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
[Wall Street Journal] Jonathan D. Tepperman - Since 1948, the UN has stepped into the Arab-Israeli maelstrom five times. But few of these efforts have paid off. Unless it takes a radically different shape, a new intervention could well make matters worse, not just for the parties on the ground, but for the UN itself. If it is to have any chance of disarming Hizballah, persuading Israel to withdraw, and keeping southern Lebanon quiet, a new UN mission will have to be big. This means several divisions of battle-tested troops (some experts put the number at 25,000). Realistically, only NATO soldiers would have the capacity for such a job. Unless those Western states now blithely calling for the UN to act are also willing to contribute troops (and so far, very few of them have), any mission is virtually doomed to fail. If recent history teaches anything, it is that half-hearted efforts - which give a false sense that something is being done but only end up costing peacekeepers' lives - can be worse than none at all. The writer is deputy managing editor of Foreign Affairs. 2006-08-04 01:00:00Full Article
UN Peacekeepers in Lebanon? Be Careful What You Wish For
[Wall Street Journal] Jonathan D. Tepperman - Since 1948, the UN has stepped into the Arab-Israeli maelstrom five times. But few of these efforts have paid off. Unless it takes a radically different shape, a new intervention could well make matters worse, not just for the parties on the ground, but for the UN itself. If it is to have any chance of disarming Hizballah, persuading Israel to withdraw, and keeping southern Lebanon quiet, a new UN mission will have to be big. This means several divisions of battle-tested troops (some experts put the number at 25,000). Realistically, only NATO soldiers would have the capacity for such a job. Unless those Western states now blithely calling for the UN to act are also willing to contribute troops (and so far, very few of them have), any mission is virtually doomed to fail. If recent history teaches anything, it is that half-hearted efforts - which give a false sense that something is being done but only end up costing peacekeepers' lives - can be worse than none at all. The writer is deputy managing editor of Foreign Affairs. 2006-08-04 01:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|