Dear Friends and Supporters of Israel Policy Forum:
On behalf of Israel Policy Forum (IPF), including our President Peter Joseph and Chair Larry Zicklin, I am pleased to inform you that IPF is embarking on its next chapter.
As 2009 draws to a close, we are bombarded by the annual litany of commentary features recapping the year in Hollywood movies to the year in international conflict, and everything in between.
When it comes to the Middle East peace process, current conventional wisdom suggests the 2009 recap might go something like this:
Ephraim Asculai, Emily B. Landau, and Tamar Malz-Ginzburg
INSS Insight No. 154, December 29, 2009
Despite the tendency to denote any simulation exercise on security issues a "war game," the recent simulation designed and held at INSS did not focus on the option of a military attack. Rather, it developed the scenario of a bilateral US-Iranian negotiation over Iran's nuclear program.
The Pulse interviewed Brig. Gen. (Res.) Shlomo Brom recently. He is former director of the Strategic Planning Division in the Planning Branch of the General Staff of the IDF.
Pulse: What do you think came out of the Obama-Abu Mazen meeting last week?
Brom: Judging from the media reports I see two main efforts on the part of President Obama.
We spoke yesterday afternoon with Ambassador Thomas Pickering. Pickering is a former ambassador to the United Nations, Russia, India, Israel, Jordan, El Salvador and Nigeria. He also served as Under Secretary of State under President Clinton. Pickering was one of ten distinguished signers of a policy paper developed by the US/Middle East Project.
Pulse: One of the more intriguing points that is made in the US/Middle East Project paper is that the Obama administration should shift its objective from ousting Hamas to modifying its behavior. Does this mean the US should drop the 3 conditions altogether, and just focus on Hamas not engaging in violence?