Chuck Freilich

AP Photo

July 13, 2009

"Hoping the Next 100 Days Go Better"

Op-Ed, The Jerusalem Post

By Chuck Freilich, Senior Fellow, International Security Program

"...[I]t was clear from day one that Obama intended to reach out to the Arab world and attempt a breakthrough toward peace. Netanyahu, who professes to 'understand American,' should have done everything in his power to align himself with the new administration's agenda. Instead, his obstinacy led to a glaring crack in relations with the US, a cardinal pillar of Israeli national security, and exposed an unprecedented degree of mutual alienation."

AP Photo

June 16, 2009

"Bibi Answers Obama"

Op-Ed, Human Events

By Chuck Freilich, Senior Fellow, International Security Program

"In his recent speech to the Muslim world, Obama set a new course for U.S. policy in the region and in so doing challenged Netanyahu to join him in the effort, or risk American ire. Poor Bibi. During his first two months, he caused gratuitous tension with Obama by refusing to explicitly endorse a two-state solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict and thereby convinced many that Israel, rather than the Palestinians, is the obstacle. Bibi knows that he cannot afford confrontation and that Israel must align itself with any administration."

AP Photo

May 14, 2009

"What are They Smoking?"

Op-Ed, BitterLemons-International.org -- Middle East Roundtable, issue 18, volume 7

By Chuck Freilich, Senior Fellow, International Security Program

"The new government in Israel, presumably by way of creating a new obstacle that it can concede and grant to US President Barack Obama as a "concession", has refused to endorse a two-state solution, though this is clearly the only viable option for preserving a Jewish and democratic Israel. By convincing the world that it is Israel—which favored a two-state solution in 1936, 1947, Camp David 2000 and most recently under Olmert—not the Palestinians, which objects to this, Netanyahu has caused severe damage to Israel's image. Moreover, his obstinacy has played into the hands of those who wish to create a fallacious and dangerous linkage between the peace process and the Iranian nuclear program, the last thing Israel should want."

AP Photo

December 4, 2008

"Engaging Iran Effectively"

Op-Ed, BitterLemons-International.org -- Middle East Roundtable, issue 6, volume 45

By Chuck Freilich, Senior Fellow, International Security Program

"Many in Israel will be alarmed by US engagement of Iran. Indeed, some will fear abandonment in the face of a potentially existential threat. Others clearly favor engagement, primarily as a way-station toward harder measures, but also in the hope, forlorn as it may be, that a deal can be worked out that will forestall the need for them. Assuming the US effectively addresses the time factor by insisting on a cessation of enrichment during engagement, Israel would have a major interest in its success and would likely support any agreement reached."

AP Photo

November 11, 2008

"A Parting Word of Thanks"

Op-Ed, The Jerusalem Post

By Chuck Freilich, Senior Fellow, International Security Program

"Today we know that Saddam Hussein did not have WMD, but to those of us in the US and Israeli governments at the time, who were sincerely convinced that he retained a residual program, it was an analytical reality. We were very wrong, but we were not irresponsible, nor malevolent. Israel, in case you have forgotten, took the threat very seriously and distributed gas masks, deployed forces and asked the US for antimissile defenses."

AP Photo

November 2008

"The United States, Israel, and Iran: Defusing an 'Existential' Threat"

Magazine or Newspaper Article, Arms Control Today

By Chuck Freilich, Senior Fellow, International Security Program

"Iran is an existential threat to Israel. This apocalyptic warning call has become a mantra continually repeated by virtually all Israeli leaders and defense officials and has been adopted by much of the U.S. national security establishment. President George W. Bush even warned that Iran’s declared intention of destroying Israel could lead to World War III.

There is no doubt that Iran poses a severe threat to Israel, not only in the nuclear field, but what kind of danger does its nuclear program constitute? Is Israel’s future in imminent danger if Iran goes nuclear? The answer is probably not. Although somewhat reassuring, this response is less than satisfying...."

AP Photo

September 1, 2008

"US-Iranian Tango"

Op-Ed, The Jerusalem Post

By Chuck Freilich, Senior Fellow, International Security Program

"...Engagement with Iran does not constitute appeasement, nor a slippery slope leading to further concessions. It can be these things if mishandled, but there is no reason for it to be anything other than a coherent, integrated policy. A policy based solely on sticks, without carrots, will surely fail. Engagement, however, should be conducted from a position of strength, with a concomitant attempt to increase pressure, such as heightened restrictions on international trade, banking and investments...."

AP Photo

September-October 2008

"The Right Return"

Magazine or Newspaper Article, The American Interest, Toolbox, issue 1, volume 4

By Chuck Freilich, Senior Fellow, International Security Program

Former Deputy Head of the Israeli National Security Council Chuck Freilich outlines a bold proposal to re-invigorate the Israeli-Palestinian peace process in an action memorandum to the next President of the United States.

AP Photo

August 4, 2008

"After Olmert"

Op-Ed, Human Events

By Chuck Freilich, Senior Fellow, International Security Program

"...In mid September, Olmert's Kadima party will hold primaries to elect his successor as party head, until which time he will stay on as premier. The two leading candidates are, Tzipi Livni, the current foreign minister and clear frontrunner among the public, and Shaul Mofaz, a former chief of staff and defense minister, now minister of transportation, the frontrunner among the party rank and file, who actually vote in the primaries...."

AP Photo

July 8, 2008

"Peace with Syria?"

Op-Ed, Human Events

By Chuck Freilich, Senior Fellow, International Security Program

"...While it is clear that withdrawal is the price of peace, disagreement over the Golan's precise delineation is what led to the talks' failure in the past. Syria demands a return to the 1967 lines, Israel to the 1923 mandatory border.

Under the 1923 demarcation, the recognized basis for all Mideast negotiations, the Golan ends just meters east of the Jordan River and Sea of Galilee. Between 1948 and 1967, however, Syria encroached upon Israeli territory, with two enclaves along the Jordan and a strip on the lake’s northeastern shore. The 1967 lines would thus give Syria more than 100% of the internationally recognized Golan, a claim to the lake's water and end full Israeli access around it...."