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
(Institute for National Security Studies-Tel Aviv) Amos Yadlin - The agreement signed with Iran is very problematic for Israel. Israel should seek the formulation of a "parallel agreement" with the U.S. that mitigates the deal's weak points. Israel is a powerful nation, strong enough to confront the challenges that lie ahead, including those expected from implementation of the agreement. Nonetheless, the best way to do so runs through Washington and requires U.S.-Israeli cooperation that manages the risks and maximizes the strategic possibilities. This cooperation should be formalized in an agreement rather than by exchanges of letters or the establishment of understandings. Recent history shows that letters and understandings - such as the letter sent by President Bush to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in 2004 - were not recognized in practice by subsequent administrations. Signing a parallel agreement with the U.S. does not mean acquiescing to or reconciling with the problematic Iran deal. Quite the contrary, it is precisely because the agreement with Iran is so troublesome that a parallel agreement between the U.S. and Israel - which is not a signatory to the agreement with Iran - is imperative. On the conventional level, Israel and the U.S. must formulate a coordinated campaign to combat Iran's negative influence in the region. The challenge is to define principles for offensive conduct against subversive Iranian activity. On the political level, both Israel and the U.S. will gain from demonstrating to Iran the strength of their bilateral alliance, and the far-reaching levels of support Israel enjoys among the American people and in Congress. This could be achieved through political measures such as formal American recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital and the transfer of the American embassy there, without waiting for a resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Other steps could include promoting recognition of Israel's sovereignty over the Golan Heights, given the dissolution of Syria. Maj.-Gen. Amos Yadlin, chief of Israeli military intelligence from 2006 to 2010, is director of INSS. 2015-09-01 00:00:00Full Article
Israel and the U.S.: Time for a Parallel Agreement
(Institute for National Security Studies-Tel Aviv) Amos Yadlin - The agreement signed with Iran is very problematic for Israel. Israel should seek the formulation of a "parallel agreement" with the U.S. that mitigates the deal's weak points. Israel is a powerful nation, strong enough to confront the challenges that lie ahead, including those expected from implementation of the agreement. Nonetheless, the best way to do so runs through Washington and requires U.S.-Israeli cooperation that manages the risks and maximizes the strategic possibilities. This cooperation should be formalized in an agreement rather than by exchanges of letters or the establishment of understandings. Recent history shows that letters and understandings - such as the letter sent by President Bush to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in 2004 - were not recognized in practice by subsequent administrations. Signing a parallel agreement with the U.S. does not mean acquiescing to or reconciling with the problematic Iran deal. Quite the contrary, it is precisely because the agreement with Iran is so troublesome that a parallel agreement between the U.S. and Israel - which is not a signatory to the agreement with Iran - is imperative. On the conventional level, Israel and the U.S. must formulate a coordinated campaign to combat Iran's negative influence in the region. The challenge is to define principles for offensive conduct against subversive Iranian activity. On the political level, both Israel and the U.S. will gain from demonstrating to Iran the strength of their bilateral alliance, and the far-reaching levels of support Israel enjoys among the American people and in Congress. This could be achieved through political measures such as formal American recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital and the transfer of the American embassy there, without waiting for a resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Other steps could include promoting recognition of Israel's sovereignty over the Golan Heights, given the dissolution of Syria. Maj.-Gen. Amos Yadlin, chief of Israeli military intelligence from 2006 to 2010, is director of INSS. 2015-09-01 00:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|