Category: Israel

  • Wait and See Game for Turkey’s Enforcement of UN Sanctions on Iran

    Wait and See Game for Turkey’s Enforcement of UN Sanctions on Iran

    Dorian Jones | IstanbuL

    21 June 2010

    ahmedinajad erdogan 17may10 480 eng 300 eng

    Photo: AFP

    Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad flashes the V-sign for victory as Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan looks on after the Islamic republic inked a nuclear fuel swap deal in Tehran (File Photo – 17 May 2010)

    Related Articles

    • Turkey Troops, Kurdish Rebels Clash Near Iraq Border
    • US Defense Secretary: Europe Pushing Turkey ‘Eastward’
    • Israel Moves to Repair Relations With Turkey

    This month, Turkey voted against the United Nations Security Council’s fourth round of sanctions against Iran. With Turkey’s Islamic rooted government increasing its economic ties with Iran in the past few years, fears are arising that the pivotal Western ally is in danger of swinging eastward because of resistance in Europe to its bid for membership of the European Union.

    Despite growing international tensions over Iran’s nuclear energy program, the Turkish government has forged ahead with energy deals with Iran, expanding its dependency on energy with the nation.

    These deals put Turkey in a precarious situation: to enforce or not to enforce the UN sanctions imposed on its neighbor Iran.

    Turkey has long been seen as a bridge between East and West. But its belief that sanctions are ineffective and that there are dangers in pushing the Islamic republic into a corner is likely to change its relationship with Western nations.

    Earlier this month Turkish foreign minister Ahmet Davutoglu expressed concern over the existing sanctions against Iran.

    AP

    “Turkey and Iran’s trade volume is around $10 billion,” he says. “And it can rise to $30 billion if sanctions are lifted.”

    Iran’s energy resources are seen as important by Ankara to break its dependency on Russian energy.

    Iran expert Gokhan Cetinsayar of Sehir University says that in addition to its dependency on gas, there are other trade initiatives with Iran that are economically key to Turkey.

    “75,000 trucks going on between Turkey and Iran every year,” said Cetinsayar. “Now there are energy deals. You know how important the Iranian natural gas and all other agreements and initiatives are economically important for Turkey.

    With large families usually depending for their livelihoods on cargo trucks, its estimated as many a million Turkish people depend on Iranian trade.

    With its increasing economic ties with Iran, there are growing fears that Turkey will balk at enforcing the UN sanctions against Iran.

    Turkish foreign minister spokesman Burak Ozugergin says Turkey has already paid a heavy economic price for UN policies with another of its neighbors, Iraq.

    “At the beginning of the 90’s, the Turkish volume of trade with Iraq was around the 15 to 20 percent mark of our total volume of trade. The next year, after the imposition of sanctions, this trickled down to almost zero,” said Ozugergin. “Money is not everything. But at least if it did work then we might be able to say to our public, ‘look it was for a good a cause.’ But can we really honestly say that looking back? For Iran again we don’t think it will help to solve the nuclear issue and perhaps may work against it.”

    The new sanctions on Iran are expected to cut into the present $10 billion trade volume. It could possibly undermine its energy policy as well. But political scientist Nuray Mert of Istanbul University say some western nations may now not be able to depend on Turkey.

    “I was inclined to think that at the end of the day Turkey will join the club when it comes to realization of these sanctions,” she said. “But nowadays I can see the government is planning to avoid these sanctions. Because now we have Turkey signing a lot of economic agreements, against the policy of sanctions.”

    For now Turkey has remained circumspect over enforcing new sanctions. One foreign ministry official said “you will have to wait and see.” Analysts say Iran would probably reward any breaking of sanctions with lucrative energy deals. But the political cost could be high because of Turkey’s aspirations for joining the EU. The coming weeks will see Ankara facing a difficult a choice.

