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
(Ynet News) Ron Ben-Yishai - The U.S. Administration recently shifted into high gear in its efforts to avert an Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear facilities by the end of the year, as seen in the flood of reports in the American media in recent weeks. The most important American objective is to eliminate potential operational options available to the IDF and the State of Israel. It is blatantly clear that reports in the past week alone have caused Israel substantive diplomatic damage, and possibly even military and operational damage. Another Administration objective is to convince the Israeli public that an Iran strike will not achieve even the minimum required to justify it. The report of only a six-month delay in Iran's nuclear program was meant for the Israeli public as the Americans try to prove the futility of a strike. The third objective of the recent publications is to scare the Israeli public via an apocalyptic account of possible retaliation by Iran and its "clients." The American publications caused the following damage: Iran now has a decent picture of what Israel's and America's intelligence communities know about Tehran's nuclear program and defense establishment, including its aerial defenses. The Iranians now know about the indications that would be perceived by Washington and Jerusalem as a "nuclear breakthrough." Hence, Iran can do a better job of concealment. Needless to say, this is not how one should be treating an ally, even by a superpower. The U.S. campaign also sharply contradicts President Obama's declaration at the AIPAC Conference, whereby he and the U.S. recognize Israel's sovereign right to defend itself by itself. One cannot utter these words and a moment later expose Israel's vulnerabilities and possible strike routes to its enemies. There is a difference between legitimate persuasion efforts and practical steps to thwart Israeli plans and eliminate them. What we are seeing here is not a trickle of information, but rather, a powerful current, a true flood that leaves no doubt as to the existence of an orchestrated media campaign with clear aims. 2012-03-30 00:00:00Full Article
U.S. Leaking Information to Media to Thwart Israeli Strike on Iran
(Ynet News) Ron Ben-Yishai - The U.S. Administration recently shifted into high gear in its efforts to avert an Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear facilities by the end of the year, as seen in the flood of reports in the American media in recent weeks. The most important American objective is to eliminate potential operational options available to the IDF and the State of Israel. It is blatantly clear that reports in the past week alone have caused Israel substantive diplomatic damage, and possibly even military and operational damage. Another Administration objective is to convince the Israeli public that an Iran strike will not achieve even the minimum required to justify it. The report of only a six-month delay in Iran's nuclear program was meant for the Israeli public as the Americans try to prove the futility of a strike. The third objective of the recent publications is to scare the Israeli public via an apocalyptic account of possible retaliation by Iran and its "clients." The American publications caused the following damage: Iran now has a decent picture of what Israel's and America's intelligence communities know about Tehran's nuclear program and defense establishment, including its aerial defenses. The Iranians now know about the indications that would be perceived by Washington and Jerusalem as a "nuclear breakthrough." Hence, Iran can do a better job of concealment. Needless to say, this is not how one should be treating an ally, even by a superpower. The U.S. campaign also sharply contradicts President Obama's declaration at the AIPAC Conference, whereby he and the U.S. recognize Israel's sovereign right to defend itself by itself. One cannot utter these words and a moment later expose Israel's vulnerabilities and possible strike routes to its enemies. There is a difference between legitimate persuasion efforts and practical steps to thwart Israeli plans and eliminate them. What we are seeing here is not a trickle of information, but rather, a powerful current, a true flood that leaves no doubt as to the existence of an orchestrated media campaign with clear aims. 2012-03-30 00:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|