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 Times) David Brooks - President Obama's deal with Iran is really a giant gamble on the nature of the Iranian regime. On Thursday, Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, delivered his first big response to the sort-of-agreed-upon nuclear framework. What did we learn? We learned that Iran's supreme leader still regards the U.S. as his enemy. The audience chanted "Death to America" during his speech, and Khamenei himself dismissed America's "devilish" intentions. He thinks the U.S. is the embodiment of evil. We learned that the West wants a deal more than Khamenei does. Throughout the speech, his words dripped with a lack of enthusiasm for the whole enterprise. President Obama is campaigning for a deal, while Khamenei is unmoved. We learned that the ayatollah is demanding total trust from us while offering maximum contempt in return. He demanded that the West permanently end all sanctions on the very day the deal is signed. He insisted that no inspectors could visit Iranian military facilities. This would make a hash of verification and enforcement. Khamenei's speech suggests that Iran still fundamentally sees itself in a holy war with the West, a war that is still a fundamental clash of values and interests. His speech suggests, as Henry Kissinger and George Shultz put it in a brilliant op-ed essay in the Wall Street Journal on Wednesday, that there is no congruence of interests between us and Iran. If Iran still has revolutionary intent, then no amount of treaty subtlety will enforce this deal. It will continue to work on its advanced nuclear technology even during the agreement. It will inevitably use nuclear weaponry, or even the threat of eventual nuclear weaponry, to advance its apocalyptic interests. Every other regional power will prepare for the worst, and we'll get a nuclear-arms race in a region of disintegrating nation-states. At some point, there has to be a scintilla of evidence that Iran wants to change. Khamenei's speech offers none. 2015-04-13 00:00:00Full Article
Where Is the Evidence that Iran Wants to Change?
(New York Times) David Brooks - President Obama's deal with Iran is really a giant gamble on the nature of the Iranian regime. On Thursday, Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, delivered his first big response to the sort-of-agreed-upon nuclear framework. What did we learn? We learned that Iran's supreme leader still regards the U.S. as his enemy. The audience chanted "Death to America" during his speech, and Khamenei himself dismissed America's "devilish" intentions. He thinks the U.S. is the embodiment of evil. We learned that the West wants a deal more than Khamenei does. Throughout the speech, his words dripped with a lack of enthusiasm for the whole enterprise. President Obama is campaigning for a deal, while Khamenei is unmoved. We learned that the ayatollah is demanding total trust from us while offering maximum contempt in return. He demanded that the West permanently end all sanctions on the very day the deal is signed. He insisted that no inspectors could visit Iranian military facilities. This would make a hash of verification and enforcement. Khamenei's speech suggests that Iran still fundamentally sees itself in a holy war with the West, a war that is still a fundamental clash of values and interests. His speech suggests, as Henry Kissinger and George Shultz put it in a brilliant op-ed essay in the Wall Street Journal on Wednesday, that there is no congruence of interests between us and Iran. If Iran still has revolutionary intent, then no amount of treaty subtlety will enforce this deal. It will continue to work on its advanced nuclear technology even during the agreement. It will inevitably use nuclear weaponry, or even the threat of eventual nuclear weaponry, to advance its apocalyptic interests. Every other regional power will prepare for the worst, and we'll get a nuclear-arms race in a region of disintegrating nation-states. At some point, there has to be a scintilla of evidence that Iran wants to change. Khamenei's speech offers none. 2015-04-13 00:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|