  • Mula Mustafa Barzani was a KGB agent

    Mula Mustafa Barzani was a KGB agent

    By Dr.Kamal Said Qadir

    Vienna-Austria
    Mula Mustafa Barzani, the legendary Kurdish leader was a KGB-agent, codenamed “RAIS“,  and the Kurdish armed revolution started by Barzani Sep.11,1961 was in reality a KGB cover action to destabilize Western interests in the Middle East and put additional pressure on the Kassem government of Iraq.
    Whoever dares to mention these facts publicly in Kurdistan, his fate will be surely unknown. The least punishment he may receive would be enforced disappearance or even murder by sophisticated means, and the whole story of KGB-Barzani ties will be dismissed as a reckless defamation by the ruling Barzani family. Unfortunately for Barzani family, these facts are not a creation of some individuals, but contents of KGB-documents became recently accessible for scholars and public, or found their way to the West with defected KGB-officers after the collapse of the Soviet Union. There are two main documentary sources on KGB-Barzani ties, this paper relies on. The first are the archives of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, which also contain the correspondence between KGB and the Central Committee. The most important documents mentioned here in this article goes back to 1961, the peak of the cold war.
    And the second sources are the so called “Mitrokhin archives“, which were smuggled to the West by the defected KGB-officer Mitrokhin after the collapse of the Soviet Union. In addition to the KGB-archives, this paper also relies on the memoirs written by former KGB-officers, where references also being made to Barzani and the Kurdish conflict. Here are the memoirs of the former KGB-general Sudoplatov, who was the head of the “SMERSH“, a special department within the Soviet Security Services, responsible for special
    operations broad, of great importance.
    There are also some scholars who conducted valuable research on KGB history using publicly accessible KGB-archives. The most important research paper I was able to find in this connection was the research paper delivered by Vladislav M. Zubok, a visiting scholar of the National Security Archives in Washington D.C. This paper is accessible online under HYPERLINK:
    The aim of the current paper on Barzani-KGB ties is simply the search for the truth in the public interest. The Barzani family has established a brutal and corrupt feudal political system in Iraqi-Kurdistan under the pretext that this family had led the Kurdish revolution. It is simply time to tell them the truth and remember them that the Kurds are freedom loving people and will never accept feudal rule. The Barzani family has misused the trust of Kurdish people and became increasingly an oligarchic family, the main aim of which is self-enrichment by illegal means and the monopoly of power by the members of this family. Murder, torture, abductions and intimidation are among the
    main methods of the family to silence the opponents by of the family. But apparently, such methods do not work well anymore in the new Iraq. My own abduction by the Parastin, the secret service of the Barzani family Oct. 26, 2005 in Erbil-Kurdistan for publishing some articles criticising the corrupt rule of the Barzani family and my subsequent release under international pressure is a further evidence that the arbitrary powers of the family are decreasing.
    The great international support for my case was based on the simple fact that the truth should not be silenced.
    And therefore I see it as my duty to continue searching for the truth.Barzani and KGB, Old Relations After the collapse of the Kurdish republic of Mahabad Dec.1946, Mustafa Barsani made his way to the Soviet borders with several hundred of his men. After arriving in the Soviet Union he received a great attention by the Soviet leadership and Soviet security services, who wanted to use the Kurds for their own ends. The first period of Barzani life in the Soviet Union and his political activities would have probably remained secret without the memoirs of the KGB-general Pavel Sudolatov, who later became the head of the “SMERSH“. Sudoplatov writes that he had met Barzani for
