Category: Israel

  • Turkish PM prepares to meet with Hamas

    Turkish PM prepares to meet with Hamas

    Turkish PM prepares to meet with terrorist group in Gaza Strip

    BY: Adam Kredo

    April 4, 2013 8:59 am

    Turkey's Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh / AP
    Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh / AP

    Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan is preparing to meet the Hamas government in Gaza, a move that could further inflame regional tensions.

    Preparations for the visit come as Secretary of State John Kerry returns to the Middle East this weekend to patch up relations between Turkey and Israel. Kerry will spend Saturday visiting Israel, the West Bank, and Turkey as he seeks to find common ground between skeptical Middle East leaders, according to reports.

    Erdogan’s trip will follow a tenuous diplomatic breakthrough between the Islamist Turkish prime minister and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who recently apologized to Erdogan for a deadly 2010 incident between the two nations that claimed the lives of eight Turks.

    It remains unclear just how much headway Kerry will be able to make given Erdogan’s hesitance to embrace Israel fully and back away from his support for Iran and Hamas, according regional experts.

    Erdogan has long acted as one of Hamas’s top cheerleaders, leading the charge to legitimize the terrorist group. The relationship blossomed long before the deadly 2010 flotilla raid harmed relations between Turkey and Israel.

    “This certainly didn’t start with the flotilla,” said David Pollock, a former Middle East adviser at the State Department. “It goes back not only longer, but deeper because support for Hamas is not just against Israel but is in line with Erdogan’s overall Muslim Brotherhood orientation, his Islamic orientation.”

    “The question that I would ask is not only why does Erdogan support Hamas against Israel but also support Hamas against the Palestinian Authority and [PA President] Mahmoud Abbas,” said Pollock, who currently serves as a senior fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

    The PA has opposed Erdogan’s planned trip to Israel, claiming it will only “deepen divisions among the Palestinians,” according to regional media reports.

    Erdogan announced he would visit Gaza and Hamas after Netanyahu offered his apology, leading State Department spokesman Patrick Ventrell to express “deep concern” during a press briefing on March 27.

    Erdogan, recently dubbed by President Barack Obama as one of his top five international friends, is attempting to consolidate power by appealing to all sides, experts said.

    “He tries to play both sides,” Pollock said. “He patched things up supposedly with Netanyahu on Obama’s recent visit [to Israel], but he continues to show support for Hamas. It’s possible in his mind he actually believes Hamas can be brought around to accept peace with Israel, but if he does, it isn’t true. There’s a real contradiction here.”

    Erdogan has said he is Hamas’ champion, even claiming in the past that he wants to “represent Hamas on international platforms.”

    The Turkish prime minister remains committed to engaging Hamas at every opportunity despite its ongoing terrorist activities.

    “We should not be squeezing them into the corner,” he said in a 2009 speech before the European Union.

    Erdogan has even vowed to personally escort any flotilla that seeks to break Israel’s naval blockade of the Gaza Strip—a promise that was made well after the deadly 2010 incident.

    Hamas leaders also view Erdogan as a top ally.

    Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh named his grandson after Erdogan so that the Turkish leader’s name “reverberated on every tongue” in the Gaza Strip, according to a 2010 report in Today’s Zaman.

    Erdogan and Hamas have rallied around their opposition to Israel.

    Erdogan has dubbed Israeli military operations against Hamas fighters “state terror.”

    When Israel launched its 2008 military incursion into Gaza to combat ongoing terrorist rocket attacks, Erdogan described it as “an act of disrespect toward Turkey.”

    “The crucial break point for Erdogan in this area was not the flotilla, but the Gaza war in December of ’08,” said Pollock. “That was the turning point. He took it very personally.”

    Hamas attacks on Israel are justified in Erdogan’s view.

    “I do not think that Hamas is a terrorist organization,” he said in April 2010, according to the Hurriyet Daily News. “I said the same thing to the United States. I am still of the same opinion. They are Palestinians in resistance, fighting for their own land.”

    Erdogan’s recent bid to soften tensions with Israel are aimed at boosting his own image, according to Tony Badran, a research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD).

    “Turkish officials are of the belief that, ‘We are going act as a mediator that is going to lead the [peace] process,’” Badran said. “That’s how they’re putting it out. He’s trying to raise the profile of Turkey as a mediator once again, specifically using the Palestinians as a platform”

    The United States has been left with few diplomatic options given the regional climate.

