Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
As Israelis and Palestinians confront the future, prospects for serious negotiations, or even a conflict-ending solution, look particularly grim.
Twenty years after Camp David, a one-time negotiator reflects on what was achieved at the historic presidential summit.
In the wake of recent battlefield developments in Libya, regional and global powers are maneuvering for influence and supremacy, with far-reaching implications for Libyan sovereignty, stability, and cohesion.
A just, enduring peace is possible on the Korean Peninsula, but it’s not going to happen just because political leaders decide to formally end the Korean conflict.
EU leaders must either decide to act jointly as the European Union or leave Libya’s future in the hands of Russia and Turkey—with dangerous consequences for NATO and for Europe’s security.
What will be the Palestinian response to Israeli annexation? What does this mean for the future of the Palestine National Authority and the Palestine Liberation Organization? How will the relationship between Israelis and Palestinians change?
Applying Israeli law to much of the West Bank would mean the irreversible end of the Palestinian statehood project, making Netanyahu the prime minister who not only buried the two-state solution but annexed choice West Bank real estate.
The history of U.S. mediation between Palestinians and Israelis is one in which Palestinians have had to first negotiate their agency, representation, and peoplehood.
The prospects of Israeli annexation today should thus surprise no one. It results from the vacuum created by drift and dysfunction in the so-called "peace process" that is more broken now than at any time since Arab-Israeli negotiations began.
The U.S. military’s constitutional guardrails and apolitical tradition have been slowly eroding in recent years.