Israel

Hamas's interest in preserving calm with Israel does not equate to an interest in making peace.

The New York Times convened an online panel of five Middle East experts to discuss diplomatic efforts to end the deadly confrontation between Israel and Palestinian militants in Gaza. The following contribution was made by Washington Institute Ziegler distinguished fellow David Makovsky, director of the Institute's Project on the Middle East Peace Process.

Advances in Israeli weaponry haven't led to advances in Israeli strategy.

Morsi is dispatching some of his country's top leaders to a war zone -- and risking, or maybe courting, a regional crisis.

Reaching a viable Egyptian-brokered ceasefire will not be easy, but if the aim is anything more than a temporary break from fighting, it's a deal worth striving for.

Washington's objective should be to persuade all parties that returning to the de facto ceasefire serves everyone's best interests, though even that outcome promises instability if Hamas does not crack down on jihadist groups in Gaza.

On November 8, 2012, Washington Institute executive director Robert Satloff addressed a Policy Forum along with Dennis Ross and Jim Jeffrey. The following is an edited version of Dr. Satloff's comments; the full event can be viewed in the above video. If President Obama tasked a courageous National Security Council

The bilateral relationship is based on tangible, steadily increasing security and economic interests, not just shared values.

Convincing Hamas to contain Gaza's increasingly violent jihadists will likely require international pressure on the group's backers in Egypt, Turkey, and Qatar.