In-Depth Coverage

Original Commentaries

09/04/08: From Zero-Sum to Win-Win —Mara Rudman, adviser, Middle East Progress; senior fellow, Center for American Progress. Original Commentary for Middle East Bulletin.
09/04/08: How Progress Is Possible —
08/07/08: How to Deal with Jerusalem —Lt. Col. (Res.) Ron Shatzberg, Project Director, Economic Cooperation Foundation. Interview with Middle East Bulletin.

Setting the Record Straight

Two-State Solution Still Best Option

“In practical terms, we can reach two conclusions: First, a final-status agreement, although its details are known, cannot be secured in the foreseeable future. Second, the time has come to think about other solutions. One of them is a return not to the 1967 borders, but rather, to the reality that prevailed in 1967, when Jordan controlled the West Bank.”
—Major General (ret.) Giora Eiland, “The Jordanian Option,” YNet, September 3, 2008

"On both sides of the green line and, indeed, wherever people think about solutions to the Israeli- Palestinian conflict, a lot of old/new thinking is taking place. … Most of these ideas are patently unrealistic. Discussion of them often reflects despair, not pragmatic strategic thinking. … Precisely because there is no such alternative, other options more readily suggest themselves, ranging from temporary conflict management to three states or entities. Nor does failure today mean that tomorrow we cannot try again to arrive at a two-state solution, which remains the best option for all."
—Yossi Alpher, coeditor of the bitterlemons family of internet publications & former director, Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies, Tel Aviv University, "One State Definitely Not an Option," bitterlemons.org, August 18, 2008

Middle East Analysis

How Progress Is Possible —Hiba Husseini, chair, Legal Committee to Final Status Negotiations between the Palestinians and Israelis; former vice chairperson of the Palestine Securities Exchange (1998-May 2005). Interview with Middle East Bulletin.
Perils of an Israeli Transition —The New York Times, Editorial
The Arabs Will Look Differently Upon America —Ron Pundak, director general of the Peres Center for Peace and former architects and negotiators of the Oslo Agreement (bitterlemons.org)

Iran’s Nuclear Program

Gary Samore, former Senior Director for Non-Proliferation and Export Controls at the National Security Council (Strategic Comments)

May 30, 2007

Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and Syrian President Bashar Assad (AP)

With the new United Nations Security Council deadline looming in late May, neither side appears willing to relent. While some outside experts have advocated unconditional nuclear talks with Iran, the P-5 see little value in negotiating the nuclear issue while Iran continues to develop its enrichment capacity. Under these circumstances, Iran would have every incentive to drag out the talks while working to achieve its nuclear objectives.

For its part, Iran fears that if it does agree to halt its activities, the P-5 would have their own reason to drag out the talks, keeping Iran’s enrichment programme on ice indefinitely while threatening to re-impose sanctions if Iran were to re-start it. …

For now, Washington is prepared to let diplomacy ‘play out’ because Iran is not making rapid technical progress towards acquiring a nuclear-weapons capability and because Washington believes that its diplomatic strategy is having some effect. Ultimately, however, if Iran begins to reach critical technical thresholds, and diplomatic means fail to persuade Iran to suspend its uranium-enrichment programme, then consideration of military options will come into play, despite all the risks and drawbacks. Access the full report>>