    the first time in Baku, shortly after the arrival of Barzani in the Soviet Union in 1947, with the aim to study the opportunities to use him to destabilize Western interests in the Middle East. Barzani and his men were to receive arms and military training in order to be sent back to Iraq for this purpose, writes Sudoplatov. Mula Mustafa Barzani must have been of extra ordinary importance for the Soviet leadership and Soviet security services, as he was cultivated by P. Sudoplatov, one of the most important figures within
    the Soviet Secret Services. Sudoplatov mentions in his memoirs that he has been responsible for assassination of Trotsky on Stalin’s order and for Soviet atomic espionage, which led to the building of the Soviet atom bomb.
    Charging Sudoplatov with negotiations with Mustafa Barzani is an evidence of the great expectation the Soviet leadership had from Barzani. But Sudoplatov was apparently not the only Soviet secret service officer to deal with Barzani. Sudoplatov mentions other officers, who succeeded him in dealing with Barzani. Sudoplatov meets Barzani for the second time in 1952 to negotiate with him on military training without mentioning any agreement reached among them. But Sudoplatov meets Barzani in 1953 in a military academy
    in Moscow, where both of them, Sudopatov and Barzani undergo military training. Barzani was apparently being prepared for a special task abroad. Sudoplatov reveals in his memoirs that Barzani told him then that the ties between his family and Russia are hundred years old and that his family had appealed to Russia for help before and received arms and ammunition from Russia sixty times. There are indeed other confidential reports on a visit to Russia made by the Sheikh Abdul Salam, the Sheikh of Barzan before the First World War There are no further reports available to me about the Barzani Russian ties before the WWI.
    The nature of relations between Mustafa Barzani and Soviet secret services during the period of 1947-1958 remains till now widely secret with the exception of the Sudoplatov memoirs. Also Mitrokhin archives and the publicly accessible KGB-archives make no mention of this period, but do deliver essential inform on the Barzani-KGB ties after 1958. From Mitrokhin archives we learn that the KGB has given Barzani the codename “RAIS“,
    and both of the archives, the Mitrokhin archives and the KGB-archives of the Central Committee of the CPSU reveal the big secret behind the Kurdish September revolution of 1961 led by Mustafa Barsani. According to these archives, this revolution was in reality not a real revolution but one of cover actions of KGB to destabilize Western interests in the Middle East.
    Shelepin, the KGB-chief in the 1960s, sent in 1961 a memorandum to Khrushchev containing plans “to cause uncertainty in government circles of the USA, England, Turkey, and Iran about the stability of their positions in the Middle and Near East.”  He offered to use old KGB connections with the chairman of Democratic party of Kurdistan, Mulla Mustafa Barzani, “to activate the movement of the Kurdish population of Iraq, Iran, and Turkey
    for creation of an independent Kurdistan that would include the provinces of
    aforementioned countries.”  Barzani was to be provided with necessary aid in arms and money.  “Given propitious developments,” noted Shelepin with foresight, “it would become advisable to express the solidarity of Soviet people with this movement of the Kurds.”
    “The movement for the creation of Kurdistan,” he predicted, “will evoke serious concern among Western powers and first of all in England regarding [their access to] oil in Iraq and Iran, and in the United States regarding its military bases in Turkey.  All that will create also difficulties for [Iraqi Prime Minister Gen. Abdul Karim] KASSIM who has begun to conduct a pro-Western policy, especially in recent time.” Shelepin also proposed an initiative to entice Egyptian President Gamal Abdul Nasser, a Third World leader avidly courted by both East and West, into throwing his support behind the Kurds.
    Shelepin suggested informing Nasser “through unofficial channels” that, in the event of a Kurdish victory, Moscow “might take a benign look at the integration of the non-Kurdish part of Iraqi territory with the UAR”–the United Arab Republic, a short-lived union of Egypt and Syria reflecting Nasser’s pan-Arab nationalism–“on the condition of NASSER’s support for the creation of an independent Kurdistan.” ( Shelepin to Khrushchev, 29 July
