Turkish Forum

Category: Israel

  • TV Show Deepens Split Between Israel and Turkey

    TV Show Deepens Split Between Israel and Turkey

    By NICHOLAS BIRCH, CHARLES LEVINSON and MARC CHAMPION

    A war of words ignited by a new Turkish TV series depicting Israeli military atrocities escalated Friday, shaking what is probably Israel’s strongest partnership in the Middle East.

    The first episode of the series, “Separation,” aired Wednesday on the public channel TRT, showed what appeared to be an Israeli soldier gunning down an unarmed Palestinian girl in a cul de sac. Shortly afterward, another soldier shoots a newborn baby.

    The images sparked outrage in Israel. Labor unions said they would boycott Turkey as a vacation destination, and Israel summoned Turkey’s ambassador Thursday to lodge a protest. Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said in a statement Thursday the series “would not be appropriate in an enemy country and certainly not in a state which maintains diplomatic relations with Israel.”

    ISRAEL-GAZA

    Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu responded Friday by criticizing Israel’s treatment of Palestinians. He said a recent decision to exclude Israel from planned North Atlantic Treaty Organization exercises in central Turkey was made in response to public outrage in Turkey over Israel’s treatment of Palestinian civilians in the Gaza Strip.

    “While the tragedy in Gaza continues, nobody should expect us to put on military displays of this sort,” Mr. Davutoglu said.

    As for the TV series, Mr. Davutoglu said: “Turkey is not a country based on censorship.”

    Officials and analysts in both countries said the split reveals Ankara no longer needs or wants Israel the way it once did.

    The two countries have long had strong diplomatic and trade relations, and Turkey has been a substantial buyer of Israeli military hardware. For years, Israeli pilots trained in Turkish airspace. As recently as August, Turkey took part in joint naval exercises with Israel.

    But the ties were built in a period when Turkey felt hemmed in on all sides, analysts say. In the 1980s and 1990s, Turkey had poor relations with Iraq and shared with Israel a deep suspicion of Iran. It was also fighting a guerrilla war with Kurdish militants. In 1998, it came close to war with Syria. Turkey was also in conflict with Greece over Cyprus, while then communist Bulgaria and Armenia were historical and Cold War rivals. Ankara needed Israel’s military hardware and intelligence sharing.

    “In the 1990s, Turkish foreign policy was guided by security issues, and that pushed Turkey closer to Israel,” says Kadri Gursel, a columnist for the centrist daily Milliyet.

    But under Mr. Davutoglu and his boss, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Turkey has worked hard to fix those problems and reintegrate into the region. This month, Turkey signed significant agreements with Armenia, Syria and Iraq.

    “There is no need for this [partnership with Israel] anymore,” said Huseyin Bagci, professor of International Relations at the Middle East Technical University in Ankara.

    Mr. Bagci predicts that Turkey increasingly will look to Italy, France and other suppliers to buy arms, rather than Israel.

    The breakdown in relations also appears personal. Mr. Erdogan walked off the stage at the World Economic Forum in Davos in January after clashing with President Shimon Peres of Israel over the conflict in Gaza. In a recent interview with The Wall Street Journal, Mr. Erdogan was still simmering.

    “If you look at Gaza, 1,500 people died, 5,000 people were wounded, infrastructure, the superstructures were all demolished. … What happened afterwards? There was nothing,” said Mr. Erdogan.

    Israel and some Turkish analysts see an ideological component to the dispute, noting the Islamist roots of the ruling Justice and Development Party. “We’ve seen Turkey evolve and change since Erdogan’s Islamic party took power,” the senior Israeli official said.

    Mr. Erdogan, in the interview, insisted his position wasn’t driven by identification with Muslim Palestinians, but by the need for honesty and fairness.

    Turkish officials insist the relationship is far from dead. “Let’s make no mistake. We value a continuation of relations with Israel, but not at any cost,” said ruling-party official Suat Kiniklioglu.

    Write to Charles Levinson at charles.levinson@wsj.com and Marc Champion at marc.champion@wsj.com

    Printed in The Wall Street Journal, page A9

  • Turkey Exposed:

    Turkey Exposed:

    Cannot Pretend to be

    Both Pro-Israeli and Pro-Palestinian

    SASSUN-2

    Publisher, The California Courier

    Playing the skillful political games of their Ottoman predecessors, Turkey’s current masters present their country under various guises — as European and Middle Eastern, Islamic and secular, pro-Arab and pro-Israeli.

    It now appears that the end is near for at least one of these Turkish charades. Israeli officials have finally awakened from their prolonged coma to discover that their erstwhile “strategic partner” is far more hostile than their Arab enemies.

    For a long time, Turkish leaders have been calling the Israelis all sorts of unsavory names and accusing Israel of committing barbaric acts, crimes against humanity, and genocide. Strangely, Israel has shown little indignation, even in the face of persistent racist and anti-Semitic outbursts by large segments of the Turkish public.

