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
(Foreign Policy) Aaron David Miller and Jason Brodsky - The president and foreign minister of Iran may be moderates, but they are not free agents. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is the final arbiter on all matters of state. It has been Khamenei calling the shots throughout this entire process. Sanctions may have brought the mullahs to the table, but that doesn't mean that they can force a deal. Tehran has been nimble in finding loopholes to lessen the bite of sanctions. There are new indications that Iran's economy is rebounding. The supreme leader has consistently coupled the nuclear file with the Islamic Republic's perennial quest for dignity. According to an internal IAEA document, Khamenei told a high-level meeting at the presidential palace in Tehran in April 1984 that launching a nuclear weapons program "was the only way to secure the very essence of the Islamic Revolution from the schemes of its enemies, especially the United States and Israel, and to prepare it for the emergence of Imam Mehdi." When Gallup asked ordinary Iranian citizens in 2013 whether it was worth continuing to develop the nuclear power program, 63% said yes. Iran is playing for time. Thus any comprehensive agreement is, by definition, interim. Iran wants to preserve as much of its nuclear weapons capacity as possible and free itself from as much of the sanctions regime as it can. The mullahs see Iran's status as a nuclear weapons state as a hedge against regime change and as consistent with its regional status as a great power. That's why it isn't prepared to do a deal. It's hard to believe that another seven months is going to somehow fix that problem. Aaron David Miller is a distinguished scholar at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, where Jason Brodsky is a research associate. 2014-11-25 00:00:00Full Article
Why the Iranian Nuclear Deal Didn't Happen
(Foreign Policy) Aaron David Miller and Jason Brodsky - The president and foreign minister of Iran may be moderates, but they are not free agents. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is the final arbiter on all matters of state. It has been Khamenei calling the shots throughout this entire process. Sanctions may have brought the mullahs to the table, but that doesn't mean that they can force a deal. Tehran has been nimble in finding loopholes to lessen the bite of sanctions. There are new indications that Iran's economy is rebounding. The supreme leader has consistently coupled the nuclear file with the Islamic Republic's perennial quest for dignity. According to an internal IAEA document, Khamenei told a high-level meeting at the presidential palace in Tehran in April 1984 that launching a nuclear weapons program "was the only way to secure the very essence of the Islamic Revolution from the schemes of its enemies, especially the United States and Israel, and to prepare it for the emergence of Imam Mehdi." When Gallup asked ordinary Iranian citizens in 2013 whether it was worth continuing to develop the nuclear power program, 63% said yes. Iran is playing for time. Thus any comprehensive agreement is, by definition, interim. Iran wants to preserve as much of its nuclear weapons capacity as possible and free itself from as much of the sanctions regime as it can. The mullahs see Iran's status as a nuclear weapons state as a hedge against regime change and as consistent with its regional status as a great power. That's why it isn't prepared to do a deal. It's hard to believe that another seven months is going to somehow fix that problem. Aaron David Miller is a distinguished scholar at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, where Jason Brodsky is a research associate. 2014-11-25 00:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|