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
[Jerusalem Post] Daniel Gordis - Many people believe that to achieve peace in the Middle East, Israel just needs to be subdued. Break Israel's intransigence, and we'll finally see progress. To these people, and to President Obama, I'd like to propose the following thought experiment: Imagine that Israel decides to take down the security fence, remove the checkpoints, open all the roads and Gaza's sea and air routes. It agrees publicly to return to the pre-1967 borders and accede to demands that parts of Jerusalem be put under Palestinian control. Does this end the conflict? Of course it doesn't. The noose would tighten. The rockets would be fired from a shorter distance and the demand for the return of refugees would persist. As was the case when Israel left Lebanon in May 2000 or Gaza in the summer of 2005, Israel's enemies would smell a weakened, bloodied state and would prepare for the next stage of their war. But peace would not have come. Now try the opposite side of the thought experiment. Imagine that the Palestinians decide that they have tired of the conflict and insist on a settlement. They recognize Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state, agree to an immediate and permanent cessation of hostilities and violence, and insist that any other outstanding issues be negotiated and resolved. Would an Israeli plebiscite overwhelmingly approve the offer? Without question. This, of course, is not going to happen because there's always been one party that's sought peace, and another that's rejected it. It's never been up to us, and it's always been up to them. The writer is senior vice president and a senior fellow at the Shalem Center in Jerusalem, and the author of Saving Israel: How the Jewish People Can Win a War that May Never End. 2009-05-28 06:00:00Full Article
Peace Has Never Been Up to Israel; It's Always Been Up to the Arabs
[Jerusalem Post] Daniel Gordis - Many people believe that to achieve peace in the Middle East, Israel just needs to be subdued. Break Israel's intransigence, and we'll finally see progress. To these people, and to President Obama, I'd like to propose the following thought experiment: Imagine that Israel decides to take down the security fence, remove the checkpoints, open all the roads and Gaza's sea and air routes. It agrees publicly to return to the pre-1967 borders and accede to demands that parts of Jerusalem be put under Palestinian control. Does this end the conflict? Of course it doesn't. The noose would tighten. The rockets would be fired from a shorter distance and the demand for the return of refugees would persist. As was the case when Israel left Lebanon in May 2000 or Gaza in the summer of 2005, Israel's enemies would smell a weakened, bloodied state and would prepare for the next stage of their war. But peace would not have come. Now try the opposite side of the thought experiment. Imagine that the Palestinians decide that they have tired of the conflict and insist on a settlement. They recognize Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state, agree to an immediate and permanent cessation of hostilities and violence, and insist that any other outstanding issues be negotiated and resolved. Would an Israeli plebiscite overwhelmingly approve the offer? Without question. This, of course, is not going to happen because there's always been one party that's sought peace, and another that's rejected it. It's never been up to us, and it's always been up to them. The writer is senior vice president and a senior fellow at the Shalem Center in Jerusalem, and the author of Saving Israel: How the Jewish People Can Win a War that May Never End. 2009-05-28 06:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|