    The latest display of Turkish hostility was the exclusion of Israel from a multinational military exercise which was to start in Turkey on October 12. In protest, the United States, Italy and Holland pulled out of these maneuvers, causing their cancellation. In a move designed to further irritate the Israelis, Turkey announced that it would instead hold joint military exercises with Syria, Israel’s main adversary.

    Turkey’s Prime Minster Rejeb Erdogan told the Anatolia Press Agency last week that he had banned Israel from the military drill in response to the wishes of the Turkish public. “Turkey does not take orders from anyone in regards to its internal affairs,” Erdogan boasted. Some Turkish officials indicated that the ban was instituted because the Israeli jets assigned to the exercise had participated in the Gaza bombings earlier this year.

    This episode marks a major escalation of the long-standing Turkish bitterness towards Israel. For the first time, the Turkish military joined the civilian government in adopting an anti-Israeli position. Furthermore, Turkey went beyond mere verbal condemnation to taking concrete action. For years, the Israeli government was willing to swallow insults from Turkish officials, as long as its Air Force was permitted to make practice runs in the vast Turkish airspace, shared intelligence, and sold military hardware to Turkey.

    Making matters worse, Israelis were deeply offended by the broadcast of a Turkish show on state TV last week, depicting graphic scenes of Israeli soldiers killing Palestinian children and committing other atrocities.

    Israel’s Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman reacted by summoning the Turkish ambassador and accused Turkey of inciting hatred against Israelis. Lieberman stated that not even Israel’s enemies would air such a hostile TV series. Israel’s Deputy Prime Minister Silvan Shalom urged Turkey “to come to its senses.” Another Israeli official stated: “We need to stop accepting the Turkish dictates and humiliations. It is inconceivable that they should insult us at every opportunity, and we should continue to hold our tongues.”

    Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu categorically rejected any future mediating role for Turkey in talks with Syria. An unnamed “senior Israeli official” was quoted by Haaretz as stating that the strategic ties with Turkey may “have simply ended.” Meanwhile, the Jerusalem Post quoted some Israeli defense officials as stating that “advanced weapons sales to Turkey would now be reviewed.”

    There were also widespread calls last week for the Israeli public to boycott Turkish resorts. National Public Radio (NPR) reported that Israel’s largest labor union would no longer plan for thousands of its workers organized tours of Turkey, and would direct them to go instead to Greece and Bulgaria. Since January, there has been a 47% drop in the number of Israelis spending their vacations in Turkey, according to Time magazine. An Israeli coffee shop chain expressed its displeasure by announcing that it would no longer serve Turkish coffee to its customers. In an unprecedented move, several Israeli cabinet ministers declared that they would turn down the Turkish Embassy’s invitation to attend Turkey’s Independence Day celebrations later this month.

    Many outraged Israelis advocated that, in retaliation, Israel acknowledge the Armenian Genocide. Dan Margalit of “Israel Hayom” newspaper accused the Turks of not only committing Genocide, but also the “ongoing crime, which is expressed in energetic Turkish activity to deny the atrocity and to incite against any country and government and artist who wish to express their horror.”

    Ephraim Inbar, head of the BESA Center for Strategic Studies at Bar-Ilan University in Ramat Gan, reminded the Turks that they are still in need of “Israeli influence in Washington to prevent the passage in Congress of a resolution declaring the killing of Armenians during World War I a genocide.”

    In an unprecedented action, the “Im Tirtzu” Israeli student movement held a protest last week in front of the Turkish Embassy in Tel Aviv. The students displayed bloody pictures of victims of the Armenian Genocide, handed out books on the Genocide to passersby, and carried signs calling on Turkey to formally recognize the Genocide.

    To atone for its past sin of siding with Turkish denialists, Israel must officially affirm the Armenian Genocide as well as actively lobby for its recognition by other states. Israel should also permit the erection of a monument at a prominent location to commemorate the victims of the Armenian Genocide and reverse its long-standing ban on TV broadcast of documentaries on this subject. It is certainly in Israel’s own interest to side with the victims of genocide rather than with its perpetrators!

    Instead of maintaining at all cost its unholy alliance with Turkey, Israel should earnestly pursue a peace settlement with the Palestinians and live in peace with its Arab neighbors, thus obviating the need to curry favors with the Turkish denialist regime.

    ==================== SUBJECT RELATED E-MAIL’S RECEIVED=

    From: Ismet Takim [ismettakim@yahoo.com]

    Subject: {Pax Turcica} Our problems are just begining, l worned you all before, we play this game we will loose and guess who is happy???

