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
(Tablet) Lee Smith - Minimizing the U.S. footprint in the Middle East was seen to require partnership with a power that could bear the load after America's exit. Supporters of the Iran deal realigned American interests with those of the Islamic Republic, overturning the traditional American alliance system. But this realignment was a geopolitical protection racket. The thinking behind it was also wrong, since Iran can't carry the load in the Middle East. It is the theocratic state of a regional minority twice over, Persian and Shiite, whose exterminationist campaigns against Sunnis have rendered it incapable of projecting influence in a Sunni-majority Middle East. Iran wages asymmetrical war through proxies because it has very limited military capabilities of its own. Even with the hundreds of billions that came to Iran after the JCPOA, Iran needed Russian support to put down Syrian rebel forces. Even the most elementary premise of realignment is illogical. It means overturning the existing U.S. alliance system of pro-American states in the Middle East in favor of embracing a genocidal regime that at its core is virulently anti-American. The writer is a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute.2019-09-23 00:00:00Full Article
Realigning U.S. Policy to Support Iran Is Illogical
(Tablet) Lee Smith - Minimizing the U.S. footprint in the Middle East was seen to require partnership with a power that could bear the load after America's exit. Supporters of the Iran deal realigned American interests with those of the Islamic Republic, overturning the traditional American alliance system. But this realignment was a geopolitical protection racket. The thinking behind it was also wrong, since Iran can't carry the load in the Middle East. It is the theocratic state of a regional minority twice over, Persian and Shiite, whose exterminationist campaigns against Sunnis have rendered it incapable of projecting influence in a Sunni-majority Middle East. Iran wages asymmetrical war through proxies because it has very limited military capabilities of its own. Even with the hundreds of billions that came to Iran after the JCPOA, Iran needed Russian support to put down Syrian rebel forces. Even the most elementary premise of realignment is illogical. It means overturning the existing U.S. alliance system of pro-American states in the Middle East in favor of embracing a genocidal regime that at its core is virulently anti-American. The writer is a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute.2019-09-23 00:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|