    1961, in St.-191/75gc, 1 August 1961, TsKhSD, fond 4, opis 13, delo 81, ll. 131-32) (see Zubok, 21).
    When a Kurdish rebellion indeed broke out in Iraqi Kurdistan in September 1961, the KGB quickly responded with additional proposals to exploit the situation.  KGB Deputy Chairman Peter Ivashutin proposed–“In accord with the decision of the CC CPSU…of 1 August 1961 on the implementation of measures favouring the distraction of the attention and forces of the USA and her allies from West Berlin, and in view of the armed uprisings of the Kurdish tribes that have begun in the North of Iraq”–to: 1) use the KGB to organize pro-Kurdish and anti-Kassim protests in India, Indonesia, Afghanistan, Guinea, and other countries; 2) have the KGB meet with Barzani to urge him to “seize the leadership of the Kurdish movements in his hands and to lead it along the democratic road,” and to advise him to “keep a low profile in the course of this activity so that the West did not have a pretext to blame the USSR in meddling into the internal affairs of Iraq”; and 3) assign the KGB to recruit and train a “special armed detachment (500-700 men)” drawn from Kurds living in the USSR in the event that Moscow might need to send Barzani “various military experts (Artillerymen, radio operators, demolition
    squads, etc.)” to support the Kurdish uprising. ( P. Ivashutin to CC CPSU, 27 September 1961, St.-199/10c, 3 October 1961, TsKhSD, fond 4, opis 13, delo 85, ll. 1-4). (see Zubok,21)What Ivashutin did not know, was the fact that the West already had information on Barzani special ties with the Soviet Union. The U.S. officials had noted with concern the possibility “that Barzani might be useful to Moscow.
    In an October 1958 cable to the State Department three months after a military coup brought Kassim to power, the U.S. ambassador to Iraq, Waldemar J. Gallman, stated that “Communists also have potential for attack [on Iraqi Prime Minister Kassim-ed.] on another point through returned Kurdish leader Mulla Mustafa Barzani.  He spent last eleven years in exile in Soviet Union.  His appeal to majority of Iraqi Kurds is strong and his ability [to] disrupt stability almost endless.  Thus we believe that today greatest potential threat to stability and even existence of Qassim’s [Kassim’s]
    regime lies in hands of Communists.”  See Gallman to Department of State, 14 October 1958, in U.S. Department of State, Foreign Relations of the United States, 1958-1960, Vol. XII (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1993), 344-46 (see Zubok, 21). So became the Kurdish conflict an instrument in the hands of Moscow to exercise pressure on successive Iraqi regimes.
    According to Mitrokhin archives, the KGB sent Yevgeni Primakov, codenamed “MAKS“ to Iraq in the 1960s under the cover of a journalist. Yevgeni Primakov was to play later a leading role in the Kurdish question, especially in the conclusion of the autonomy agreement between the Kurdistan Democratic Party and the Iraqi regime March 1970. The
    Baath regime has to accept the Soviet conditions in return for the mediation, since the Iraqi army was completely exhausted by fighting with the Kurds. Iraqi regime has to ease pressure on the Iraqi Communist Party and establish close ties with the Soviet Union.After the March agreement the Iraqi regime gained strength with Soviet support and began to obstruct the implementation of the March agreement. And the Soviet Union, having successfully used the Kurdish card to influence the Iraqi foreign policy, turned its back to the Kurds. Barzani in return moved closer to CIA, Mossad and Savakis. The Iraqi-Soviet honey moon lasted till the collapse of the Kurdish uprising after it was betrayed by the Western allies and Iran in 1975. After this date, the Iraqi regime resumed its oppressive politics towards the Iraqi Communist Party and began to come closer to the West. And the Soviet Union resumed its use for the Kurdish card.
    Since that time the history has repeated itself several times and the Barzani family has often changed the fronts between, KGB, CIA and Mossad. The drama is continuing.
    , August 23, 2006
  • In Kurdistan (sic.), Mossad is is an embarassment to Washington

