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
(Toronto Globe and Mail) Rami Khouri - A close reading of the American text of last week's statement on Sharon's plan to unilaterally withdraw from Gaza reveals that Bush merely stated in public and gave official American support to long-standing assumptions that are universally held among those who are involved in, or closely follow, Palestinian-Israeli negotiations. These assumptions are that only a symbolic return of some Palestinian refugees to Israel proper would occur as part of any final agreement, while the majority would repatriate or settle elsewhere, and that the large Israeli settlement towns along the former border such as Maale Adumim, Ariel, and Givat Zeev would be permanently incorporated into Israel, in exchange for territory of equal value that Israel would cede to the new Palestinian state. These assumptions were first articulated in the parameters that U.S. president Bill Clinton issued in late 2000. The U.S. statement reiterates and leaves open for direct negotiations almost all the issues that Palestinians and Arabs deem important. It says that final borders must be negotiated by the parties, with any changes to the 1949 armistice lines to be "mutually agreed." Israel gets Washington's slightly vague support on the key issues of settlements and refugees; the Palestinians get reaffirmations that final status agreements will be negotiated between Palestinians and Israelis. The writer is editor of the Beirut Daily Star. 2004-04-23 00:00:00Full Article
A View from the Arab World
(Toronto Globe and Mail) Rami Khouri - A close reading of the American text of last week's statement on Sharon's plan to unilaterally withdraw from Gaza reveals that Bush merely stated in public and gave official American support to long-standing assumptions that are universally held among those who are involved in, or closely follow, Palestinian-Israeli negotiations. These assumptions are that only a symbolic return of some Palestinian refugees to Israel proper would occur as part of any final agreement, while the majority would repatriate or settle elsewhere, and that the large Israeli settlement towns along the former border such as Maale Adumim, Ariel, and Givat Zeev would be permanently incorporated into Israel, in exchange for territory of equal value that Israel would cede to the new Palestinian state. These assumptions were first articulated in the parameters that U.S. president Bill Clinton issued in late 2000. The U.S. statement reiterates and leaves open for direct negotiations almost all the issues that Palestinians and Arabs deem important. It says that final borders must be negotiated by the parties, with any changes to the 1949 armistice lines to be "mutually agreed." Israel gets Washington's slightly vague support on the key issues of settlements and refugees; the Palestinians get reaffirmations that final status agreements will be negotiated between Palestinians and Israelis. The writer is editor of the Beirut Daily Star. 2004-04-23 00:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|