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
(BESA Center for Strategic Studies-Bar-Ilan University) Jose V. Ciprut - Despite the fact that a state of Palestine does not exist, it was, by Sep. 14, 2015, already "recognized" by 136 (70.5%) of the 193 member states of the UN. But this label does not guarantee Palestine's viability as a functional entity until and unless it can also reach a "mutually just and durable peace" agreement with the democratic Jewish State of Israel, with which it must sincerely want to coexist. The sad realities on the ground indicate that the conditions for such mutual coexistence are not only nonexistent right now but unattainable for the foreseeable future, owing to the persistent absence of a shared ethical foundation. The PLO can no longer credibly pretend to be amenable to negotiating peaceful coexistence with Israel at the same time that it refuses direct contact with it; waits for "an acceptable final deal" to be served up by a third party; and instructs yet another third party [the ICC] to prosecute its future peace partner for "serious war crimes" - in utter disregard of binding agreements to the contrary. One cannot pretend to be ready in good faith to engage in peace negotiations with a putative future partner whom one formally asks the ICC to pursue and condemn for matters that should be resolved through direct negotiation. The writer is a conflict analyst, social systems scientist, and international political economist. 2017-11-28 00:00:00Full Article
Prerequisites for Negotiating Peaceful Coexistence
(BESA Center for Strategic Studies-Bar-Ilan University) Jose V. Ciprut - Despite the fact that a state of Palestine does not exist, it was, by Sep. 14, 2015, already "recognized" by 136 (70.5%) of the 193 member states of the UN. But this label does not guarantee Palestine's viability as a functional entity until and unless it can also reach a "mutually just and durable peace" agreement with the democratic Jewish State of Israel, with which it must sincerely want to coexist. The sad realities on the ground indicate that the conditions for such mutual coexistence are not only nonexistent right now but unattainable for the foreseeable future, owing to the persistent absence of a shared ethical foundation. The PLO can no longer credibly pretend to be amenable to negotiating peaceful coexistence with Israel at the same time that it refuses direct contact with it; waits for "an acceptable final deal" to be served up by a third party; and instructs yet another third party [the ICC] to prosecute its future peace partner for "serious war crimes" - in utter disregard of binding agreements to the contrary. One cannot pretend to be ready in good faith to engage in peace negotiations with a putative future partner whom one formally asks the ICC to pursue and condemn for matters that should be resolved through direct negotiation. The writer is a conflict analyst, social systems scientist, and international political economist. 2017-11-28 00:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|