    READ

    Turkey Exposed:

    and any of you still have any questions about this? some of our readers here is also responsiable for this and you have no idea what we will face, you just sit and watch, pro Palestenian Turkey is comitting suicide,

    Erdogan made the biggest mistake, and some of you who posts pro

    Filistin BS, tags and articles here should be ashame of themselves

    they have done a disservice and put our mainly my efforts back in

    time, and we have to fix this now, l have to go to work again and undo some of this,

    stupid stupid stupid bird brains bleeding hearts, stop your Anti Israel stands and get real, stop hurting Turkey,

    ======================================================

    From: Metin Mangir [mangir.metin@gmail.com]
    Subject: {Pax Turcica} Are you aware of the slap to Erdogan by Obama?


    While we are all focussed on the Armenian issue (because of our

    proxomity to the diaspora) Obama invited (!) Erdogan to come to WDC on

    Oct 29 (with two weeks notice), following the cancellation of the joint

    military exercises with Israel, US, and the increasing row with Israel

    upon showing of a TV program on TRT.  (now that Turkey has good

    relations with Syria,  does it not need Israel to squeeze Syria?? which

    was what started the close military collaboration with Israel.)

    The choice of date and such short notice is VERY significant (and

    insulting)!  The big brother is calling the errant boy on the carpet?

    By the way, in general the news about the Armenian protocols are

    positive in Turkey (amazing!).  Very few voices are opposing it.  Also

    it has lost its luster as the “milli birlik acilimi” and the return of

    34 people from Irak upon Ocalan’s orders has taken the center stage.

    If the borders open the real big winner will be Russia, more than

    Armenia.  Since (rightly) Azerbeycan will be pissed off at Turkey and

    the West, and get closer to Russia (if it can dare to play with such

    danger) and the West, US will loose the Caucases.

    What I do not understand is

    1)  how come US is willing to let this happen?  What has Russia forced

    upon US following Georgia?

    2) Davutoglu, who has written in three different places in his book

    about the  crucial importance of Azerbeycan for Turkey, is going along

    with this protocols steps?

    Metin

    ==========================================

    From: Ergun [ergun@cox.net]
    Subject: {Pax Turcica} Re: Are you aware of the slap to Erdogan by Obama?

    Metin,

    I suspect one major thing behind Obama’s sudden invitation:  Afghanistan.

    He may ask for more troops from Turkey.  Secondarily, Iraq.  O. may discuss

    strategy with E. on the mechanics of US pull out, the vacuum in Iraq, etc.

    All have to do with US involvement in unpopular, unwanted wars that are

    draining the US economy and social life.

    Israel, Azerbaijan, Armenia, and others are little more than dressing for

    the salad.

    This is one man’s opinion.  🙂

    Ergun  KIRLIKOVALI

    ===================================================

    Statement released by National Security Council that met today is below. Afghanistan issue has been discussed. Turkey will resume Kabul Area Commandership for the second time.

    Afganistan‘da son dönemde meydana gelen gelişmeler, Cumhurbaşkanlığı seçimleri dahil, değerlendirilmiş, ülkemizin Afganistan‘ın istikrarına yönelik katkı ve girişimlerinin sürdürüleceği belirtilmiştir. Bu kapsamda; Türk Silahlı Kuvvetlerinin Kabil Bölge Komutanlığı görevini Kasım 2009 başında ikinci defa alacağı, yine önceki görevlerde olduğu gibi, Türk Silahlı Kuvvetlerinin terörle mücadele, uyuşturucu ile mücadele, mayın temizleme görevlerinde kullanılmayacağı teyit edilmiştir.

    Fariz Huseynov [huseynovfa@gmail.com]

    =======================================================================

    On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 12:52 PM, <vaslay@aol.com> wrote:

    dear Ergun

    you are not alone for this opinion

    is isn’t funny while we are disgracing our man and women in uniform ( TSK)
    Obama needs our soldiers not government

    if you didn’t have one of the best army in the middle east

    O. wouldn’t care less for you

    regardas,

    vedat aslay

    ——————-

    Dear Metin

    Excellent observation and analysis

    I wonder what is going behind the close doors?

    Yes Russia it seems that  the big winner?

    how come for the US. Are we underestimating her.

    The is a big game going on over the middle east and Central Asia.

    The player are strong and Armenia, Azerbaijan, Syria, TURKEY  and even Israel is foot soldiers in this game

    Obama will make sure that Erdogan is not out of step. If he is you know in military

    SOL, SAG, SOL SAG, SOL, SOL P……. SOL
    Don’t worry this game is a long game and  we are just watching part I

    Vedat Aslay vaslay@aol.com

    ========================================================

    From: Yusif [yusif@azeris.com]
    Subject: {Pax Turcica} Re: Are you aware of the slap to Erdogan by Obama?

    That’s correct. Russia will be a winner big time.

    First, they will close the discussion on Nabucco both restricting

    other countries’ willingness to diversify their exports and preventing

    anything that could possibly harm Russia economically and

    politically.

    Second, they will realize the South Stream project, always viewed as

    an alternative to Nabucco and through that project will still control

    southern Europe and Turkey itself.

