In-Depth Coverage

Original Commentaries

08/07/08: How to Deal with Jerusalem —Lt. Col. (Res.) Ron Shatzberg, Project Director, Economic Cooperation Foundation. Interview with Middle East Bulletin.
08/07/08: How to Deal with Jerusalem —
08/05/08: Why Did Maliki Call for a Timeline? —by Christopher Kojm who teaches at the Elliott School of International Affairs at George Washington University and is a former senior advisor to the Iraq Study Group. Original Commentary for Middle East Bulletin.

Setting the Record Straight

Already Divided

“Even the Arab minority in the city has shown its preference for living under Israeli rule, as many have moved to the Israeli side of the security barrier being built around Jerusalem. Their choice is reasonable, as Jerusalem offers the quality of life of a modern western city while only a few kilometers away the norm is a third world standard of living, chaos and religious intolerance. An undivided Jerusalem is the best guarantee of a better life for all Jerusalemites.”
—Nathan Diament, Director of Public Policy, Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America, July 23, 2008

“Those who believe that Jerusalem should not be divided, and mean by that that the Arab neighborhoods should not be separated from the city, should be the first to insist that an active policy be adopted by the government and the municipality to improve the lot of local Arab residents. Barring that, Jerusalem will continue to remain a divided city.”
—Moshe Arens, former Israeli defense and foreign minister (Likud), “A Story of Neglect,” Haaretz, July 28, 2008

Middle East Analysis

Israel Releases 199 Palestinian Prisoners —
Significant Lebanese-Syrian Meeting Overshadowed by Bombing —
The Challenge of Jerusalem —Prof. Yaacov Bar-Siman-Tov, head, Jerusalem Institute for Israel Studies; professor of international relations, Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Interview with Middle East Bulletin.

Banning AKP is Greater Danger

April 14, 2008

“The threat posed by the policies of the AKP is clear and present. Concrete steps have been taken that may harm the civilized peace and the democratic regime in the country. … In this context, there is no other possibility than closing the party as the only sanction applicable and also required by the society in order to protect the society from this danger and to prevent [the AKP] from reaching its objective.”
--Abdurrahman Yalcinkaya, chief public prosecutor of the Turkish Supreme Court of Appeals, Indictment Against the Ruling AK Party, March 14, 2008

“I think the AK Party is not going to be closed down. But if it is, it's going to create more problems than it's going to solve. … Without the closure of the government party, Turkish democracy would still be there. … How can you talk about democracy when the party that has to vote is closed down and you can still claim to have a democracy? … We have seen party closures before. It's true. We have not seen the closure of a government party.”
--Faruk Logoglu, former Turkish ambassador to the United States, panel discussion on “Turkey’s Kurdish Conundrum,” Center on the United States and Europe, Brookings Institution, March 20, 2008