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 Hill) Stephen Blank - From every corner comes pressure upon Israel to acquiesce to a two-state solution. Israel's sovereignty and security are to be overridden by the EU and the U.S. to, if necessary, impose a Palestinian state. At best there will be so-called "robust guarantees" of Israeli and Palestinian security. Here we should remember that earlier UN, U.S. and EU guarantees of Israeli security have always been found to be unavailing. Israel has fought by itself in 1967, 1973, 1982 and in the multiple intifadas and wars since then. Even in 2007 when Israel discovered that North Korea was building a nuclear reactor for Syria, Washington refused to act, leaving Israel no choice but to act alone to destroy it. The idea of a two-state solution has been around for almost a century but has consistently failed because the Palestinian leadership has never been willing to accept the legitimacy of Israel. Palestinian leaders have rejected all offers of an opportunity to begin a state because they insisted on a one-state solution, i.e., a wholly Palestinian state that would be free of Jews. So the Palestinian leadership has exercised a veto on self-determination. Instead, the Palestinian Authority and Hamas have regularly resorted to terror, most recently on Oct. 7. Therefore, it should surprise nobody that Israeli public opinion, not just Prime Minister Netanyahu, uniformly opposes a two-state solution. Similarly, most Palestinians oppose this solution. The effort to impose this solution in the wake of powerful historical and real political contradictions gives rise to the thought that many of those urging it do not know what they are talking about. Certainly, no state in the world would accept the presence of a terrorist movement or state on its border that regularly lobs missiles into its territory. The writer is a Foreign Policy Research Institute senior fellow and a former professor of national security affairs at the Strategic Studies Institute of the U.S. Army War College. 2024-02-16 00:00:00Full Article
The Mirage of the Two-State Solution
(The Hill) Stephen Blank - From every corner comes pressure upon Israel to acquiesce to a two-state solution. Israel's sovereignty and security are to be overridden by the EU and the U.S. to, if necessary, impose a Palestinian state. At best there will be so-called "robust guarantees" of Israeli and Palestinian security. Here we should remember that earlier UN, U.S. and EU guarantees of Israeli security have always been found to be unavailing. Israel has fought by itself in 1967, 1973, 1982 and in the multiple intifadas and wars since then. Even in 2007 when Israel discovered that North Korea was building a nuclear reactor for Syria, Washington refused to act, leaving Israel no choice but to act alone to destroy it. The idea of a two-state solution has been around for almost a century but has consistently failed because the Palestinian leadership has never been willing to accept the legitimacy of Israel. Palestinian leaders have rejected all offers of an opportunity to begin a state because they insisted on a one-state solution, i.e., a wholly Palestinian state that would be free of Jews. So the Palestinian leadership has exercised a veto on self-determination. Instead, the Palestinian Authority and Hamas have regularly resorted to terror, most recently on Oct. 7. Therefore, it should surprise nobody that Israeli public opinion, not just Prime Minister Netanyahu, uniformly opposes a two-state solution. Similarly, most Palestinians oppose this solution. The effort to impose this solution in the wake of powerful historical and real political contradictions gives rise to the thought that many of those urging it do not know what they are talking about. Certainly, no state in the world would accept the presence of a terrorist movement or state on its border that regularly lobs missiles into its territory. The writer is a Foreign Policy Research Institute senior fellow and a former professor of national security affairs at the Strategic Studies Institute of the U.S. Army War College. 2024-02-16 00:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|