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 Review) Elliott Abrams - The slaughter of Israelis by Hamas on Oct. 7 has greatly affected Israeli opinion. A Palestinian state today is simply too dangerous. Yet former State Department officials Daniel Kurtzer and Aaron David Miller, writing in Foreign Affairs on Dec. 22, call to "create an independent Palestinian state" as the only solution to the conflict. They write, "Hamas' terrorism may well encourage a further radicalization of the Israeli population." Now think about that. Some Israelis were not keen on an independent Palestinian state because they've been living with Palestinian terrorism and intifadas and rockets from Gaza for decades. Now that view is called "radical" and if more Israelis feel that way after the massacres of Oct. 7, that isn't common sense or self-defense; it's "further radicalization." The two peace processors conclude that President Biden "can make it clearer to the Israelis that the continued strength of their relationship with Washington rests on Israel understanding that it cannot reoccupy Gaza, and that their ultimate security guarantee will be a peace agreement with a similarly peace-minded Palestinian state." Those last words are breathtaking. What better example of the Tinker Bell effect than thinking that Israel will be secure because there will be "a similarly peace-minded Palestinian state." From everything we can see about Palestinian politics and public opinion, basing Israeli security on dreams about Palestinian pacifism is nuts. That is the problem with the two-state solution: No one can explain how a sovereign and independent Palestinian state will not constitute a grave security threat to Israel (and Jordan as well). Kurtzer and Miller, like all the peace processors, just wish this away, conjuring up a mythical Palestine that loves peace. The writer, a senior fellow for Middle Eastern studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, served as deputy assistant to the president and deputy national security advisor, where he supervised U.S. policy in the Middle East for the White House. 2024-01-02 00:00:00Full Article
The Peace Processors Return
(National Review) Elliott Abrams - The slaughter of Israelis by Hamas on Oct. 7 has greatly affected Israeli opinion. A Palestinian state today is simply too dangerous. Yet former State Department officials Daniel Kurtzer and Aaron David Miller, writing in Foreign Affairs on Dec. 22, call to "create an independent Palestinian state" as the only solution to the conflict. They write, "Hamas' terrorism may well encourage a further radicalization of the Israeli population." Now think about that. Some Israelis were not keen on an independent Palestinian state because they've been living with Palestinian terrorism and intifadas and rockets from Gaza for decades. Now that view is called "radical" and if more Israelis feel that way after the massacres of Oct. 7, that isn't common sense or self-defense; it's "further radicalization." The two peace processors conclude that President Biden "can make it clearer to the Israelis that the continued strength of their relationship with Washington rests on Israel understanding that it cannot reoccupy Gaza, and that their ultimate security guarantee will be a peace agreement with a similarly peace-minded Palestinian state." Those last words are breathtaking. What better example of the Tinker Bell effect than thinking that Israel will be secure because there will be "a similarly peace-minded Palestinian state." From everything we can see about Palestinian politics and public opinion, basing Israeli security on dreams about Palestinian pacifism is nuts. That is the problem with the two-state solution: No one can explain how a sovereign and independent Palestinian state will not constitute a grave security threat to Israel (and Jordan as well). Kurtzer and Miller, like all the peace processors, just wish this away, conjuring up a mythical Palestine that loves peace. The writer, a senior fellow for Middle Eastern studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, served as deputy assistant to the president and deputy national security advisor, where he supervised U.S. policy in the Middle East for the White House. 2024-01-02 00:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|