    Third, under the pretext of protection of South Stream, Russia will

    completely militarize Black Sea with additional Russian fleet and will

    henceforth prevent another proposed rival energy project White Stream

    to go from Georgia to EU through Ukraine from realization.

    Fourth, Russia will get deeper into Turkish economy through Armenia

    and through Armenian element will be able to exert pressure on Turkey

    and possibly other Middle Eastern states in the future. It benefits

    Russia to see islamization of Turkey. The practice of moderate Islam

    in the form of Gulenist ideology actually may suit Russia’s interests.

    In regards to US interests in the deal there are several factors.

    First of all, US was hoping for Russia’s support on the issues of

    nuclear threat from Iran. In general, apart from everything else, it

    is not in Russia’s interest to see containment and any sort of

    democratization of Iran. There is 25 mln Azeri minority in Iran which

    if needed could be a decisive factor in the future partition of Iran

    or a tool to bring down the current mullah regime. That’s one of the

    reasons Stalin was willing to and finally withdrew from Iran in 1946

    because he did not want a more sizeable Azeri minority within Soviet

    borders.

    Secondly, in my opinion, it’s not the US that is exerting pressure on

    Turkey. I think it’s Turkey which is using its inadequate behavior

    with Israel to pressure the United States. If we go back to 2003 we

    would see that Turkey was bold enough to withstand pressure from US

    during proposed invasion of Iraq from Turkey. To me personally, it

    doesn’t make sense to see America give up Azerbaijan and Georgia and

    the existing energy projects therefore losing both economically and

    politically.

    As far as Turkey’s position about Azerbaijan is concerned, I think

    they might have striken a deal on withdrawal of Armenian troops from 5

    occupied regions and agreed with Russia and US on joint peacekeeping

    mission. In any case, allowing any peacekeeping missions in Karabakh

    would be disastrous for Azerbaijan. If Russia’s troops are allowed to

    be stationed on Azerbaijani soil in any form, this would be the end of

    Azerbaijani independence and goodbye to Karabakh. Experience with

    Georgia is a good example.

    Presence of US troops would mean almost the same. Experience with

    Kosovo is a good example. That’s why Kaidanow is all around (http://

    www.a1plus.am/en/official/2009/10/20/nalbandian-tina-kaidanow)

    Presence of Turkish troops, if any, would mean nothing at all,

    especially if the protocols are ratified and diplomatic relations

    established and ‘good will of friendly’ Turkish government is

    recognized in Armenia and separatist regime in Karabakh.

    Any peacekeeping mission whatsoever would mean protraction of this

    conflict and interim status of NK last forever, therefore ending in

    partitioning of Azerbaijan forever.

    I guess, the original plan of these regional players is:

    1. to strike a deal, have Armenian troops withdrawn from 5 regions;

    2. bring in the peacekeeping force into those regions;

    3. ensure return of Azerbaijani refugees to those regions;

    4. re-arrange routes of energy resources from Azerbaijan and Central

    Asia through Armenia and/or through occupied Karabakh, as many allege;

    5. build confidence between people of the region

    6. hold a referendum in NK. Holding a referendum in Karabakh would

    mean complete loss.

    Opening any borders means directly benefitting Armenia economically

    which will stimulate economy and therefore human reproduction of

    Armenians in Karabakh. That’s when the numbers will matter.

    Yusif

    ================================================

    Turkey’s The policy of “zero problems” creating “new problems”
    https://www.turkishnews.com/en/content/2009/10/20/turkeys-the-policy-of-zero-problems-creating-new-problems/

    From: Ergun [ergun@cox.net]

    The policy of “zero problems” with neighbors seems to be creating “new problems” with neighbors

    Case one:  Azerbaijan.

    The U.S.-Russia-mandated protocols with murky gains but sure losses for Turkey are already costing Turkey dearly.  Check out these recent developments:

    1- Azerbaijan Looks For Gas Routes To Europe Bypassing Turkey

    2- Azerbaijan warns Turkey, West on gas exports

    3- Azeri leader slams Turkey as gas route to Europe

    https://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idUSLG44450320091016

    4-  Azerbaijan stops flying the Turkish flags over the Turkish martyrs’ cemetary in Baku.

    When the U.S. and Russia (an EU) forced these protocols on Turkey, they probably expected the estrangement of Azerbaijan.  If the oil and gas lines from Azerbaijan to Turkey run dry, the biggest beneficary would be, you guessed it, Russia.  Risk all you got for something in return that may or may not pan out.  We are sold this deal as “dialog, normalization, peace, and democracy” package.  Sometimes I wish an engineer was the leader in Turkey so that he would know simple math, as in addition and subtraction.

    April 24 is not far away.  We will all see if the protocols bring “normalization and peace” or ” more chaos, polarization, and stalemate”, with the net result of poorer Turkey due to weakened/lost energy lines.  (Prediction:  the latter.  Why?  Because the deal incredibly left Azerbaijan out.  Huge mistake!)

