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
(Newsweek) Prof. Eugene Kontorovich - The proposed deal would give the Iranian puppet-state in Lebanon hundreds of miles of territory in the Mediterranean Sea - and the vast reserves of natural gas underneath. In the final U.S. proposal, the recipe for compromise is simple: Israel accepts all of Lebanon's territorial claims and redraws its borders. The standard principle in maritime mediation is equitable division somewhere down the middle. But the deal reportedly requires Jerusalem to meet Beirut's claims in full. It does not advance U.S. strategic interests to propose a deal that would strengthen Hizbullah, a State Department-designated terror group and Iranian proxy that largely controls Lebanon. The notion that the gas fields give Lebanon "something to lose" depends on the unlikely assumption that Israel would target these fields, operated by a French company, in retaliation for a Hizbullah missile attack on Israeli facilities. In reality, the international community - as well as legal and environmental concerns - would restrain Israel. The writer is director of the Center for the Middle East and International Law at George Mason University Law School.2022-10-03 00:00:00Full Article
Israel Must Reject a Terrible Natural Gas Deal with Hizbullah
(Newsweek) Prof. Eugene Kontorovich - The proposed deal would give the Iranian puppet-state in Lebanon hundreds of miles of territory in the Mediterranean Sea - and the vast reserves of natural gas underneath. In the final U.S. proposal, the recipe for compromise is simple: Israel accepts all of Lebanon's territorial claims and redraws its borders. The standard principle in maritime mediation is equitable division somewhere down the middle. But the deal reportedly requires Jerusalem to meet Beirut's claims in full. It does not advance U.S. strategic interests to propose a deal that would strengthen Hizbullah, a State Department-designated terror group and Iranian proxy that largely controls Lebanon. The notion that the gas fields give Lebanon "something to lose" depends on the unlikely assumption that Israel would target these fields, operated by a French company, in retaliation for a Hizbullah missile attack on Israeli facilities. In reality, the international community - as well as legal and environmental concerns - would restrain Israel. The writer is director of the Center for the Middle East and International Law at George Mason University Law School.2022-10-03 00:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|