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
(Washington Institute for Near East Policy) James F. Jeffrey - The Obama administration appears headed toward a nuclear agreement that will do little more than memorialize the limited Iranian concessions made in last year's Joint Plan of Action (JPOA). This is a bad deal for the U.S. Almost any feasible formal agreement would represent a major defeat for the U.S. - in the current global context, a JPOA-like deal would be seen as yielding to Iran and giving hostile states more legitimacy. Moreover, such a deal would not much reduce the Iranian nuclear threat. With these problems in mind, the administration may want to consider another course of action that does not depend on reaching a formal agreement. If the deadlock persists, Washington should freeze the negotiations and keep existing sanctions at their current level. The U.S. should lay out clear redlines for military action that would apply if Iran approaches a nuclear weapons capability or blocks inspections. Moreover, the U.S. should cooperate with, rather than attempt to rein in, Israel's deterrent threat. This includes providing more weapons and systems to Israel that could facilitate a strike, and continuing the improvement of U.S. military capabilities in the Persian Gulf, especially missile defense. Central to this alternative is a U.S. commitment to use force if a redline is crossed, or eventually face a nuclear-armed Iran. The writer served as U.S. Deputy National Security Advisor and U.S. Ambassador to Turkey and Iraq. 2014-08-14 00:00:00Full Article
No Iran Deal Is Better Than Any (Feasible) Deal
(Washington Institute for Near East Policy) James F. Jeffrey - The Obama administration appears headed toward a nuclear agreement that will do little more than memorialize the limited Iranian concessions made in last year's Joint Plan of Action (JPOA). This is a bad deal for the U.S. Almost any feasible formal agreement would represent a major defeat for the U.S. - in the current global context, a JPOA-like deal would be seen as yielding to Iran and giving hostile states more legitimacy. Moreover, such a deal would not much reduce the Iranian nuclear threat. With these problems in mind, the administration may want to consider another course of action that does not depend on reaching a formal agreement. If the deadlock persists, Washington should freeze the negotiations and keep existing sanctions at their current level. The U.S. should lay out clear redlines for military action that would apply if Iran approaches a nuclear weapons capability or blocks inspections. Moreover, the U.S. should cooperate with, rather than attempt to rein in, Israel's deterrent threat. This includes providing more weapons and systems to Israel that could facilitate a strike, and continuing the improvement of U.S. military capabilities in the Persian Gulf, especially missile defense. Central to this alternative is a U.S. commitment to use force if a redline is crossed, or eventually face a nuclear-armed Iran. The writer served as U.S. Deputy National Security Advisor and U.S. Ambassador to Turkey and Iraq. 2014-08-14 00:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|