    Case two: Israel

    This one has to do with Gaza, Lebanon, and Syria, although the tensions came to a head over other things like a cancelled joint military exercises and an aired TV-show:

    TV Show Deepens Split Between Israel and Turkey

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB125573461255590957

    Turkey points to Israel to deflect from itself

    Netanyahu declares in Madrid that due to recent developments, Turkey is no longer an impartial mediator for peace talks between Syria ad Israel.

    My take on all this:

    I am not against dialog or peace.  I am against poor business deals, especially if they are conducted under pressure of partisans with vested interests clashing with yours.

    The foreign policy of Turkey should be updated from “zero problems with neighbors” to “zero old and new problems with neighbors”.

    Ergun KIRLIKOVALI


  • Israel revives water imports from Turkey plan

    Israel revives water imports from Turkey plan

    Water Authority chief: We’re still in a severe crisis.

    Merav Ankori

    globesThe Water Authority and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs are working together to revive a plan to import water from Turkey by tankers, according to preliminary answers that Water Authority director general Uri Shani provided the State Inquiry Committee Investigating the Water Shortage, headed by Judge Emeritus Dan Bein. The committee will hold an emergency meeting tomorrow.

    Shani said that the average range of prices of water imported from Turkey was higher than the price of desalinated seawater. He added that the import of 30 million cubic meters of water would take 18 months, and the water could be taken through terminals at Hadera and Palmachim without the need to make major changes in the national water system.

    “We’re still in a severe crisis, which could last until the large desalination plants at Ashdod and Soreq come online in 2013,” warned Shani. He said that not only would the water shortage continue, but maintaining the water quality was becoming more difficult as the population in Israel and neighboring counties continues to grow.

    Shani said that even if the 2009-10 winter rains are good, “We still don’t have enough water to meet needs during another drought.”

    Shani said that the campaign to conserve water and the drought tax were helping, and that water consumption seemed to have dropped sharply. “The water consumption target in 2009 was 91 cubic meters per person per year. This seemed very ambitious when the target was set. In fact, it appears that water consumption will be 89 cubic meters per person in 2009. Levying the drought tax on excess consumption in 2010 for a full year will probably further reduce consumption to about 87 cubic meters per person per year.”

    At the same time, “IDF Radio” (Galei Zahal) reports that Israel will replace its ambassador to Turkey in Ankara and Turkey will replace its ambassador in Tel Aviv within a few months. The measures are part of an effort to turn the page in the countries’ bilateral relations.

    Published by Globes [online], Israel business news – www.globes-online.com – on October 19, 2009

    © Copyright of Globes Publisher Itonut (1983) Ltd. 2009

    Source:  www.globes.co.il, 19 Oct 2009

  • Turkey ‘set to sue’ Israel as rift deepens

    Turkey ‘set to sue’ Israel as rift deepens

    îèåñ ììà èééñ - îçõ 1TEL AVIV, Israel, Oct. 19 (UPI) — Turkey’s high-profile rift with its erstwhile strategic ally Israel has deepened with reports that Ankara is ready to sue the Jewish state if it fails to supply 10 unmanned aerial vehicles ordered in 2005.

    Under the $180 million contract, Israel Aerospace Industries, the flagship of Israel’s defense industry, and Elbit Systems, the country’s leading electronics specialist, were expected to deliver four of the Heron UAVs in August, with the series completed by the end of October.

    But they missed the deadline. The Israelis said the delay was caused by problems in upgrading the Heron engines so that Turkish-made electro-optical payloads could be fitted to the UAVs.

    Israel Radio quoted Defense Ministry officials as saying the problem had now been solved.

    It was not clear whether deliveries had taken place. But Turkish publication Today’s Zaman quoted a senior official at the Undersecretariat for Defense Industries as saying Thursday: “Turkey plans to impose a heavy monetary penalty for the delay.

    “If this country refuses to comply with the penalty, then Turkey will head to the International Court of Commercial Arbitration.”

    The Turkish government’s hard-line position underscored the degree to which once-flourishing relations between the two countries, the leading non-Arab military powers in the eastern Mediterranean and the Levant, have deteriorated in recent months.

    In particular, a series of serious diplomatic confrontations over Israeli military actions against Palestinians in recent months, culminating in the Dec. 27-Jan.18 invasion of the Gaza Strip, effectively shattered the alliance that was formalized in a 1996 agreement.

    Trouble has been brewing ever since the Islamist-based Justice and Development Party took power in Ankara in 2002.

    The Turkish move away from Israel has accelerated under Prime Minister Recep Tayyep Erdogan, who has his eyes on restoring Turkey’s leadership role in the Muslim world following the collapse of Ankara’s bid to join the European Union.

    To restore Turkey’s status in the Muslim world, which vanished with the collapse of the Ottoman Empire after World War I, Erdogan had to shed the alliance with Israel.