    In Kurdistan (sic.), Mossad is is an embarassment to Washington

    by G. M.
    Resumed after the war which drove Saddam Hussein out of power in Baghdad in 2003, the secret security co-operation between Israelis and Iraqi Kurds was put to a crushing stop these last few months, under Washington’s influence.
    After Jalal Talabani’s (the Kurdish leader) nomination to the presidency of
    the Republic of Iraq in spring 2005, “a conflict of interest appeared
    between the two allies”, estimates an expert in Middle East safety. “In
    order not to be criticized by the Shiites and the sunnites,” he adds, “the
    new Head of the State Talabani could not allow the further development of a
    relationship that is condemned by the immense majority of the Iraqis. The
    Kurdish two-sided-game was stopped.” Since then, some of the Israeli agents
    are believed to have left the north of Iraq. Apparently, there would remain
    only one hundred of them, and Israeli businessmen practically only act
    through Kurdish or Jordanian intermediaries.
    The conflict had however helped to tighten the partnership between Mossad,
    the Israeli secret service, and the Kurdish leadership, who combined their
    effort in thirty years struggle against the nationalist regime of Baghdad.
    Israel wanted to support the Kurds’ federal aspirations and contain the
    Iranian influence over Iraq. “After the hostilities, the Israelis, anxious
    to see thousands of so-called Iranian pilgrims entering Iraq, tried in vain
    to convince the Americans to close the border between Iran and Iraq”,
    explains Patrick Clawson, deputy manager of the American research center
    “The Washington Institute for Near East Policy”. But the United States,
    willing to preserve their relationship with their Iraqi Shiites allies,
    refused to act.
    The Israelis then decided to take matters in their own hand. In Erbil and Souleymanieh, Israeli instructors, often disguised as businessmen, were charged to improve the training of the pechmergas, the Kurdish militiamen. Beginning of 2004, approximately 1,200 agents either from Mossad or from the Israeli military intelligence operated in Kurdistan, according to French
    military estimates. Their mission was to set up sufficiently strong Kurdish commandos that could effectively counter the Shiites militia in the South of Iraq (that are more or less manipulated by Teheran), in particular that of the troublemaker Moqtada Al-Sadr. The Kurdish leaders returned the favor by making positive declarations. Last 6 June, Massoud Barzani, of the democratic Party of Kurdistan, estimated that a relation with Israel “is not a crime since the majority of the Arab countries maintain the relationship” with the Hebrew State.
    Kurdistan’ mountains have always been filled with spies. “The presence of many people in this area, autonomous since 1991, makes it possible to the Israelis to recruit agents which will infiltrate other organizations, declared the former boss of a European intelligence service. Today, the Kurdish priority to infiltrate the new Iraqi army, directed by one of their own, serves the Israeli interests. Through its alliance with the Iraqi Kurds, the Hebrew State has reinforced its monitoring on Iran and Syria, its two great enemies in the Middle East. But Israeli actions ended up disturbing Washington. “We’ve received strong pressure from Washington to stop our operations with the Kurds”, said an Israeli sent to Erbil under cover of being a student. “the Americans do not agree any more with the Israeli plans”, he affirms. Washington does not seem to tolerate anymore this presence that threathens its interests.

    Le Figaro International, 28 Sept 2005

  • A flash of lightning

    A flash of lightning

    A flash of lightning
    By Uri Avnery

    Night. Utter darkness. Heavy rain. Visibility close to nil.

    And suddenly – a flash of lightning. For a fraction of a second, the landscape is lit up. For this split second, the terrain surrounding us can be seen. It is not the way it used to be.

    Israeli government’s action against the Gaza aid flotilla was such a lightning flash.


    Israelis normally live in darkness as far as seeing the world is concerned. But for that instant, the real landscape around us could be seen, and it looked frightening. Then the darkness settled down over us, Israel returned to its bubble, the world disappeared from view.

    This split second was enough to reveal a dismal scene. On almost all fronts, the situation of Israel has worsened since the last flash of lightning.

    The Gaza Freedom Flotilla and the attack on it did not create this landscape. It has been there since Israel’s present government was set up. But the deterioration did not start even then. It began a long time before.

    The action of Ehud Barak & Co. only lit up the situation as it is now, and gave it yet another push in the wrong direction.

    How does the new landscape look in the light of Barak’s barak? (“barak” means lightning in Hebrew.)

    The list is headed by a fact that nobody seems to have noticed until now: the death of the Holocaust.

    In all the tumult this affair has caused throughout the world, the Holocaust was not even mentioned. True, in Israel there were some who called Recep Tayyip Erdogan “a new Hitler”, and some Israel-haters talked about the “Nazi attack”, but the Holocaust has practically disappeared.

    For two generations, Israel’s foreign policy used the Holocaust as its main instrument. The bad conscience of the world determined its attitude towards Israel. The (justified) guilt feelings — either for atrocities committed or for looking the other way — caused Europe and America to treat Israel differently than any other nation — from nuclear armaments to the settlements. All criticism of our governments’ actions was branded automatically as anti-Semitism and silenced.

    But time does its work. New tragedies have blunted the world’s senses. For a new generation, the Holocaust is a thing of the remote past, a chapter of history. The sense of guilt has disappeared in all countries, except Germany.

