All Policy Analysis by Robert Satloff

The paper’s editors appear to have taken the path of least resistance by failing to address any of the serious questions raised about its “decomposing babies” story.

For Hamas and its extremist fellow travelers, military campaigns and terrorist attacks during the holy month have long been perfectly acceptable tactics.

A heartrending story about finding decomposing infants in a Gaza hospital is full of troubling holes, discrepancies, and conflicts of interest that should have raised serious questions at the paper.

The Washington Institute’s executive director reflects on the feasibility of the Biden administration’s current diplomatic plans in the region, based in part on what local officials said during his recent group trip to Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Israel, and the PA.

Experts discuss the military and political situation at what appears to be a decisive moment in the war, offering insights on Israel’s calculations, the effects of growing foreign pressure, and the need for further international action to address attacks by Iran’s other regional partners.

If Washington Post reporters had asked Israeli officials, they would have written a very different story.

Laying the groundwork for an eventual Hamas surrender would break the current binary choice between more destructive conflict and an ineffectual ceasefire.

Despite not taking the time to speak with Israeli officials or even verify key details on the ground, reporters proceeded with a heavily slanted piece that raised further questions about the paper’s wartime editorial policies.

Changing the minds of anti-Semites is a lost cause, but Israel can win over other critics by committing more effort and ingenuity to the task of saving innocent Palestinian lives.

What Hamas unleashed on October 7 was so jarring that it is only natural to seek the comfort of historical examples to put Israel’s response in some digestible context.

Despite well-meaning concerns about civilian casualties, pushing Israel to pursue a premature and false “calm” is more likely to widen the conflict in the long term.

The war triggered by the shocking Hamas assault will be the first zero-sum conflict in the Arab-Israeli arena since 1948, and U.S. policymakers should prepare accordingly.

It’s not too early to think about the “day after” the war—even preliminary planning to create an interim administration will help clarify objectives for Israel’s leaders, sustain U.S. support, provide a more positive alternative future for Palestinians, and give Arab allies a rationale to play a more constructive role.

In its scope, depravity, and national reach, the Hamas assault was a much greater shock to Israelis, and their response should be viewed through that lens.

Veteran U.S., Palestinian, and Israeli experts and policy practitioners explore the broader strategic repercussions of the unfolding war, as well as the factors that enabled Hamas to reach its current level of malign regional influence.

The October 7 terrorist attacks by Hamas against Israel represent a turning point that should bring home oft-overlooked realities about the Middle East and compel U.S. policymakers to rethink preconceptions about the region and America's role and interests in it.

The history is clear—well-intentioned intervention in an ally’s domestic politics often triggers bigger problems, and the president’s stance could conjure a self-fulfilling prophecy about the erosion of U.S.-Israel ties.

Opposition leader and former defense minister Benny Gantz discusses Israel’s domestic political challenges, the triggers for action against Iran’s nuclear program, the prospects of normalization with Saudi Arabia, and more.

A recent essay touting a “one-state” approach to Israeli-Palestinian issues is more about eliminating the world’s only Jewish state than offering real solutions to complex regional problems.

A near-term breakthrough may be unlikely, but President Biden is well positioned to apply his energy toward negotiating a historic deal that establishes peace and advances American interests.