    Last week NATO member Turkey abruptly excluded Israel from biannual air exercises codenamed Anatolian Eagle, in which U.S., European and Israeli forces regularly participated. The maneuvers were canceled after the United States and Italy subsequently pulled out.

    Ankara cited the delay in the Heron deliveries as one of the main reasons for snubbing Israel over the October exercises.

    The impact of the Turkish action has been heightened by international condemnation of Israel’s massive 22-day military offensive in Gaza, in which some 1,300 Palestinians, most of them civilians, were killed. Israeli fatalities totaled 13, several from friendly fire.

    Israelis feel Ankara is employing a double standard by ignoring that it conducts offensive operations against its Kurdish separatists, including incursions into northern Iraq.

    Turkey’s leading daily newspaper, Hurriyet, has suggested that the “icy new tone” in relations is not likely to ease off any time soon.

    Israelis have been aghast at the deterioration in relations with a country they thought was a close ally and friend. Their concern has been deepened by an upswing in Ankara’s relations withSyria, one of Israel’s main Arab foes, in recent weeks.

    In April, Turkey conducted military exercises with Syria, a country with which it almost went to war in the late 1990s.

    If the Turks decide to take legal action against Israeli defense companies over the Heron issue, relations will undoubtedly be aggravated further. It would also likely mean the end of substantial Israeli arms sales to Turkey.

    According Israeli media reports, the largely state-run defense industries acknowledge that the volume of exports to Turkey has been diminishing in the last couple of years.

    U.S. and European companies, particularly Italian, have been moving in to replace Israeli companies.

    As the crisis has deepened, Israeli defense sources have indicated that the Jewish state might seek to retaliate against Turkey, possibly by cutting off the sale of advanced weapons systems.

    Source:  www.upi.com, Oct. 19, 2009

  • Human Rights Council endorses Goldstone report

    Human Rights Council endorses Goldstone report
    Saturday 17th October, 2009Human Rights Council endorses Goldstone report

    Big News Network.com     Saturday 17th October, 2009

    Home/

    The Human Rights Council on Friday strongly condemned a host of Israeli measures in the occupied Palestinian territory and called on both sides to implement the recommendations of a United Nations commission that found evidence that Israel and the Palestinians committed serious war crimes in the three-week Gaza war nine months ago.

    The commission, led by Justice Richard Goldstone, recommended that the Security Council require Israel and the relevant Palestinian authorities to launch appropriate independent probes into the alleged crimes, monitor their compliance, and refer the matter to the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) if these did not take place.

    In a resolution, adopted by 25 votes in favour, six against, and 11 abstentions, the Council recommended that the General Assembly consider the Goldstone report during the main part of its current session, requested Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to submit a report on the implementation of its recommendations to the Council in March, and condemned Israel’s refusal to cooperate with the commission.

    The Goldstone report concluded that, while the Israeli Government sought to portray its operations as a response to rocket attacks in the exercise of its right to self defence, the Israeli plan had been directed, at least in part, at the people of Gaza as a whole.

    It highlighted the treatment of many civilians detained or killed while trying to surrender as one manifestation of the way in which the effective rules of engagement, standard operating procedures and instructions to the troops on the ground appeared to have been framed to create an environment in which due regard for civilian lives and basic human dignity was replaced with a disregard for basic international humanitarian law.

    The destruction of food supply installations, water sanitation systems, concrete factories and residential houses had been the result of a deliberate and systematic policy by the Israeli armed forces and not because those objects had presented a military threat, it said.

    It also found that Palestinian armed groups caused terror within Israel’s civilian population through the launch of thousands of rockets and mortars into Israel since April 2001, determining that both sides may thus have committed serious war crimes and possible crimes against humanity.

    Much of Friday’s resolution was devoted to other Israeli activities, particularly in Jerusalem, including condemnation of limits to Palestinian access to properties and holy sites based on national origin, religion, sex, age or other grounds, calling this a grave violation of the Palestinian people’s civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights.

    It condemned recent Israeli violations of human rights in occupied East Jerusalem, particularly the confiscation of lands and properties, the demolishing of houses, the construction and expansion of settlements, the continuing construction of the separation Wall built in part on land Israel occupied in the 1967 war, and the continuous digging and excavation works in and around Al-Aqsa mosque and its vicinity.

    The Council demanded that Israel allow Palestinian citizens and worshippers unhindered access to their properties and religious sites in the occupied Palestinian territory, cease immediately all digging and excavations beneath and around the mosque, and refrain from any acts may endanger the structure or change the nature of Christian and Islamic holy sites.

    It requested that UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay report periodically on Israel’s implementation of its human rights obligations in and around East Jerusalem.
  • How Turkey was lost

    How Turkey was lost

    Sunday, October 18, 2009

    “Turkey is lost and we’d better make our peace with this devastating fact.” (Jerusalem Post)

    jplogo

    Column One: How Turkey was lost
    Oct. 15, 2009


    Caroline Glick    , THE JERUSALEM POST


    Once the apotheosis of a pro-Western, dependable Muslim democracy, this week Turkey officially left the Western alliance and became a full member of the Iranian axis.

