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
(New York Post) Amir Taheri - In 1948 there was no Palestine problem; there was an Israel problem, in that the Arab League wouldn't tolerate a Jewish state in its midst. Nor was the 1967 war about Palestine. Egypt's Nasser, who started it, said the objective was "throwing the Jews into the sea." At no point was creating a Palestinian state even considered. Nasser failed, and the new status quo favored Israel by widening its security perimeter - with territories taken from Egypt, Jordan and Syria, not from Palestine. The demand for a return to pre-1967 borders is bizarre, to say the least. In 1967 there were no borders, just ceasefire lines drawn in 1948 - lines that symbolized an unstable status quo that led to two wars. Going back to them means returning to a situation that breeds war, not peace. The "peace process" also ignores a fact well established in human history: Every war ends with a winner and a loser; the winner dictates the new status quo and the loser grudgingly accepts. Israel is perhaps the only winner to be prevented from even thinking about cashing its chips. Each time it won a war, the UN and other outsiders intervened to put the whole thing on a different trajectory. All that the various "peace initiatives" have done is to raise Palestinian expectations beyond what any Israeli government could accept. 2014-05-01 00:00:00Full Article
Moving Beyond the "Peace Process"
(New York Post) Amir Taheri - In 1948 there was no Palestine problem; there was an Israel problem, in that the Arab League wouldn't tolerate a Jewish state in its midst. Nor was the 1967 war about Palestine. Egypt's Nasser, who started it, said the objective was "throwing the Jews into the sea." At no point was creating a Palestinian state even considered. Nasser failed, and the new status quo favored Israel by widening its security perimeter - with territories taken from Egypt, Jordan and Syria, not from Palestine. The demand for a return to pre-1967 borders is bizarre, to say the least. In 1967 there were no borders, just ceasefire lines drawn in 1948 - lines that symbolized an unstable status quo that led to two wars. Going back to them means returning to a situation that breeds war, not peace. The "peace process" also ignores a fact well established in human history: Every war ends with a winner and a loser; the winner dictates the new status quo and the loser grudgingly accepts. Israel is perhaps the only winner to be prevented from even thinking about cashing its chips. Each time it won a war, the UN and other outsiders intervened to put the whole thing on a different trajectory. All that the various "peace initiatives" have done is to raise Palestinian expectations beyond what any Israeli government could accept. 2014-05-01 00:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|