    “Realistically, we have to deal with this guy,” said Pollock. “He’s in charge of a very, very important country for the region and for us. I think he has his mishegas [craziness], but he’s demonstrated that he can be quite pragmatic toward us and even toward Israel. We have to make the best of not a great situation.”

    This entry was posted in Middle East and tagged Hamas, Israel, John Kerry, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Turkey. Bookmark the permalink.

    via Turkish PM prepares to meet with Hamas | Washington Free Beacon.

  • Turkey and Israel: A ‘what next?’ mindset

    Turkey and Israel: A ‘what next?’ mindset

    Turkey and Israel: A ‘what next?’ mindset

    By CAN KASAPOGLU

    At this point, the critical question is how to turn the forthcoming strategic dialogue into strategic cooperation.

    ShowImage
    Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan. Photo: REUTERS/Stringer
    Following the early signs of rapprochement between Turkey and Israel, analysts on both sides focused on why and how this was happening.

    Meanwhile, many columnists voiced their opinions about who should take credit for this critical development; some praised the Turkish foreign policy that succeeded in making Israel apologize, others praised Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu for his strategic wisdom, and of course US President Barack Obama for his excellent mediation skills. There were even academics who discussed whether the Israeli government did or did not exactly apologize. Although these issues might be very attractive to read about in foreign policy columns, they don’t make much sense at all in the “Hobbesian real world of the Middle East” which is “nasty and brutish” indeed.

    Instead of all endless “why, how, and what happened exactly” debates, this paper prefers to focus on the vital question of “what to do next, and how to accomplish it.”

    From Détente to strategic dialogue: Following “the apology and the positive response,” now we have a détente in Turkish- Israeli relations that offers a cautious optimism for the future. The first and foremost requirement should be turning this détente into a strategic dialogue.

    Having political figures from both countries photographed shaking hands would just be a PR effort. Instead, we, the Turks and the Israelis, right away need our experts to talk openly about Syrian chemical and biological agents’ locations, Assad’s ballistic missiles’ combat-readiness, and trajectory of the Syrian civil war. Likewise, a rise in tourist exchange would be nice in order to overcome mutual distrust in people-to-people relations. However, more urgently, we need our think-tanks setting forums for brain-storming about Iran’s military trends and nuclear program.

    In sum, we need a comprehensive strategic dialogue to compensate for the times days of deterioration in Turkish-Israeli relations. As the author of this op-ed has stated, when the crisis between the two nations culminated in the flotilla incident, “Bouazizi was still alive in Tunisia, Ankara and Damascus were holding joint cabinet meetings, and Iranian officials hadn’t threatened Turkey due to NATO assets on Turkish soil.” In other words, while we were having problems in our marriage, the neighborhood was only as dangerous as usual; but now everywhere is on fire and we have really serious issues to handle.

    From strategic dialogue to cooperation Upon a comprehensive strategic dialogue on key issues of Turkish and Israeli national security agendas, decision-makers of both sides would need to develop a robust cooperation to confront the drastically worsening landscape of regional threat.

    As PM Netanyahu pointed out immediately after he initiated the US-brokered rapprochement, the most critical strategic priority would be Syria’s prolonged civil war. Within this context, Turkey and Israel have to get ready to secure the Baathist tyranny’s chemical and allegedly biological weapons arsenal along with other strategic weapons systems in case of an uncontrolled regime collapse. Furthermore, we also need to carefully watch for any mass transfer of game-changing weapon systems in asymmetric conflicts, such as man portable air defense systems (MANPADS), and antitank guided missiles (ATGM) into the hands of non-state groups that might target Turkey or Israel. In a moment of irrational shock, Assad or members of the elite surrounding him might attempt to ignite a regional war by provoking Turkish or Israeli administrations. In this case, the two nations need to be prepared to act in coordination, to nip the threat in the bud.