    It isn’t that Ankara’s behavior changed fundamentally in recent days. There is nothing new in its massive hostility toward Israel and its effusive solicitousness toward the likes of Syria and Hamas. Since the Islamist AKP party first won control over the Turkish government in the 2002 elections, led by AKP chairman Recip Tayyip Erdogan, the Turks have incrementally and inexorably moved the formerly pro-Western Muslim democracy into the radical Islamist camp populated by the likes of Iran, Syria, Hizbullah, al-Qaida and Hamas.
    What made Turkey’s behavior this week different from its behavior in recent months and years is that its attacks were concentrated, unequivocal and undeniable for everyone outside of Israel’s scandalously imbecilic and flagellant media.
    Until this week, both Israel and the US were quick to make excuses for Ankara. When in 2003 the AKP-dominated Turkish parliament prohibited US forces from invading Iraq through Kurdistan, the US blamed itself. Rather than get angry at Turkey, the Bush administration argued that its senior officials had played the diplomatic game poorly.
    In February 2006, when Erdogan became the first international figure to host Hamas leaders on an official state visit after the jihadist group won the Palestinian elections, Jerusalem sought to explain away his diplomatic aggression. Israeli leaders claimed that Erdogan’s red carpet treatment for mass murderers who seek the physical destruction of Israel was not due to any inherent hostility on the part of the AKP regime toward Israel. Rather, it was argued that Ankara simply supported democracy and that the AKP, as a formerly outlawed Islamist party, felt an affinity toward Hamas as a Muslim underdog.

    Jerusalem made similar excuses for Ankara when during the 2006 war with Hizbullah Turkey turned a blind eye to Iranian weapons convoys to Lebanon that traversed Turkey; when Turkey sided with Hamas against Israel during Operation Cast Lead, and called among other things for Israel to be expelled from the UN; and when Erdogan caused a diplomatic incident this past January by castigating President Shimon Peres during a joint appearance at the Davos conference. So, too, Turkey’s open support for Iran’s nuclear weapons program and its galloping trade with Teheran and Damascus, as well as its embrace of al-Qaida financiers have elicited nothing more than grumbles from Israel and America.

    Initially, this week Israel sought to continue its policy of making excuses for Turkish aggression against it. On Sunday, after Turkey disinvited the IAF from the Anatolian Eagle joint air exercise with Turkey and NATO, senior officials like Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon and opposition leader Tzipi Livni tried to make light of the incident, claiming that Turkey remains Israel’s strategic ally.

    But Turkey wasted no time in making fools of them. On Monday, 11 Turkish government ministers descended on Syria to sign a pile of cooperation agreements with Iran’s Arab lackey. The Foreign Ministry didn’t even have a chance to write apologetic talking points explaining that brazen move before Syria announced it was entering a military alliance with Turkey and would be holding a joint military exercise with the Turkish military. Speechless in the wake of Turkey’s move to hold military maneuvers with its enemy just two days after it canceled joint training with Israel, Jerusalem could think of no mitigating explanation for the move.

    Tuesday was characterized by escalating verbal assaults on the Jewish state. First Erdogan renewed his libelous allegations that Israel deliberately killed children in Gaza. Then he called on Turks to learn how to make money like Jews do.

    Erdogan’s anti-Israel and anti-Semitic blows were followed on Tuesday evening by Turkey’s government-controlled TRT1 television network’s launch of a new prime-time series portraying IDF soldiers as baby- and little girl-killers who force Palestinian women to deliver stillborn babies at roadblocks and line up groups of Palestinians against walls to execute them by firing squad.

    The TRT1 broadcast forced Israel’s hand. Late on Tuesday, the Foreign Ministry announced it was launching an official protest with the Turkish Embassy. Unfortunately, it was unclear who would be coming to the Foreign Ministry to receive the demarche, since Turkey hasn’t had an ambassador in Israel for three weeks.

    Turkey’s break with the West; its decisive rupture with Israel and its opposition to the US in Iraq and Iran was predictable. Militant Islam of the AKP variety has been enjoying growing popularity and support throughout Turkey for many years. The endemic corruption of Turkey’s traditional secular leaders increased the Islamists’ popularity. Given this domestic Turkish reality, it is possible that Erdogan and his fellow Islamists’ rise to power was simply a matter of time.

    But even if the AKP’s rise to power was eminently predictable, its ability to consolidate its control over just about every organ of governance in Turkey as well as what was once a thriving free press, and change completely Turkey’s strategic posture in just seven years was far from inevitable. For these accomplishments the AKP owes a debt of gratitude to both the Bush and Obama administrations, as well as to the EU.