    The Israeli public did not notice this, because in Israel itself the Shoah is alive and present. Many Israelis are children or grandchildren of Holocaust survivors, and the Holocaust has been imprinted on their childhood. Moreover, a huge apparatus ensures that the Holocaust will not disappear from our memory, starting from kindergarten, through ceremonies and memorial days, to organized tours “there”.

    Therefore, the Israeli public is shocked to see that the Holocaust has lost its power as a political instrument. Our most valuable weapon has become blunt.

    The central pillar of our policy is our alliance with the United States. To use a phrase dear to Binyamin Netanyahu (in another context): it’s “the rock of our existence”.

    For many years, this alliance has kept us safe from all trouble. We knew that we could always get from the U.S. all we needed: advanced arms to retain our superiority over all Arab armies combined, munitions in times of war, money for our economy, the veto on all UN Security Council resolutions against us, automatic support for all the actions of our successive governments. Every small and medium country in the world knew that in order to gain entrance to the palaces of Washington, the Israeli doorkeeper had to be bribed.

    But during the last year, cracks have appeared in this pillar. Not the small scratches and chips of wear and tear, but cracks caused by shifts of the ground. The mutual aversion between Barack Obama and Binyamin Netanyahu is only one symptom of a much deeper problem.

    The Chief of the Mossad told the Knesset last week: “For the U.S., we have ceased to be an asset and become a burden.”

    This fact was put into incisive words by General David Petraeus, when he said that the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict is endangering the lives of American soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan. The later soothing messages did not erase the significance of this warning. (When Petraeus fainted this week at a Senate hearing, some religious Jews viewed it as divine punishment.)

    It is not only the Israeli-American relationship that has undergone a fateful change, but the standing of the U.S. itself is changing for the worse, a bad omen indeed for the future of Israeli policy.

    The world is changing, slowly and quietly. The U.S. is still by far the most powerful country, but it is no longer the almighty superpower it had been since 1989. China is flexing its muscles, countries like India and Brazil are getting stronger, countries like Turkey — yes, Turkey! — are beginning to play a role.

    This is not a matter of one or two years, but anyone who is thinking about the future of Israel in ten, twenty years must understand that unless there is a basic change in our position, our position, too, will decline.

    If our alliance with the U.S. is one central pillar of Israeli policy, the support of the vast majority of world Jewry is the second.

    For 62 years, we could count on it with our eyes shut. Whatever we did — almost all the world’s Jews stood at attention and saluted. In fire and water, victory or defeat, glorious or dark chapters — the world’s Jews did support us, giving money, demonstrating, pressuring their governments. Without second thoughts, without criticism.

    Not anymore. Quietly, almost silently, cracks have appeared in this pillar, too. Opinion polls show that most American Jewish young people are turning away from Israel. Not shifting their loyalty from the Israeli establishment to Israel’s liberal camp — but turning away from Israel altogether.

    This will not be felt immediately either. AIPAC continues to strike fear into Washingtonian hearts, Congress will continue to dance to its tune. But when the new generation comes to man key positions, the support for Israel will erode, American politicians will stop crawling on their bellies and the U.S. administration will gradually change its relations with us.

    In our immediate neighborhood, too, profound changes are underway, some of them beneath the surface. The flotilla incident has exposed them.

    The influence of our allies is decreasing constantly. They are losing height, and an old-new power is on the rise: Turkey.

    Hosni Mubarak is busy with his efforts to pass power to his son, Gamal. The Islamic opposition in Egypt is raising its head. Saudi money is trumped by the new attraction of Turkey. The Jordanian king is compelled to adapt himself. The axis of Turkey-Iran-Syria-Hezbollah-Hamas is the rising power, the axis of Egypt-Saudi Arabia-Jordan-Fatah is in decline.

    But the most important change is the one that is taking place in international public opinion. Any derision of this reminds one of Stalin’s famous sneer (“How many divisions has the pope?”)

    Recently, an Israeli TV station showed a fascinating film about the German and Scandinavian female volunteers who flooded Israel in the 50s and 60s to live and work (and sometimes marry) in the kibbutzim. Israel was then seen as a plucky little nation surrounded by … enemies, … risen from the ashes of the Holocaust to become a haven of freedom, equality and democracy, which found their most sublime expression in that unique creation, the kibbutz.

