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
(The National-Abu Dhabi) Michael Young - With thousands of men under arms, a missile arsenal, Iranian backing and much of the Shiite religious community behind the party, Hizbullah remains a potent force in Lebanese society. Yet its ability to act as Iran's deterrent has been severely compromised by Lebanon's domestic situation. Hizbullah's plan is to turn the country into a "resistance state" that acts as an outpost for Iranian influence, and another counterweight to Israel and the U.S. Hizbullah has lost two of the essential prerequisites needed to conduct a war against Israel, were Iran to demand it. The first is Lebanon's ability to absorb Israeli retaliation and rebuild, as happened in 2006. Lebanon's bankruptcy means that after a war against Israel, the country would be unable to bounce back from the destruction. The second is a minimum level of consensus nationally behind Hizbullah's "resistance" agenda. The rifts in the political class as a result of the popular protest movement mean that there is no discernible consensus to back Hizbullah in going to war. When Ziad Aswad, a prominent member of the Hizbullah-allied Christian Aounist faction, declares that Lebanon "cannot continue to hold a rifle when its people are hungry," he expresses a widespread view. Hizbullah would be blamed for sacrificing Lebanon for Iran. Hundreds of thousands of displaced Shiites would have to find refuge in areas hostile to the party, which could result in a civil conflict that it could not hope to win, nullifying its usefulness to Iran. As Iran looks at Lebanon, it sees its local ally presiding over a state in ruin whose population is angry and refuses to suffer for Tehran. The writer is editor of Diwan, the blog of the Carnegie Middle East program in Beirut. 2023-05-25 00:00:00Full Article
Hizbullah Is Much Weaker than It Seems
(The National-Abu Dhabi) Michael Young - With thousands of men under arms, a missile arsenal, Iranian backing and much of the Shiite religious community behind the party, Hizbullah remains a potent force in Lebanese society. Yet its ability to act as Iran's deterrent has been severely compromised by Lebanon's domestic situation. Hizbullah's plan is to turn the country into a "resistance state" that acts as an outpost for Iranian influence, and another counterweight to Israel and the U.S. Hizbullah has lost two of the essential prerequisites needed to conduct a war against Israel, were Iran to demand it. The first is Lebanon's ability to absorb Israeli retaliation and rebuild, as happened in 2006. Lebanon's bankruptcy means that after a war against Israel, the country would be unable to bounce back from the destruction. The second is a minimum level of consensus nationally behind Hizbullah's "resistance" agenda. The rifts in the political class as a result of the popular protest movement mean that there is no discernible consensus to back Hizbullah in going to war. When Ziad Aswad, a prominent member of the Hizbullah-allied Christian Aounist faction, declares that Lebanon "cannot continue to hold a rifle when its people are hungry," he expresses a widespread view. Hizbullah would be blamed for sacrificing Lebanon for Iran. Hundreds of thousands of displaced Shiites would have to find refuge in areas hostile to the party, which could result in a civil conflict that it could not hope to win, nullifying its usefulness to Iran. As Iran looks at Lebanon, it sees its local ally presiding over a state in ruin whose population is angry and refuses to suffer for Tehran. The writer is editor of Diwan, the blog of the Carnegie Middle East program in Beirut. 2023-05-25 00:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|