...
Obama's "winds of change" speech was meant to formalize an historic shift in U.S. policy toward the Middle East. Instead, he put the spotlight on the one thing that seems impervious to change: the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Jews and Christian supporters of Israel in the U.S. and the Israeli people and their leaders trusted President Bush. They do not have confidence in President Obama's commitment to Israel's security.
President Barack Obama's back-to-back speeches on the peace process had much good to build on. Now is the time to start building.
We can no longer afford to confuse supporting the State of Israel with supporting the policies of the leaders who control the Israeli government at a particular time.
Israel must take the initiative now. It is its last chance. If it does not it will be destined for one of two outcomes -- a one-state solution or no state.
When activists seeking to break Gaza's blockade proclaim their commitment to nonviolence, how do they square that with Hamas's record of violence, including its bloody seizure of power from the Palestinian Authority four years ago?
The death of Osama bin Laden should send a clear message, both symbolic and real, to Islamists: Violent extremism will not be tolerated in the new Middle East, and no terrorist leader is immune to bin Laden's fate.
The media is full of conflicting reports about whether Hamas is ready to recognize Israel. But why does it matter so long as Hamas agrees to permanently end terror attacks against Israel?
The 83-year-old Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood is giving itself a 21st Century facelift just in time for the upcoming September parliamentary elections.
Last night, the executive committee of the CUNY Board of Trustees reversed the Board's refusal of an honorary degree to Tony Kushner. Behind the original decision and reversal are three stories.
How can so many reasonable minds welcome the reconciliation between Fatah and Hamas as good news, a good sign, like the far too long delayed reunion of a too long divided people, when it is, in reality, a catastrophe?
The big debate about the Fatah-Hamas unity agreement of earlier this month is whether it will increase the chances of Israeli-Palestinian peace, or weaken them.
The reconciliation agreement between Fatah and Hamas -- should it withstand the test of time -- offers Israel and Hamas the opportunity to face what they have denied each other for nearly three decades.
Now is the time -- if there ever was one -- for Hamas to work as a government, not a terrorist entity. They must sit with Fatah and together show that they can be partners for peace.
One path for the Palestinians leads to a serious opportunity to create a successful state for the Palestinian people. The other path leads to destroying any present hope for a viable Palestinian state. The choice lies in their hands.
Hamas, the Palestinian terror group that runs Gaza, is mourning the death of Osama bin Laden. And Hamas has just concluded a pact with the so-called Palestinian Authority (PA), or Fatah, the group that the U.S. recognizes and to whom we give lavish foreign aid.
How can any Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement be reconciled with the totally divergent positions of the two Palestinian movements towards bin Laden's legacy and the peace process?
It appears that Israel is by no means afforded the same enthusiastic moral support in its effort to hunt down its own Bin-Ladenesque figures as the United States.
As Americans we can do our part in this ongoing push to win the war on terror by getting out of our cars altogether, and getting on a subway or bicycle instead.
Palestinians shouldn't be asked to choose "reconciliation or peace" especially when the party doing the asking is denying them the chance to have both.