balance of power through negotiations and armed resistance, the PA has turned to new battlefronts - including the Security Council and the International Criminal Court (ICC) - where it deploys international law to advance its territorial claims and further Israel's political isolation. Prior to 2334, the U.S. had consistently opposed PA lawfare. Its abstention on 2334 constitutes an unwelcome reversal, likely to entrench PA maximalism and thwart America's stated aim of "mov[ing] the parties closer to an agreement." By abstaining on 2334, the U.S. countenanced Palestinian irredentism. The result was to render peace an ever-distant dream.2017-06-21 00:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
|
Search:
|