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
(Brookings Institution) Natan B. Sachs - The common view from Jerusalem reflects a combination of short-term relief over the French resolve, and a very deep concern over the new and potentially dramatic rift with the U.S. administration. The Israelis claim that U.S. officials had previously briefed them on an outline of a deal which they, the Israelis, didn't like, but which they could have lived with. However, the Israelis claim that the terms that emerged in Geneva were far worse than previously outlined, and the Israeli surprise over the extent of the sanctions relief is genuine. The Israelis, like the French, appear very concerned about the provisions of the interim deal that: (a) permitted Tehran to continue some uranium enrichment; (b) allowed Iran to continue building the heavy-water reactor in Arak; and (c) provided Tehran with incentives that the Israelis see as the beginning of the dismantling of the sanctions regime. Israel's concern is that the proposed sanctions relief will not, in practice, be reversible, while the Iranian commitments could be easily reversed. Discussions in Israel suggest the Americans have been over-eager to reach a deal and had allowed the terms to erode significantly, rather than Iran feeling pressured to close a diplomatic deal in light of the biting sanctions. This plays into a common narrative in the region of a U.S. administration eager to find any diplomatic way out of a confrontation. The writer is a fellow at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at Brookings.2013-11-13 00:00:00Full Article
Israel Reacts with Alarm at What Its Leadership Sees as a Bad Deal
(Brookings Institution) Natan B. Sachs - The common view from Jerusalem reflects a combination of short-term relief over the French resolve, and a very deep concern over the new and potentially dramatic rift with the U.S. administration. The Israelis claim that U.S. officials had previously briefed them on an outline of a deal which they, the Israelis, didn't like, but which they could have lived with. However, the Israelis claim that the terms that emerged in Geneva were far worse than previously outlined, and the Israeli surprise over the extent of the sanctions relief is genuine. The Israelis, like the French, appear very concerned about the provisions of the interim deal that: (a) permitted Tehran to continue some uranium enrichment; (b) allowed Iran to continue building the heavy-water reactor in Arak; and (c) provided Tehran with incentives that the Israelis see as the beginning of the dismantling of the sanctions regime. Israel's concern is that the proposed sanctions relief will not, in practice, be reversible, while the Iranian commitments could be easily reversed. Discussions in Israel suggest the Americans have been over-eager to reach a deal and had allowed the terms to erode significantly, rather than Iran feeling pressured to close a diplomatic deal in light of the biting sanctions. This plays into a common narrative in the region of a U.S. administration eager to find any diplomatic way out of a confrontation. The writer is a fellow at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at Brookings.2013-11-13 00:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|