Debating Israel’s Strategic Value

During yesterday's Nixon Center debate on Israel's value as an ally, Rob Satloff managed to provide a true and thorough strategic assessment.

Yesterday, I referred to the Satloff-Freeman debate at the Nixon Center on Israel's strategic value as "disappointing." What I meant to say was that I was disappointed by Chas Freeman's failure to engage the question in any substantial way. He fired off a series of disparaging remarks but never did anything like a strategic assessment.

On re-reading though, I realize that the adjective might be interpreted as a criticism of both participants. Let me correct that: Satloff did a true and thorough net assessment, anticipating and addressing the strongest claims of the other side before presenting the offsetting facts to support his conclusion. This is the way it's supposed to be done, regardless of whether or not you agree with the final judgment - which of course I do.

But don't take my word for it: Read Satloff's statement in full for yourself, here.