    The present generation of idealistic youngsters from all over the world, male and female, who would once have volunteered for the kibbutzim, can now be found on the decks of the ships sailing for downtrodden, choked and starved Gaza, which touches the hearts of many young people. The pioneering Israeli David has turned into a brutish Israeli Goliath.

    Even a genius of spin could not change this. For years, now, the world sees Israel every day on the TV screen and on the front pages in the image of heavily armed soldiers shooting at stone-throwing children, guns firing phosphorus shells into residential quarters, helicopters executing “targeted eliminations”, and now pirates attacking civilian ships on the open seas. Terrified women with wounded babies in their arms, men with amputated limbs, demolished homes. When one sees a hundred pictures like that for every picture that shows another Israel, Israel becomes a monster. The more so since the Israeli propaganda machine is successfully suppressing any news about the Israeli peace camp.

    Many years ago, when I wanted to ridicule the addiction of our leaders to the use of force, I paraphrased a saying that reflects much of Jewish wisdom: “if force does not work, use brains.” In order to show how far we, the Israelis, are different from the Jews, I changed the words: “If force doesn’t work, use more force.”

    I thought of it as a joke. But, as happens to many jokes in Israel, it has become reality. It is now the credo of many primitive Israelis, headed by Ehud Barak.

    In practice, the security of a state depends on many factors, and military force is but one of them. In the long run, world public opinion is stronger. The pope has many divisions.

    In many respects, Israel is still strong. But, as the sudden illumination of the flotilla affair has shown, time is not working in our favor. We should deepen our roots in the world and in the region — which means making peace with our neighbors — as long as we are as strong as we are now.

    If force doesn’t work, more force will not necessarily work either.

    If force doesn’t work, force doesn’t work. Period.

    Uri Avnery, 86, is an Israeli writer and founder of the Gush Shalom peace movement.

    (Source: Gush Shalom)

    Photo: Demonstrators holding flags protest against Israeli attack on the Gaza Freedom Flotilla in Istanbul, Turkey, May 31, 2010. (Xinhua/AFP Photo)

  • Turkey and Israel by Abraham Foxman

    Turkey and Israel by Abraham Foxman

    Strained Relations between Israel and Turkey Undermines Bridge Between West and Muslim World

    Abraham Foxman June 21st 2010

    Cutting Edge commentator

    These are sad times indeed for those with a strong attachment to Israel, and an equal and longstanding respect for Turkey. The unique relationship shared by these two countries, down through history and into the present, is being undermined in a stormy environment of disagreement, and charged rhetoric.

    We need not go into a rehash of the much-discussed events and the diplomatic rows that brought us to this pass. The strongly critical remarks by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, first at Davos in response to Israel’s December 2008 invasion of Gaza, and more recently over the flotilla episode and the deaths of nine Turkish activists aboard the Mavi Marmara, have cast a deep pall over the Israeli-Turkish relationship.

    The echoes of Davos and the flotilla affair seem to be prevailing over calm heads and good will, and we can only wonder, why?

    Sadly, an historic era of cooperation may be slipping away, as Turkey appears on the verge of abandoning a role it so proudly played as a bridge between the Muslim world and the West. The inter-governmental and people-to-people relationships are fraying, and the tangible benefits they have brought to both sides are at serious risk.

    This is a shared history based on mutual interests and concerns. In March 1949, Turkey became the first Muslim state to recognize Israel, and in 1958, Turkish Prime Minister Adnan Menderes and Israeli Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion met in secret to sign a military and intelligence cooperation agreement. Ben-Gurion later wrote to President Dwight D. Eisenhower that Israel’s “links with the Government of Turkey have grown more intimate in secret channels.”

    Turkish-Israeli relations have always had ups and downs. Yet, until recently, the unmistakable trend for the prior two decades was growing trade and investment, more cultural exchanges, increased tourism, ever greater military and intelligence cooperation and more frequent political meetings.

