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 - For the first 25 years of Israel's independence, American presidents were more interested in cultivating Arab leaders than in aligning with Jerusalem. Only after Richard Nixon concluded that an Israeli defeat in the 1973 Yom Kippur War would empower the Soviet Union across the Middle East did Washington move toward a strategic relationship. After the fall of the Soviet Union, Washington saw Jerusalem as a necessary partner in containing Iran and, after 9/11, the war on terror. American policy toward Israel depends on how a given U.S. president sees American interests world-wide. For the past half-century, American presidents generally believed that the Middle East, thanks to its oil reserves, was a high priority in America's strategy of global engagement and that a close relationship with Israel on balance strengthened America's position in the region and beyond. The likelihood of a wholesale American withdrawal from the Middle East is likely overestimated. The energy transition will probably take longer and be less total than greens hope. And global geopolitical competition is more likely to buttress American support for limiting Chinese influence in the Middle East. In any case, Israel today is orders of magnitude stronger, wealthier and more influential than it was in 1948. The writer, a fellow at the Hudson Institute, is Professor of Foreign Affairs and Humanities at Bard College. 2023-05-18 00:00:00Full Article
Israel at 75 Is Threatened but Strong
(Wall Street Journal) Walter Russell Mead - For the first 25 years of Israel's independence, American presidents were more interested in cultivating Arab leaders than in aligning with Jerusalem. Only after Richard Nixon concluded that an Israeli defeat in the 1973 Yom Kippur War would empower the Soviet Union across the Middle East did Washington move toward a strategic relationship. After the fall of the Soviet Union, Washington saw Jerusalem as a necessary partner in containing Iran and, after 9/11, the war on terror. American policy toward Israel depends on how a given U.S. president sees American interests world-wide. For the past half-century, American presidents generally believed that the Middle East, thanks to its oil reserves, was a high priority in America's strategy of global engagement and that a close relationship with Israel on balance strengthened America's position in the region and beyond. The likelihood of a wholesale American withdrawal from the Middle East is likely overestimated. The energy transition will probably take longer and be less total than greens hope. And global geopolitical competition is more likely to buttress American support for limiting Chinese influence in the Middle East. In any case, Israel today is orders of magnitude stronger, wealthier and more influential than it was in 1948. The writer, a fellow at the Hudson Institute, is Professor of Foreign Affairs and Humanities at Bard College. 2023-05-18 00:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|