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
(IMRA) Aaron Lerner - President Obama argued that by mentioning land swaps, he did not actually call for Israel to withdraw to the indefensible '67 lines since Israel can trade off other land to avoid the '67 line. But the point is that President Obama handed the Palestinians a tremendous concession by embracing the Palestinian assertion that it somehow has the implicit right to every square meter beyond the Green Line and thus must be compensated on a 1:1 basis for any adjustment to the line. This was not the meaning of UN Security Council Resolution 242. The framers of 242 were well aware that secure borders for Israel would be achieved by Israel retaining territory beyond the '67 lines, without any requirement to compensate the Arabs for the retention of such land.2011-05-23 00:00:00Full Article
Resolution 242 Did Not Call for Land Swaps
(IMRA) Aaron Lerner - President Obama argued that by mentioning land swaps, he did not actually call for Israel to withdraw to the indefensible '67 lines since Israel can trade off other land to avoid the '67 line. But the point is that President Obama handed the Palestinians a tremendous concession by embracing the Palestinian assertion that it somehow has the implicit right to every square meter beyond the Green Line and thus must be compensated on a 1:1 basis for any adjustment to the line. This was not the meaning of UN Security Council Resolution 242. The framers of 242 were well aware that secure borders for Israel would be achieved by Israel retaining territory beyond the '67 lines, without any requirement to compensate the Arabs for the retention of such land.2011-05-23 00:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|