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
(Washington Post) Eugene Kontorovich - The U.S. decision to allow a UN Security Council resolution condemning Israeli settlements to pass was met with bipartisan condemnation, including from leading players in efforts to achieve a two-state solution, such as Democrats Dennis Ross and George Mitchell. The new U.S. administration cannot directly reverse the resolution, but the President and Congress can take action to negate its ideas, and to create a different reality from the one Resolution 2334 seeks to promote. The U.S. must clearly declare that whatever the political merits of Israeli settlements, they do not violate international law. The Security Council's condemnation of any Jewish presence in eastern Jerusalem and the West Bank is a unique rule invented for Israel. What is being demanded of Israel in its historical homeland has never been demanded of any other state, and never will be. Congress can pass legislation making clear that Israel does not violate international law by permitting Jews to live in territories under its control. The U.S. should move its embassy to the location of the current U.S. Consular Section in the Arnona neighborhood of Jerusalem. This location is a few hundred meters over the imaginary line across which the UN says Jews may not go. Moving the embassy there would be the most tangible rejection of the resolution's "1967 lines" policy. The U.S. must clarify that all its treaties or laws applicable to Israel apply fully to all areas under Israel's civil jurisdiction. For example, the President could immediately rescind Treasury regulations that require Israeli goods from the West Bank to be labeled "Made in West Bank," and instead direct that they be labeled "Made in Israel." Moreover, Congress should also pass anti-boycott legislation specifying that it applies to boycotts of territories under Israeli jurisdiction. The writer, a professor at Northwestern University School of Law, is an expert on constitutional and international law.2017-01-03 00:00:00Full Article
How the New U.S. Administration Can Negate the Anti-Israel UN Security Council Resolution
(Washington Post) Eugene Kontorovich - The U.S. decision to allow a UN Security Council resolution condemning Israeli settlements to pass was met with bipartisan condemnation, including from leading players in efforts to achieve a two-state solution, such as Democrats Dennis Ross and George Mitchell. The new U.S. administration cannot directly reverse the resolution, but the President and Congress can take action to negate its ideas, and to create a different reality from the one Resolution 2334 seeks to promote. The U.S. must clearly declare that whatever the political merits of Israeli settlements, they do not violate international law. The Security Council's condemnation of any Jewish presence in eastern Jerusalem and the West Bank is a unique rule invented for Israel. What is being demanded of Israel in its historical homeland has never been demanded of any other state, and never will be. Congress can pass legislation making clear that Israel does not violate international law by permitting Jews to live in territories under its control. The U.S. should move its embassy to the location of the current U.S. Consular Section in the Arnona neighborhood of Jerusalem. This location is a few hundred meters over the imaginary line across which the UN says Jews may not go. Moving the embassy there would be the most tangible rejection of the resolution's "1967 lines" policy. The U.S. must clarify that all its treaties or laws applicable to Israel apply fully to all areas under Israel's civil jurisdiction. For example, the President could immediately rescind Treasury regulations that require Israeli goods from the West Bank to be labeled "Made in West Bank," and instead direct that they be labeled "Made in Israel." Moreover, Congress should also pass anti-boycott legislation specifying that it applies to boycotts of territories under Israeli jurisdiction. The writer, a professor at Northwestern University School of Law, is an expert on constitutional and international law.2017-01-03 00:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|