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
(National Interest) Dov S. Zakheim - The notion that the original deal with Iran was somehow a great accomplishment because it delayed the time frame within which Iran could fashion a nuclear weapon from a few months to an estimated year was fanciful at best. A year can pass very quickly, and the difference of a few months might prove to be no difference at all, given uncertainties surrounding what exactly Tehran was up to, and the reluctance of the West to go to war. Were the West truly able to detect Iranian activity, it could act within the few months it would take Iran to build a bomb in defiance of the deal. Many who opposed the deal felt that once America signed the agreement it should not withdraw from it in order not to undermine its credibility as a reliable interlocutor. However, having abandoned the deal, returning to it is an entirely different proposition. The Biden Administration must be wary of making any gestures that the Ayatollahs could pocket without giving anything in return. Washington should not do away with any sanctions unless Iran reciprocates in some fashion. The writer served as the undersecretary of defense (comptroller) and chief financial officer for the U.S. Department of Defense (2001-2004). 2021-01-28 00:00:00Full Article
It Might Not Be So Easy to Reboot the Iran Deal
(National Interest) Dov S. Zakheim - The notion that the original deal with Iran was somehow a great accomplishment because it delayed the time frame within which Iran could fashion a nuclear weapon from a few months to an estimated year was fanciful at best. A year can pass very quickly, and the difference of a few months might prove to be no difference at all, given uncertainties surrounding what exactly Tehran was up to, and the reluctance of the West to go to war. Were the West truly able to detect Iranian activity, it could act within the few months it would take Iran to build a bomb in defiance of the deal. Many who opposed the deal felt that once America signed the agreement it should not withdraw from it in order not to undermine its credibility as a reliable interlocutor. However, having abandoned the deal, returning to it is an entirely different proposition. The Biden Administration must be wary of making any gestures that the Ayatollahs could pocket without giving anything in return. Washington should not do away with any sanctions unless Iran reciprocates in some fashion. The writer served as the undersecretary of defense (comptroller) and chief financial officer for the U.S. Department of Defense (2001-2004). 2021-01-28 00:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|