    The relationship was much more than strategic. Both Israeli and Turkish societies benefited from close ties that transcended the politics of the moment. Israelis found in Turkey a beautiful country for vacations and struck up close friendships in Turkey. After a disastrous earthquake struck Turkey in 1999, Israel was one of the first countries to extend emergency assistance by sending sophisticated equipment and search and rescue crews. The Israeli public launched a spontaneous campaign to assist the victims, as thousands of Israelis stood in line across the country to donate more than 25 tons blankets, clothing and food.

    There was also the memory of history. Turkey, and the Ottoman Empire that preceded it, served as a safe haven for Jews, from the time of the expulsion from Spain and Portugal and into the Holocaust years. And Turkey’s protection of its own minority Jewish community was admirable and unique among the nations – and particularly in the aftermath of the 2003 bombing of two synagogues in Istanbul, when Turkish leaders stood up to publicly decry anti-Semitism.

    Until recently, Turkey was held up as proof that a Muslim-majority country could have warm and significant relations with the Jewish state. Turkey now seems to shun that globally important role.

    Today, the relationship is in steep decline. Turkish Foreign Minister Davutoglu compared the Gaza flotilla incident to the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Turkey recalled its ambassador to Israel, and President Abdullah Gul has left open the possibility of breaking off relations altogether.

    Israeli tourism to Turkey has plummeted, and Israeli supermarkets are boycotting Turkish products. Turkey has cancelled joint military exercises. Israel and Turkey have clashed over policies toward Iran, Hamas, and Syria. Erdogan is reported to have angrily proclaimed in public remarks that the Star of David is the same as the Nazi swastika. A Turkish delegation of teachers and scholars, scheduled to participate in an event at Yad Vashem on the lessons of the Holocaust, failed to show.

    Beyond the bilateral relationship, Turkey is in the process of losing other roles and friends. For many years, Turkey has sought to leverage its geographic linking of the Middle East and Europe to create connections between different religions and cultures. Today, however, its rapprochement with Iran, Hamas, and Syria generates doubts, not confidence, in the U.S. and elsewhere.

    The American Jewish community has long been supportive of Turkish interests in the United States, as a NATO ally and based on its strategic relationship with Israel, a premise that many politically active Jewish organizations may have to revisit.

    Turkey, Israel and the international community would benefit from a reversal of this downward spiral. An investigation into the flotilla affair with international observers has been commissioned by Israel, and hopefully it will provide a base from which to rebuild the relationship. Until then, both Israelis and Turks should exercise care with their rhetoric and their actions.

    However, should that investigation uncover Turkish government involvement with Insani Yardim Vakfi (IHH), the Istanbul-based charity that was one of the major sponsors the Free Gaza flotilla, and its preparations for violently confronting Israeli solders – as some information now suggests – the report could be the death knell for rebuilding the relationship.

    Hopefully, what we are seeing today from Turkey is a temporary detour from the path it has pursued so successfully for years. Hopefully, the friendship we had come to know and to rely on will re-emerge.

    Hopefully, the instincts of the Turkish people that wrote a magnificent chapter in Jewish history more than 500 years ago as a haven and refuge for those expelled from Spain will bring Turkey back from the brink.

    Then we will be able to continue to celebrate our long-held affection and respect for Turkey.

    Cutting Edge commentator Abraham H. Foxman is National Director of the Anti-Defamation League and author of “The Deadliest Lies: The Israel Lobby and the Myth of Jewish Control.”

    http://www.thecuttingedgenews.com/index.php?article=12293

  • Turkey: no Blue Stream gas to Israel for now

    Turkey: no Blue Stream gas to Israel for now

    June 21st, 2010 by IFandP Newsroom

    Turkish energy and natural resources minister Taner Yildiz said that the country would not be transporting any natural gas to Israel via the Blue Stream pipeline until Turkish-Israeli relations have normalised.

    Russia’s Prime Minister Vladimir Putin had indicated during a recent visit to Turkey that shipping natural gas from Turkey to Israel via Blue Stream II was out of question at the moment due to some other reason. Subsequently, Mr Yildiz told reporters in Russia that he agreed with Mr Putin’s view. He added that the two countries also had the Samsun-Ceyhan pipeline through which Russian oil would flow to many different markets.