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 Institute for Near East Policy] David Makovsky - The character of the upcoming Middle East peace conference in Annapolis is changing in order to avert failure or an immediate Israeli-Palestinian crisis over core issues. Instead of the expected pre-conference declaration of final status, Annapolis will only mark the beginning of negotiations on these issues. In addition, the November conference will attempt to revive the moribund Quartet Roadmap laid out in 2003, with particular focus on the plan's first phase. But unlike the past, the parties have agreed to simultaneously negotiate the third, final-status phase while implementing the first phase. At the same time the Israelis are wary of sacrificing territorial cards with no concessions in return. The U.S. will be called on to simultaneously guide final-status talks and monitor implementation of the first phase, a task that will test the U.S. on how to measure compliance and how to enforce judgments. The new dual-track process will either instill confidence in both parties and stave off the ascendancy of Hamas, or simply serve as a way of parking the Israeli-Palestinian issue until the end of the Bush administration. 2007-11-09 01:00:00Full Article
Annapolis and a Dual-Track Peace Process
[Washington Institute for Near East Policy] David Makovsky - The character of the upcoming Middle East peace conference in Annapolis is changing in order to avert failure or an immediate Israeli-Palestinian crisis over core issues. Instead of the expected pre-conference declaration of final status, Annapolis will only mark the beginning of negotiations on these issues. In addition, the November conference will attempt to revive the moribund Quartet Roadmap laid out in 2003, with particular focus on the plan's first phase. But unlike the past, the parties have agreed to simultaneously negotiate the third, final-status phase while implementing the first phase. At the same time the Israelis are wary of sacrificing territorial cards with no concessions in return. The U.S. will be called on to simultaneously guide final-status talks and monitor implementation of the first phase, a task that will test the U.S. on how to measure compliance and how to enforce judgments. The new dual-track process will either instill confidence in both parties and stave off the ascendancy of Hamas, or simply serve as a way of parking the Israeli-Palestinian issue until the end of the Bush administration. 2007-11-09 01:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|