Writing in the Huffington Post, Nathan Gonzales argues for an Israeli strike on Syria rather than Iran.
At some point in the future, Israel must make an effort to become an accepted resident of its own neighborhood, and a Syrian intervention would be the most logical place to start.
Amy Davidson of the New Yorker takes a closer look at the Mormon phenomenon of baptizing deceased Holocaust survivors and what it means for the presidential race.
There is an unresolved debate about how much Romney’s Mormonism has contributed to the discomfort many conservatives seem to have with him. If the unfairness of that reaction has impressed itself upon Romney, it has not kept him from accusing Obama of being at war with the godly.
In a wide-ranging interview to Foreign Policy, Egyptian presidential candidate and former Arab League chief Amr Moussa says parts of the Egypt-Israel peace treaty should be reexamined.
What governs the relationship between the two states is the Egyptian-Israeli treaty [signed in 1979]. And I believe that we should adhere to this treaty, as we do with all of our international commitments and treaties, as long as the other party adheres to it too. However, within a security context in Sinai, the treaty has to be revisited.
Writing in Bloomberg, Mustafa Alani offers a different perspective on Iran’s troublesome nuclear ambitions.
The perception within this region is that Iran without nuclear capability is a troublemaker and that with a nuclear bomb it would probably become still more aggressive and irresponsible. From the Saudi perspective, Iran doesn’t need nuclear weapons for deterrence because, like other states in the region, it doesn’t face a nuclear threat.