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
(Times-UK)Michael Gove - There is a widespread sense that a new opportunity exists to provide the Palestinian people and the Israelis with fresh hope for the future. But that fresh hope is compromised by the tired assumptions with which it is accompanied. The belief that America is to blame for neglecting to engage; the conviction that the President must display neutrality; the judgment that Ariel Sharon's current tactics are folly; and the idea that the peace process is the principal solution for the region's woes are almost totally wrong. These assumptions have underpinned the policies that were followed for 30 years in the Middle East, and they have been responsible for our current misery. The demand that Bush "re-engage" with the Middle East peace process springs from a misplaced faith that major conflicts can be resolved if only outside figures apply themselves to brokering negotiations. The truth about peace processes is that outside brokers can achieve something only if the parties to the conflict want out. And that wasn't the case with Arafat. George Bush could not remain impartial between a terrorist entity prosecuting a campaign that targeted innocents and a democracy defending itself, any more than a policeman can be even-handed between burglar and householder. Arafat was not the only Arab leader to blame his people's problems on the Jews, to prefer the romance of the liberation struggle to the hard work of democratic modernization, and to line his own pockets while his citizens scrabbled for survival. The root cause of violence, poverty, and division in the Middle East is not a failure to solve the peace process. The failure of the peace process stems from the continuing addiction of so many of the Arab world's leaders to fomenting violence, presiding over poverty, and indulging in the politics of division. 2004-11-11 00:00:00Full Article
Tired Assumptions About the Peace Process
(Times-UK)Michael Gove - There is a widespread sense that a new opportunity exists to provide the Palestinian people and the Israelis with fresh hope for the future. But that fresh hope is compromised by the tired assumptions with which it is accompanied. The belief that America is to blame for neglecting to engage; the conviction that the President must display neutrality; the judgment that Ariel Sharon's current tactics are folly; and the idea that the peace process is the principal solution for the region's woes are almost totally wrong. These assumptions have underpinned the policies that were followed for 30 years in the Middle East, and they have been responsible for our current misery. The demand that Bush "re-engage" with the Middle East peace process springs from a misplaced faith that major conflicts can be resolved if only outside figures apply themselves to brokering negotiations. The truth about peace processes is that outside brokers can achieve something only if the parties to the conflict want out. And that wasn't the case with Arafat. George Bush could not remain impartial between a terrorist entity prosecuting a campaign that targeted innocents and a democracy defending itself, any more than a policeman can be even-handed between burglar and householder. Arafat was not the only Arab leader to blame his people's problems on the Jews, to prefer the romance of the liberation struggle to the hard work of democratic modernization, and to line his own pockets while his citizens scrabbled for survival. The root cause of violence, poverty, and division in the Middle East is not a failure to solve the peace process. The failure of the peace process stems from the continuing addiction of so many of the Arab world's leaders to fomenting violence, presiding over poverty, and indulging in the politics of division. 2004-11-11 00:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|