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
(Wall Street Journal) Walter Russell Mead - In an interview I had last month with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, he explained that with respect to Iran, the administration is confident that the combination of America's fracking revolution (which allows the U.S. to exclude Iranian oil from world markets without risking a devastating rise in prices), the dramatic, info-tech-enabled increase in the effectiveness of American sanctions, and continuing U.S. military superiority has given America the advantage. Iran, the administration believes, is in a box. The policy of extreme economic pressure through sanctions continues to weaken Iran's economy - and the noose will tighten further when new sanctions take effect in 2020. The International Monetary Fund estimates that Iran's GDP contracted 9.5% in 2019, and the damage could be more than twice as severe in 2020. Iran is seen to have three choices: It can continue to resist while its domestic economy and regional allies suffer under growing resource constraints. It can launch a large-scale attack on Americans - or initiate a dash for the bomb, which would pose a substantial threat to U.S. security - triggering a Pearl Harbor-like reaction which would sustain a massive military response. Or it can enter into serious negotiations over ending its nuclear program, its missile program, and its scheme of terror and subversion in neighboring states. The writer is professor of foreign affairs and the humanities at Bard College, and a distinguished fellow in strategy and statesmanship at the Hudson Institute. 2020-01-07 00:00:00Full Article
Pompeo Explains America's Iran Policy
(Wall Street Journal) Walter Russell Mead - In an interview I had last month with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, he explained that with respect to Iran, the administration is confident that the combination of America's fracking revolution (which allows the U.S. to exclude Iranian oil from world markets without risking a devastating rise in prices), the dramatic, info-tech-enabled increase in the effectiveness of American sanctions, and continuing U.S. military superiority has given America the advantage. Iran, the administration believes, is in a box. The policy of extreme economic pressure through sanctions continues to weaken Iran's economy - and the noose will tighten further when new sanctions take effect in 2020. The International Monetary Fund estimates that Iran's GDP contracted 9.5% in 2019, and the damage could be more than twice as severe in 2020. Iran is seen to have three choices: It can continue to resist while its domestic economy and regional allies suffer under growing resource constraints. It can launch a large-scale attack on Americans - or initiate a dash for the bomb, which would pose a substantial threat to U.S. security - triggering a Pearl Harbor-like reaction which would sustain a massive military response. Or it can enter into serious negotiations over ending its nuclear program, its missile program, and its scheme of terror and subversion in neighboring states. The writer is professor of foreign affairs and the humanities at Bard College, and a distinguished fellow in strategy and statesmanship at the Hudson Institute. 2020-01-07 00:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|