Yossi Alpher is an independent security analyst. He is the former director of the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies at Tel Aviv University, a former senior official with the Mossad, and a former IDF intelligence officer. Views and positions expressed here are those of the writer, and do not necessarily represent APN's views and policy positions.

This week, Alpher discusses Trump's plan to bring Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas to Washington and to send special representative for international negotiations Jason Greenblatt to Israel and Palestine; possible advantages this administration might have over its predecessors in sponsoring a peace process; Trump's drawbacks as a peace mediator; possible collaboration with the region’s Sunni Arab states that need Trump's support against both Iran and ISIS; whether peace process issues are flexible enough to sustain concessions and enable creative compromise in the spirit of Trump’s brand of deal-making; and whether Trump's emerging team of negotiators are aware of important nuances.

Peace Now reports:

Last night, Channel 2 News reported that Prime Minister Netanyahu intends to argue to American officials that the new settlement for the Amona outpost evacuees should not be considered as such. Yet based on its proposed location, the new settlement, often referred to as “Geulat Zion,” cannot be considered as anything but a new settlement. Geulat Zion is located approximately 2.5 kilometers east of Shilo, on an empty hilltop, and beyond the settlement’s jurisdiction.

Americans for Peace Now’s Ori Nir on February 27^th 2017 delivered a talk at J Street’s national conference on the basics of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

APN: Israeli-Palestinian Conflict 101 from Americans for Peace Now.

Americans for Peace Now on February 27th 2017 sponsored a panel discussion at J Street’s national conference on West Bank settlements with MK Tamar Zandberg, APN’s Lara Freidman, Peace Now’s Lior Amihai and moderated by Haaretz’s Amir Tibon.

APN Panel on Settlements 27 February, 2017 from Americans for Peace Now.

Israel’s new Entry Law is actually much worse than we originally thought.

It turns out that its final language is even more draconian than the text published in the media when the law was adopted. The new language uses a much broader definition of who would be subject to denial of entry into Israel. It seems that right before it was brought to a final vote someone changed the language of the bill to include anyone who acts “for the sake of” an organization that calls for boycotts (rather than people who “represent” such organizations).