Chuck Freilich
Senior Fellow, International Security Program
Contact:
Telephone: 617-495-8898
Fax: 617-496-0606
Email: chuck_freilich@harvard.edu
AP Photo
April 29, 2012
"A Tale of Three Capitals"
Op-Ed, The Jerusalem Post
By Chuck Freilich, Senior Fellow, International Security Program
"In Israel, although a range of views exists regarding the means of dealing with the nuclear threat, the approach is very narrowly focused; just prevent, or at least significantly delay, an Iranian bomb, even at the expense of other issues in which Israel has vital interests, such as Iran's massive arming of Hezbollah."
AP Photo
February 2, 2012
"Israel's Profound Choice on Iran"
Op-Ed, Los Angeles Times
By Chuck Freilich, Senior Fellow, International Security Program
"So herein lies the dilemma: a potential risk to the nation's existence versus the uncertain results of military action, the likelihood of a devastating Iranian/Hezbollah response, the risk of an end to the peace with Egypt and even a military confrontation and regional war, severe international opprobrium and a partial rift with the United States."
AP Photo
September 14, 2011
"Keep the Peace Between Israel and Egypt"
Op-Ed, Los Angeles Times
By Chuck Freilich, Senior Fellow, International Security Program
"An Israel worried about the future of peace with Egypt will be understandably less inclined to go forward with the Palestinians, but the need for a major diplomatic initiative, together with military restraint, is greater than ever. The Palestinians must ensure that the U.N. vote becomes a basis for negotiations, not conflict. The U.S. must bring all of its influence to bear on the Palestinians to encourage them to do so, and on Egypt to ensure that it continues to pursue a peaceful course. Responsible Egyptians must make their voices heard."
AP Photo
June 9, 2011
"Much Ado About Very Little"
Op-Ed, BitterLemons-International.org -- Middle East Roundtable, issue 16, volume 9
By Chuck Freilich, Senior Fellow, International Security Program
"Denuded of the boilerplate rhetoric, the president's message was clear: the United States will continue to pursue the same policy it has adopted since the Arab spring began. Events in each country will be treated as discrete policy issues, not as part of a broad regional vision or normative commitment, and the US will support reform where it serves its interests and as long as the price—politically, economically and especially militarily—is minimal. No clarion call for democracy, no broad strategic vision, just reactive realpolitik, with best wishes."
AP Photo
April 11, 2011
"Focus on Iran"
Op-Ed
By Chuck Freilich, Senior Fellow, International Security Program
As the popular uprisings sweep through the Middle East, attention has been diverted from Iran, in which all of the components of the revolutionary situation exist as well, writes Chuck Freilich. Regime change in Iran, he says, "should be the number one priority in the Mideast today and is an issue on which virtually all U.S. allies, in the region and beyond, can agree."
AP Photo
July 23, 2010
"Inscrutable Face of Egypt's Future"
Op-Ed, Washington Times
By Chuck Freilich, Senior Fellow, International Security Program
"Now or in the not-distant future, we will face the question of Egypt's course in the post-Mubarak era. Will his son, Gamal, the most likely successor, or some general from the ruling junta, succeed in gaining and retaining power, in which case Egypt's policies presumably will continue as known? Or will there be a battle for power, with the radical Muslim Brotherhood, the only opposition of consequence, the likely winner?"
AP Photo
Summer 2010
"Armageddon and the Threat of Nuclear Terrorism"
Journal Article, InFocus, issue 2, volume IV
By Chuck Freilich, Senior Fellow, International Security Program
"Nuclear terrorism poses a unique threat not only because of the magnitude of the destruction, but because those most likely to perpetrate an attack may be fundamentally nihilistic and therefore undeterrable — prepared to pay any cost in loss of life in pursuit of their objectives. As millennial movements for whom the crippling and even destruction of the U.S. and Israel are sacred missions, a nuclear terrorist attack where even a devastating response is assumed may be a worthy means of ushering in a messianic era."
AP Photo
June 15, 2010
"Prime Minister Ibib"
Op-Ed, The Jerusalem Post
By Chuck Freilich, Senior Fellow, International Security Program
"Bibi rightly takes an uncompromising position regarding security. Ibib grossly mishandled the Gaza flotilla fiasco, enraged international opinion, led to an end to the Egyptian embargo of Gaza and now to a partial termination of Israel's. Justified as the embargo may have been, it failed to achieve its objectives and should have been lifted long ago simply for reasons of cost effectiveness. Now we are being forced to do so under international pressure. Bibi wanted to isolate Hamas; Ibib succeeded in isolating Israel. Hamas, Iran and Recep Tayyip Erdogan's Turkey came out the victors."
AP Photo
Spring 2010
"Decision Time in Jerusalem"
Journal Article, Journal of International Security Affairs, volume 18
By Chuck Freilich, Senior Fellow, International Security Program
In Israel, it has become commonplace—indeed, almost axiomatic—to speak of the Iranian nuclear program as an existential threat. Senior decision-makers and defense officials have repeated this warning so often that the words "existential" and "Iran" have become almost synonymous in Israeli discourse. Foreign media, meanwhile, repeatedly speculate on the prospects of an Israeli attack on Iran, and some have speculated that 2010 may be the "year of decision."
AP Photo
April 2010
The Armageddon Scenario: Israel and the Threat of Nuclear Terrorism
Report
By Chuck Freilich, Senior Fellow, International Security Program
The following study focuses on the threat of nuclear terrorism facing Israel. It begins with an overview of the nature of the threat, before turning to the potential perpetrators of nuclear terrorism against Israel, possible delivery mechanisms and targets, and the specific scenarios under which the threat to Israel might materialize. The study then presents possible policy options for Israel to deal with the threat, both unilaterally and in conjunction with the United States.
