The long-standing alliance between Netanyahu and Peres may be over – thanks to differences on Iran and the Palestinians, says Dan Ephron writing in the Daily Beast.
People familiar with the relationship say tensions have bubbled to the surface in recent months over how to cope with Iran’s nuclear ambitions and what to offer the Palestinians. So much so that while Netanyahu is expected to tell Obama Israel will take action on its own if sanctions against Iran don’t produce quick results - raising the specter a regional war - Peres has different ideas.
Writing in Asharq Alawsat, Amir Taheri describes the signs of change to look in today’s Iranian parliamentary elections.
This is the first electoral exercise since the fiasco of the presidential election in 2009 that split the Khomeinist establishment. Some analysts claim that Iranians are no longer interested in change within the regime as offered by Mir-Hussein Mussavi. What Iranians now want is regime change, these analysts assert. A low turnout might be an indicator in support of that claim.
If Israel Attacks Iran: Threat to the Special Relationship
Robert W. Merry of The National Interest looks at the inevitable impact on historically strong bilateral ties should Israel drag the US into another Mideast war.
But suppose the already war-weary American people were to find their country in a beleaguered situation—beset by economic woes wrought by a global recession; pulled into further Mideast hostilities that generated growing numbers of U.S. casualties without an end in sight; grappling with an enflamed Middle East that threatened to fray the global order at various points around the edges of its stability. And suppose all this could be attributed to an Israeli military action undertaken over the objections of the American president
President Obama has a message for Israel and Iran, delivered in an interview to Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic.
Obama stated specifically that “all options are on the table,” and that the final option is the “military component.” But the president also said that sanctions organized by his administration have put Iran in a “world of hurt,” and that economic duress might soon force the regime in Tehran to rethink its efforts to pursue a nuclear-weapons program.
Getting rid of the Syrian leader will not be easy, writes Dennis Ross in USA Today, but there are steps that can be taken to facilitate his departure.
Assad and those who support him in the security establishment see the Russians as their insurance policy — a protector in the U.N. and an impediment to external intervention. Change that perception, and the balance of power is likely to shift inside Syria.
America needs to tread carefully with the new regime in Cairo if it wants to preserve its status in the Middle East, writes Graeme Bannerman in Politico.
Egypt was and remains the dominant force in the Middle East. Since World War II, the balance of power in the region has shifted twice. First in the 1950s, when Egypt led the region into a de facto alliance with the Soviet Union. Then, in the 1970s, when Anwar Sadat decided Egypt’s interests were better served by allying with the U.S.