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
(i24 News) Ben-Dror Yemini - These negotiations were serious. The framework started coming together. So why did the negotiations break down? Because John Kerry refused to learn from the past. We've seen the same framework he was planning to present in previous rounds: Bill Clinton's framework, Ehud Olmert's framework. The Palestinians said no - twice. And both times, they paid no price. Both times, the finger was pointed at Israel. Then Kerry made a series of statements about the boycott that Israel would be facing if negotiations fail. Kerry didn't mean to - but he signaled the way for the Palestinians to once again raise the bar on their demands. Kerry made it clear to the Palestinians that Israel would be paying the price alone. Nothing would happen to them. Some claim that Israel brought about the crisis in negotiations because of its refusal to release prisoners. That's interesting. According to the deal being formulated, the Palestinians would have gotten many more than the 26 prisoners originally slated for release, so where's the refusal? Additionally, one should remember that the Palestinians announced in advance that the negotiations were about to end. Under such circumstances, refusing to make the last payment was the sensible thing to do. Consider a buyer who has made three payments and is about to make the fourth, except that before doing so, he finds out that the seller has no merchandise. Would going through with the last payment be reasonable? 2014-04-08 00:00:00Full Article
Why the Negotiations Broke Down
(i24 News) Ben-Dror Yemini - These negotiations were serious. The framework started coming together. So why did the negotiations break down? Because John Kerry refused to learn from the past. We've seen the same framework he was planning to present in previous rounds: Bill Clinton's framework, Ehud Olmert's framework. The Palestinians said no - twice. And both times, they paid no price. Both times, the finger was pointed at Israel. Then Kerry made a series of statements about the boycott that Israel would be facing if negotiations fail. Kerry didn't mean to - but he signaled the way for the Palestinians to once again raise the bar on their demands. Kerry made it clear to the Palestinians that Israel would be paying the price alone. Nothing would happen to them. Some claim that Israel brought about the crisis in negotiations because of its refusal to release prisoners. That's interesting. According to the deal being formulated, the Palestinians would have gotten many more than the 26 prisoners originally slated for release, so where's the refusal? Additionally, one should remember that the Palestinians announced in advance that the negotiations were about to end. Under such circumstances, refusing to make the last payment was the sensible thing to do. Consider a buyer who has made three payments and is about to make the fourth, except that before doing so, he finds out that the seller has no merchandise. Would going through with the last payment be reasonable? 2014-04-08 00:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|