    The Bush administration ignored the warnings of secular Turkish leaders in the country’s media, military and diplomatic corps that Erdogan was a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Rather than pay attention to his past attempts to undermine Turkey’s secular, pro-Western character and treat him with a modicum of suspicion, after the AKP electoral victory in 2002 the Bush administration upheld the AKP and Erdogan as paragons of Islamist moderation and proof positive that the US and the West have no problem with political Islam. Erdogan’s softly peddled but remorselessly consolidated Islamism was embraced by senior American officials intent on reducing democracy to a synonym for elections rather than acknowledging that democracy is only meaningful as a system of laws and practices that engender liberal egalitarianism.

    In a very real sense, the Bush administration’s willingness to be taken in by Erdogan paved the way for its decision in 2005 to pressure Israel to allow Hamas to participate in the Palestinian elections and to coerce Egypt into allowing the Muslim Brotherhood to participate in its parliamentary poll.

    In Turkey itself, the administration’s enthusiastic embrace of the AKP meant that Erdogan encountered no Western opposition to his moves to end press freedom in Turkey; purge the Turkish military of its secular leaders and end its constitutional mandate to preserve Turkey’s secular character; intimidate and disenfranchise secular business leaders and diplomats; and stack the Turkish courts with Islamists. That is, in the name of its support for its water-downed definition of democracy, the US facilitated Erdogan’s subversion of all the Turkish institutions that enabled liberal norms to be maintained and kept Turkey in the Western alliance.

    As for the Obama administration, since entering office in January it has abandoned US support for democracy activists throughout the world, in favor of a policy of pure appeasement of US adversaries at the expense of US allies. In keeping with this policy, President Barack Obama paid a preening visit to Ankara where he effectively endorsed the Islamization of Turkish foreign policy that has moved the NATO member into the arms of Teheran’s mullahs. Taken together, the actions of the Bush and Obama White Houses have demoralized Westernized Turks, who now believe that their country is doomed to descend into the depths of Islamist extremism. As many see it, if they wish to remain in Turkey, their only recourse is to join the Islamist camp and add their voices to the rising chorus of anti-Americanism and anti-Semitism sweeping the country.

    Then there is the EU. For years Brussels has been stringing Turkey along, promising that if it enacts sufficient human rights reforms, the 80-million strong Muslim country will be permitted to join Europe. But far from inducing more liberal behavior on the part of Turkey, those supposedly enlightened reforms have paved the way for the Islamist ascendance in the country. By forcing Turkey to curb its military’s role as the guarantor of Turkish secularism, the EU took away the secularists’ last line of defense against the rising tide of the AKP. By forcing Turkey to treat its political prisoners humanely and cancel the death penalty, the EU eroded the secularists’ moral claim to leadership and weakened their ability to effectively combat both Kurdish and Islamist terror.

    At the same time, by consistently refusing to permit Turkey to join the EU, despite Ankara’s moves to placate its political correctness, Brussels discredited still further Turkey’s secularists. When after all their self-defeating and self-abasing reforms, Europe still rejected them, the Turks needed to find a way to restore their wounded honor. The most natural means of doing so was for the Turks writ large to simply turn their backs on Europe and move toward their Muslim brethren.

    For its part, as the lone Jewish state that belongs to no alliance, Israel had no ability to shape internal developments in Turkey. But still, Turkey’s decision to betray the West holds general lessons for Israel and for the free world as a whole. These lessons should be learned and applied moving forward not only to Turkey, but to a whole host of regimes and sub-national groups in the region and throughout the world.

    In the first instance it is crucial for policy-makers to recognize that change is the only permanent feature of the human condition. A country’s presence in the Western camp today is no guarantee that it will remain there in the future. Whether a regime is democratic or authoritarian or somewhere in the middle, domestic conditions and trends play major roles in determining its strategic posture over time. This is just as true for Turkey as it is for the US, for Iran and for Sweden and Egypt.

    The loss of Turkey shows that countries can and do change.     The best way to influence that change is to remain true to one’s friends, even if those friends are imperfect. Only by strengthening those who share one’s country’s norms and interests – rather than its procedures and rhetoric – can governments exert constructive influence on internal changes in other states and societies.

    Moreover, it is only by being willing to recognize what makes an ally an ally and an adversary an adversary that the West will adopt policies that leave it more secure in the long run. A military-controlled Turkish democracy that barred Islamists from political power was more desirable than a popularly elected AKP regime that has moved Turkey into the Iranian axis.

    So, too, a corrupt Western-dependent regime in Afghanistan is more desirable than a Taliban-al-Qaida terror state. Likewise an unstable, weakened mullocracy in Iran challenged by a well-funded, liberal opposition is preferable to a strong, stable mullocracy that has successfully repressed its internationally isolated liberal rivals.


    Turkey is lost and we’d better make our peace with this devastating fact. But if we learn its lessons, we can craft policies that check the dangers that Turkey projects and prepare for the day when Turkey may decide that it wishes to return to the Western fold.

    caroline@carolineglick.com

    Posted by Cem Ryan, Ph.D. at 1:05 AM