Home
Archives
Jerusalem Center Homepage
View the current issue
Jerusalem Center Videos
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
[Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs] Maj.-Gen. (res.) Giora Eiland - Israeli-Syrian negotiations in 1999-2000 discussed security arrangements to compensate Israel for the loss of the Golan Heights. The idea was to guarantee that in case of war, IDF forces could quickly return to the place where they are currently stationed. This analysis demonstrates that Israel does not possess a plausible solution to its security needs without the Golan Heights. Not only was the "solution" proposed in the year 2000 implausible at the time, but changing circumstances - made evident in the Second Lebanon War in 2006 - have rendered Israel's forfeiture of the Golan today inadvisable. These changes include the massive use of short-range rockets against Israel's home front, which could hinder the mobilization of IDF reserves; the massive use of anti-tank weaponry, which would slow the return of IDF forces to their previous defensive line; and the Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon, which removed the issue of the disarmament of Hizbullah from any Golan agreement. 2009-04-10 06:00:00Full Article
Defensible Borders on the Golan Heights
[Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs] Maj.-Gen. (res.) Giora Eiland - Israeli-Syrian negotiations in 1999-2000 discussed security arrangements to compensate Israel for the loss of the Golan Heights. The idea was to guarantee that in case of war, IDF forces could quickly return to the place where they are currently stationed. This analysis demonstrates that Israel does not possess a plausible solution to its security needs without the Golan Heights. Not only was the "solution" proposed in the year 2000 implausible at the time, but changing circumstances - made evident in the Second Lebanon War in 2006 - have rendered Israel's forfeiture of the Golan today inadvisable. These changes include the massive use of short-range rockets against Israel's home front, which could hinder the mobilization of IDF reserves; the massive use of anti-tank weaponry, which would slow the return of IDF forces to their previous defensive line; and the Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon, which removed the issue of the disarmament of Hizbullah from any Golan agreement. 2009-04-10 06:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
|
Search:
|