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
(National Interest) Emily Landau - Nothing has changed in terms of Iran's military nuclear ambitions, and Iran continues to advance its program where it can. In the post-deal period, Iran continues to try to squeeze more concessions from the West - to ensure improvement of its economic situation beyond what was agreed to. Iran forever glosses over its aggressive regional behavior, gross human rights violations, and missile and nuclear advances. In attempting to squeeze more concessions, Iran adamantly claims that it has upheld its end of the bargain meticulously, while accusing the U.S. of bad-faith behavior and of shirking its commitments. These accusations were predictable from the start, because the tactic has been employed so many times before. It is the exact pattern that Iran followed in the early stage of negotiations with the EU-3, from 2003-05. Generally speaking, the U.S. has refrained from pushing back with determination against Iran's false narratives. The administration's response to Iran's missile tests that violated UN Security Council resolutions was delayed and relatively mute, failing to highlight Iran's ongoing support for terror. Iran's success in the long and drawn-out negotiation with the international community from 2003 to 2015 was due to its ability to manipulate the weaknesses in the NPT long enough, so that when it was finally forced to negotiate seriously, it already had an advanced nuclear program. The writer heads the Arms Control and Regional Security Program at the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) in Tel Aviv.2016-05-11 00:00:00Full Article
How Iran Is Twisting Reality to Get What It Wants
(National Interest) Emily Landau - Nothing has changed in terms of Iran's military nuclear ambitions, and Iran continues to advance its program where it can. In the post-deal period, Iran continues to try to squeeze more concessions from the West - to ensure improvement of its economic situation beyond what was agreed to. Iran forever glosses over its aggressive regional behavior, gross human rights violations, and missile and nuclear advances. In attempting to squeeze more concessions, Iran adamantly claims that it has upheld its end of the bargain meticulously, while accusing the U.S. of bad-faith behavior and of shirking its commitments. These accusations were predictable from the start, because the tactic has been employed so many times before. It is the exact pattern that Iran followed in the early stage of negotiations with the EU-3, from 2003-05. Generally speaking, the U.S. has refrained from pushing back with determination against Iran's false narratives. The administration's response to Iran's missile tests that violated UN Security Council resolutions was delayed and relatively mute, failing to highlight Iran's ongoing support for terror. Iran's success in the long and drawn-out negotiation with the international community from 2003 to 2015 was due to its ability to manipulate the weaknesses in the NPT long enough, so that when it was finally forced to negotiate seriously, it already had an advanced nuclear program. The writer heads the Arms Control and Regional Security Program at the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) in Tel Aviv.2016-05-11 00:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|