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) Oren Kessler - Harold Rhode, who served for decades as an analyst of the Islamic world's culture and politics in the office of the U.S. secretary of defense, knows all of the Middle East's four major languages: Arabic, Persian, Turkish and Hebrew. A university student in Iran in 1978 on the eve of the Islamic Revolution that ousted the Shah the following year, Rhode has obvious affection for Iran's culture and people, but pulls no punches in denouncing the tyrants who now run its government. "I believe regime change is the only answer," he said in an interview. Any successor regime would be preferable to the current theocracy. "One can't think of anything more extreme." Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, he continued, "hated the people who are now in power. He kept them away from government because he feared they would lead Iran to its destruction." He said there was no reason to publicize the West's next move by talking about it unnecessarily. "You don't want to show your cards to the Iranians; you want to use your cards to win." According to Rhode, Iran's current leaders "believe that if they provoke a conflagration, their hidden imam, the mahdi, will return to save them. So Mutually Assured Destruction - MAD - that we used effectively with the Soviets is an incentive and an inducement, not a deterrent." "There's unfortunately no such thing as a win-win situation in the Middle East. Confidence-building measures are interpreted as weakness. You talk after you've won; if you do so beforehand, it is seen as weakness." "In the languages of the Middle East, the concept for compromise doesn't exist - at least not as we understand it....Instead, one who compromises is said to have brought 'aib, or shame, on himself. That's why the Middle East is always in a state of tension," he explained. When former prime minister David Ben-Gurion dealt with the Arabs, he said, "he always started by saying the following: 'We are coming home. This is our homeland. We were thrown out of here 2,000 years ago. We're not coming here - we are returning home. We realize there are other people here, and in a modern, democratic society they're going to have equal rights. But this is ours - all of this is ours.'" Ben-Gurion was "willing to compromise on that, but he understood intuitively who and what he was, and he wasn't ashamed to say so to the Arabs," Rhode concluded. 2012-02-03 00:00:00Full Article
Former Pentagon Analyst: Regime Change in Iran Is the Only Answer
(Jerusalem Post) Oren Kessler - Harold Rhode, who served for decades as an analyst of the Islamic world's culture and politics in the office of the U.S. secretary of defense, knows all of the Middle East's four major languages: Arabic, Persian, Turkish and Hebrew. A university student in Iran in 1978 on the eve of the Islamic Revolution that ousted the Shah the following year, Rhode has obvious affection for Iran's culture and people, but pulls no punches in denouncing the tyrants who now run its government. "I believe regime change is the only answer," he said in an interview. Any successor regime would be preferable to the current theocracy. "One can't think of anything more extreme." Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, he continued, "hated the people who are now in power. He kept them away from government because he feared they would lead Iran to its destruction." He said there was no reason to publicize the West's next move by talking about it unnecessarily. "You don't want to show your cards to the Iranians; you want to use your cards to win." According to Rhode, Iran's current leaders "believe that if they provoke a conflagration, their hidden imam, the mahdi, will return to save them. So Mutually Assured Destruction - MAD - that we used effectively with the Soviets is an incentive and an inducement, not a deterrent." "There's unfortunately no such thing as a win-win situation in the Middle East. Confidence-building measures are interpreted as weakness. You talk after you've won; if you do so beforehand, it is seen as weakness." "In the languages of the Middle East, the concept for compromise doesn't exist - at least not as we understand it....Instead, one who compromises is said to have brought 'aib, or shame, on himself. That's why the Middle East is always in a state of tension," he explained. When former prime minister David Ben-Gurion dealt with the Arabs, he said, "he always started by saying the following: 'We are coming home. This is our homeland. We were thrown out of here 2,000 years ago. We're not coming here - we are returning home. We realize there are other people here, and in a modern, democratic society they're going to have equal rights. But this is ours - all of this is ours.'" Ben-Gurion was "willing to compromise on that, but he understood intuitively who and what he was, and he wasn't ashamed to say so to the Arabs," Rhode concluded. 2012-02-03 00:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|