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
(Institute for National Security Studies-Tel Aviv University) Dr. Raz Zimmt - The U.S. decision to actually use military leverage to prevent Iran's breakout toward nuclear weapons is an important precedent that may ease the path for future administrations to do the same if necessary. Iran is likely to portray the war as a success regardless of its actual outcome in an effort to construct a narrative that the Islamic Republic is capable of withstanding prolonged confrontation with Israel and causing it serious harm in return. There is no indication that Iran is currently interested in returning to a negotiated framework - especially not one that would require concessions perceived in Tehran as capitulation to U.S. dictates, including the relinquishment of Iran's enrichment capabilities. Moreover, it is doubtful that Iran would agree to an intrusive inspection mechanism by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). If no agreement is reached, Israel will have to pursue a long-term campaign, combining kinetic strikes with covert operations to prevent an Iranian breakout. On the other hand, a nuclear deal would do little to prevent continued progress along a covert path. Moreover, any agreement that results in lifting economic sanctions would offer the regime a lifeline and enhance its capacity to continue its malign activities across multiple arenas. It could also restrict Israel's freedom of action against Iran. The battle against Iran is far from complete. The Israeli and American strikes do not offer a comprehensive answer to the full range of threats posed by the Islamic Republic - which openly calls for Israel's destruction. Ultimately, the long-term solution to the Iranian threat lies in regime change in Tehran. The writer, a veteran Iran watcher in the IDF, is Director of the Iran and the Shiite Axis program at INSS. 2025-06-29 00:00:00Full Article
The Israel-Iran War: Concluded but Not Resolved
(Institute for National Security Studies-Tel Aviv University) Dr. Raz Zimmt - The U.S. decision to actually use military leverage to prevent Iran's breakout toward nuclear weapons is an important precedent that may ease the path for future administrations to do the same if necessary. Iran is likely to portray the war as a success regardless of its actual outcome in an effort to construct a narrative that the Islamic Republic is capable of withstanding prolonged confrontation with Israel and causing it serious harm in return. There is no indication that Iran is currently interested in returning to a negotiated framework - especially not one that would require concessions perceived in Tehran as capitulation to U.S. dictates, including the relinquishment of Iran's enrichment capabilities. Moreover, it is doubtful that Iran would agree to an intrusive inspection mechanism by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). If no agreement is reached, Israel will have to pursue a long-term campaign, combining kinetic strikes with covert operations to prevent an Iranian breakout. On the other hand, a nuclear deal would do little to prevent continued progress along a covert path. Moreover, any agreement that results in lifting economic sanctions would offer the regime a lifeline and enhance its capacity to continue its malign activities across multiple arenas. It could also restrict Israel's freedom of action against Iran. The battle against Iran is far from complete. The Israeli and American strikes do not offer a comprehensive answer to the full range of threats posed by the Islamic Republic - which openly calls for Israel's destruction. Ultimately, the long-term solution to the Iranian threat lies in regime change in Tehran. The writer, a veteran Iran watcher in the IDF, is Director of the Iran and the Shiite Axis program at INSS. 2025-06-29 00:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|