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
(Christian Science Monitor) Ephraim Sneh - In May 2003 I attended a closed international conference on Middle East security after the fall of Saddam Hussein. To the participants' surprise, a special guest joined the meeting: Muhssein Rizai, the former commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps, and an influential insider of the regime in Tehran. Rizai sent a clear message to the U.S. administration: If you, the Americans, want to stabilize the Middle East, talk to the hegemonic power - us, the Iranians. He effectively offered to partition the Middle East into two zones of influence: Iranian and American. The U.S. rejected his offer. Until now. With the deal in Geneva last month, the Iranian regime stands on the verge of getting exactly what it wants, thanks to nuclear blackmail. The P5+1 seems ready to give to the ayatollah's regime not only a comprehensive insurance policy for its survival, but also a license for its imperial ambitions and a permit to use the blackmail leverages of missiles and terror to undermine governments in the Persian Gulf and Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt and the Palestinian territories. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's harsh criticism of the Geneva deal is correct. The eagerness of the P5+1 to strike a deal with the ayatollah's regime seems to stem not only from an aversion to standing up against evil, but also from a lack of understanding of the Islamist challenge and from a blurred distinction between allies and foes in the region. Brig.-Gen. (ret.) Dr. Ephraim Sneh, a Labor Knesset member (1992-2008), twice served as Israel's deputy minister of defense and is chair of the S. Daniel Abraham Center for Strategic Dialogue at Netanya Academic College. 2013-12-06 00:00:00Full Article
Iran Deal Validates Nuclear Blackmail
(Christian Science Monitor) Ephraim Sneh - In May 2003 I attended a closed international conference on Middle East security after the fall of Saddam Hussein. To the participants' surprise, a special guest joined the meeting: Muhssein Rizai, the former commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps, and an influential insider of the regime in Tehran. Rizai sent a clear message to the U.S. administration: If you, the Americans, want to stabilize the Middle East, talk to the hegemonic power - us, the Iranians. He effectively offered to partition the Middle East into two zones of influence: Iranian and American. The U.S. rejected his offer. Until now. With the deal in Geneva last month, the Iranian regime stands on the verge of getting exactly what it wants, thanks to nuclear blackmail. The P5+1 seems ready to give to the ayatollah's regime not only a comprehensive insurance policy for its survival, but also a license for its imperial ambitions and a permit to use the blackmail leverages of missiles and terror to undermine governments in the Persian Gulf and Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt and the Palestinian territories. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's harsh criticism of the Geneva deal is correct. The eagerness of the P5+1 to strike a deal with the ayatollah's regime seems to stem not only from an aversion to standing up against evil, but also from a lack of understanding of the Islamist challenge and from a blurred distinction between allies and foes in the region. Brig.-Gen. (ret.) Dr. Ephraim Sneh, a Labor Knesset member (1992-2008), twice served as Israel's deputy minister of defense and is chair of the S. Daniel Abraham Center for Strategic Dialogue at Netanya Academic College. 2013-12-06 00:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|