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
(Institute for National Security Studies-Tel Aviv University) Giora Eiland - In Operation Pillar of Defense, Israel defined the enemy as a terrorist organization, which in fact it is not. Gaza is de facto a state in every sense, and it is therefore proper to deal with it as such. Regarding it as a state offers the option of inflicting damage to its national infrastructures during a military confrontation. It was possible to expand the operation by massively attacking all targets of infrastructure and governance in Gaza. The Second Lebanon War included one particularly effective mission - the massive attack on Hizbullah's high command in Beirut, which created the so-called Dahiya doctrine. The deterrence vis-a-vis Hizbullah that has prevailed since 2006 is largely attributable to the destruction of the Dahiya suburb in southern Beirut. Some say that Israel paid a steep price for the ceasefire agreement because it granted Hamas a great deal of international legitimacy. But one could also argue that Israel paid no price whatsoever and that this outcome is in Israel's interest, as the world will now relate to Gaza as a state entity. Moreover, it is in Israel's interest that foreign parties visit Gaza and infuse it with capital and generate an economic boom. The more the Hamas government is required to meet the standard of state-like responsibility and the more the economic situation improves and construction of civilian infrastructures increases, the more the government in Gaza will be restrained in attacking Israel. It is impossible to prevent smuggling from Egypt into Gaza if efforts at prevention begin and end with the Gaza-Egypt border. Even when the IDF was in control of the area (until 2005), it was only partly successful. There are two actions Egypt can take to prevent smuggling if it wished to do so. One is to take more effective action deep in the Sinai Peninsula and even within Egypt itself. The second is to build a barrier about four km. west of Gaza with only a single transit point under tight security control. No one would dig a four km.-long tunnel. Maj.-Gen. (ret.) Giora Eiland is a former Israeli National Security Advisor. 2013-01-03 00:00:00Full Article
Operation Pillar of Defense in Gaza: Strategic Perspectives
(Institute for National Security Studies-Tel Aviv University) Giora Eiland - In Operation Pillar of Defense, Israel defined the enemy as a terrorist organization, which in fact it is not. Gaza is de facto a state in every sense, and it is therefore proper to deal with it as such. Regarding it as a state offers the option of inflicting damage to its national infrastructures during a military confrontation. It was possible to expand the operation by massively attacking all targets of infrastructure and governance in Gaza. The Second Lebanon War included one particularly effective mission - the massive attack on Hizbullah's high command in Beirut, which created the so-called Dahiya doctrine. The deterrence vis-a-vis Hizbullah that has prevailed since 2006 is largely attributable to the destruction of the Dahiya suburb in southern Beirut. Some say that Israel paid a steep price for the ceasefire agreement because it granted Hamas a great deal of international legitimacy. But one could also argue that Israel paid no price whatsoever and that this outcome is in Israel's interest, as the world will now relate to Gaza as a state entity. Moreover, it is in Israel's interest that foreign parties visit Gaza and infuse it with capital and generate an economic boom. The more the Hamas government is required to meet the standard of state-like responsibility and the more the economic situation improves and construction of civilian infrastructures increases, the more the government in Gaza will be restrained in attacking Israel. It is impossible to prevent smuggling from Egypt into Gaza if efforts at prevention begin and end with the Gaza-Egypt border. Even when the IDF was in control of the area (until 2005), it was only partly successful. There are two actions Egypt can take to prevent smuggling if it wished to do so. One is to take more effective action deep in the Sinai Peninsula and even within Egypt itself. The second is to build a barrier about four km. west of Gaza with only a single transit point under tight security control. No one would dig a four km.-long tunnel. Maj.-Gen. (ret.) Giora Eiland is a former Israeli National Security Advisor. 2013-01-03 00:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|