Home
Archives
Jerusalem Center Homepage
View the current issue
Jerusalem Center Videos
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) Steven A. Cook and Amr T. Leheta - The failure of the Sykes-Picot agreement signed 100 years ago is now part of the received wisdom about the contemporary Middle East. The borders of the countries in the region do not make sense, according to this argument, because there are people of different religions, sects, and ethnicities within them. For starters, Sykes and Picot never negotiated state borders, but rather zones of influence. And the framework the two diplomats hammered out never came into existence. British Prime Minister David Lloyd George's government actively began to undermine the accord as soon as Sykes signed it. Nor are the Middle East's modern borders completely without precedent. These boundaries were not whimsical lines drawn on a blank map. They were based, for the most part, on pre-existing political, social, and economic realities of the region, including Ottoman administrative divisions and practices. Steven A. Cook is a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, where Amr T. Leheta is a research associate.2016-05-17 00:00:00Full Article
Don't Blame Sykes-Picot for the Middle East's Mess
(Foreign Policy) Steven A. Cook and Amr T. Leheta - The failure of the Sykes-Picot agreement signed 100 years ago is now part of the received wisdom about the contemporary Middle East. The borders of the countries in the region do not make sense, according to this argument, because there are people of different religions, sects, and ethnicities within them. For starters, Sykes and Picot never negotiated state borders, but rather zones of influence. And the framework the two diplomats hammered out never came into existence. British Prime Minister David Lloyd George's government actively began to undermine the accord as soon as Sykes signed it. Nor are the Middle East's modern borders completely without precedent. These boundaries were not whimsical lines drawn on a blank map. They were based, for the most part, on pre-existing political, social, and economic realities of the region, including Ottoman administrative divisions and practices. Steven A. Cook is a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, where Amr T. Leheta is a research associate.2016-05-17 00:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
|
Search:
|