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) Gerald Steinberg - History shows that some issues are so critical that even the President of the United States cannot force Israel's hand. The sharpest example took place almost fifty years ago, when in 1961 President Kennedy demanded that Ben-Gurion end Israel's nuclear deterrent program. But for the Israeli leader, the overriding objective was to gain the tools necessary to insure Jewish survival in a very hostile world. Before 1967, Israel was far more isolated and vulnerable than is the case today. Ben-Gurion did not refuse Kennedy's requests - he avoided saying no by dancing around them for two years. Finally, Kennedy warned in a letter dated May 18, 1963, that unless American inspectors were allowed into Israel's Dimona facility, Israel would find itself totally isolated. Rather than answering, Ben-Gurion abruptly resigned. In 1969, Nixon and Kissinger made one more effort to force Israel to relinquish the deterrent option, and when Golda Meir refused, the U.S. and Israel agreed to the "don't ask, don't tell" compromise that has served both countries well for over forty years. While Dimona was a bilateral issue, in the peace process, the Palestinians are a crucial third party. There is no sense in pressuring Israel if Palestinians continue terror and incitement, and reject the legitimacy of Jewish sovereignty. The writer is professor of political science at Bar-Ilan University. 2010-04-01 07:31:57Full Article
U.S.-Israel Crisis: When Ben-Gurion Said No to JFK
(Jerusalem Post) Gerald Steinberg - History shows that some issues are so critical that even the President of the United States cannot force Israel's hand. The sharpest example took place almost fifty years ago, when in 1961 President Kennedy demanded that Ben-Gurion end Israel's nuclear deterrent program. But for the Israeli leader, the overriding objective was to gain the tools necessary to insure Jewish survival in a very hostile world. Before 1967, Israel was far more isolated and vulnerable than is the case today. Ben-Gurion did not refuse Kennedy's requests - he avoided saying no by dancing around them for two years. Finally, Kennedy warned in a letter dated May 18, 1963, that unless American inspectors were allowed into Israel's Dimona facility, Israel would find itself totally isolated. Rather than answering, Ben-Gurion abruptly resigned. In 1969, Nixon and Kissinger made one more effort to force Israel to relinquish the deterrent option, and when Golda Meir refused, the U.S. and Israel agreed to the "don't ask, don't tell" compromise that has served both countries well for over forty years. While Dimona was a bilateral issue, in the peace process, the Palestinians are a crucial third party. There is no sense in pressuring Israel if Palestinians continue terror and incitement, and reject the legitimacy of Jewish sovereignty. The writer is professor of political science at Bar-Ilan University. 2010-04-01 07:31:57Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|