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
(Institute for Contemporary Affairs-Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs) Amb. Alan Baker - PLO Negotiator Saeb Erekat denounced Australia's recognition of West Jerusalem as Israel's capital, stating that "East Jerusalem, under international law, is an integral part of the occupied Palestinian territory." Since we had worked together on the 1995 Oslo Interim Agreement, I responded on Twitter: Saeb - you're not a lawyer. There's no violation of international law in recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's capital. You seem to confuse international law with UN resolutions which are not international law. Permit me to remind you and your colleagues of some basic facts and truths: A Palestinian state does not exist because it cannot fulfill the accepted international law criteria for statehood. The fact that the PLO is committed by the Oslo Accords to negotiate with Israel on the issue of the permanent status of the territories is indicative of the fact that permanent status has not yet been agreed upon, and thus there can be no Palestinian state. Basing their claim to statehood on a 2012 non-binding General Assembly resolution is totally flawed, manipulative, and misleading. The General Assembly is not empowered to establish states. Since the PLO is not a state, it therefore cannot be party to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), which is specifically open only to states. The fact that the Palestinians politically manipulated the UN and ICC into viewing them as a state is legally flawed and has yet to be reviewed juridically. Rather than going to such great efforts to manipulate and abuse the international community, and trying to bypass the negotiating process, the Palestinians need to restore their credibility as a viable negotiating partner and return to that process immediately. The writer participated in the negotiation and drafting of the Oslo Accords with the Palestinians, as well as agreements and peace treaties with Egypt, Jordan, and Lebanon. He served as legal adviser and deputy director-general of Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs and as Israel's ambassador to Canada. 2018-12-17 00:00:00Full Article
The Palestinian Claim to Statehood: An Open Letter to PLO Negotiator Saeb Erekat
(Institute for Contemporary Affairs-Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs) Amb. Alan Baker - PLO Negotiator Saeb Erekat denounced Australia's recognition of West Jerusalem as Israel's capital, stating that "East Jerusalem, under international law, is an integral part of the occupied Palestinian territory." Since we had worked together on the 1995 Oslo Interim Agreement, I responded on Twitter: Saeb - you're not a lawyer. There's no violation of international law in recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's capital. You seem to confuse international law with UN resolutions which are not international law. Permit me to remind you and your colleagues of some basic facts and truths: A Palestinian state does not exist because it cannot fulfill the accepted international law criteria for statehood. The fact that the PLO is committed by the Oslo Accords to negotiate with Israel on the issue of the permanent status of the territories is indicative of the fact that permanent status has not yet been agreed upon, and thus there can be no Palestinian state. Basing their claim to statehood on a 2012 non-binding General Assembly resolution is totally flawed, manipulative, and misleading. The General Assembly is not empowered to establish states. Since the PLO is not a state, it therefore cannot be party to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), which is specifically open only to states. The fact that the Palestinians politically manipulated the UN and ICC into viewing them as a state is legally flawed and has yet to be reviewed juridically. Rather than going to such great efforts to manipulate and abuse the international community, and trying to bypass the negotiating process, the Palestinians need to restore their credibility as a viable negotiating partner and return to that process immediately. The writer participated in the negotiation and drafting of the Oslo Accords with the Palestinians, as well as agreements and peace treaties with Egypt, Jordan, and Lebanon. He served as legal adviser and deputy director-general of Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs and as Israel's ambassador to Canada. 2018-12-17 00:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|