    At this point, the critical question is how to turn the forthcoming strategic dialogue into strategic cooperation. While everyone recalls the strategic partnership in the 1990s between Turkey and Israel, during the years of deterioration of their relationship the author of this op-ed has tried to point out the presence of another cooperation model in Turkish- Israeli relations, namely, the peripheral pact signed in 1958. This model was narrowly-designed to cover specifically determined military-political affairs, and was handled within a limited community of top decision makers. Although the current rapprochement is an overt development, we should also take the two countries’ domestic political constraints into consideration. Israel has just formed a new government with the participation of right-wing and centrist figures that excluded the ultra- Orthodox. On Turkey’s end, municipal, parliamentary and presidential elections will take place only in two-a-half years, although constitution debates are ongoing. Moreover, both Israel’s apology and Turkey’s positive response are “security-oriented” to a large extent, and the two states will have to deal with very critical threats.

    Who would say no to some extra benefits Although the US-brokered restoration is taking place out of national security urgencies on both sides, Turkish- Israeli relations have always had the potential to produce momentous results. The first prospective development might be a come-back in military ties. As the relations normalize, frozen military deals can be gradually revived. In that sense, Turkey’s ongoing efforts in promoting missile defense capabilities, drone warfare and armor modernization would be attractive to the Israeli defense industry. Moreover, the two countries can restart naval and air force drills and Turkey might drop its veto on NATO-Israeli cooperation, as things get better. More importantly, effective energy cooperation in the Eastern Mediterranean would a bright idea, especially when the Greek Cypriots are swamped with their banking crisis and corrupt governance; Turkey and Israel can work on an alternative energy corridor that would be much more beneficial.

    In the long run, if everything goes even better than expected, the special relations between Turkey and Azerbaijan, and Israel’s close defense and intelligence cooperation with Baku can be enhanced to prompt a trilateral partnership to counterbalance the Iranians’ aggressive agenda.

    In sum, the most important bilateral ties of the Middle East, relations between the only two democracies of this dangerous region, might be on the eve of a major restoration. The crucial track would be driving this prospect into a strategic dialogue, and then an effective cooperation. However, at this point we should keep an eye on Palestinian affairs and Lebanon, where anyone who is uncomfortable with Turkish-Israeli partnership might try to provoke an Israeli military action, and thereby, a Turkish diplomatic reaction. If Turkish and Israeli officials want to keep their rapprochement safe, they should remember that on one hand there are the likes of Obama, who is happy with how things are going so far. Nevertheless there are some others who are already starting to go mad to see the Turks and the Israelis acting in coordination in Syria.

    The writer, who holds a Ph.D. from the Turkish War College, served as a post-doctoral fellow for the BESA Center at Bar-Ilan University. He is currently a research fellow at the Istanbul based Turkish think-tank EDAM.

  • Turkey rises again as a leading resort destination for Israelis

    Turkey rises again as a leading resort destination for Israelis

    Turkey rises again as a leading resort destination for Israelis

    Turkish airline and charter companies have ramped up their number of flights to and from Israel and are preparing to expand service to resort destinations.

    By Zohar Blumenkrantz | Apr.03, 2013 | 3:05 AM | 1

    904529138

    An Antalya resort. Photo by David Bachar

    THIS STORY IS BY

    Zohar Blumenkrantz

    RELATED TAGS

    Israel business news

    Israel Turkey

    RELATED ARTICLES

    Israeli, Turkish officials to meet April 12 for talks over compensation to flotilla victims’ families

    By Haaretz | Apr.03,2013 | 3:05 AM | 30

    Interest among Israelis in vacation getaways to Turkey more than quadrupled during Passover week, sparked by a thaw in nearly three years of chilly relations between Jerusalem and Ankara, according to the Travelist website.

    Turkish airline and charter companies have ramped up their number of flights to and from Israel and are preparing to expand service to resort destinations besides the traditionally popular Antalya, including Dalaman, Bodrum and Marmaris.

    On Sunday, the eve of the last day of Passover, three Turkish charter flights left Ben-Gurion International Airport for Antalya, in addition to the two regular weekly charter flights on Sundays and Thursdays. Turkish charter operators, including Onur Air, Corendon Airlines and Freebird Airlines, are running 25 flights to Antalya from last Sunday until next Wednesday.

    “Around 13,000 people have expressed interest in vacationing in Antalya, but due to the early stage of the thaw between Israel and Turkey, they’re still worried about booking,” said Travelist CEO Zion Madmon.

    “In terms of interest expressed in vacation destinations, Antalya rose from 12th place to second place after Barcelona and ahead of Berlin, Prague, Paris and Rhodes. In terms of bookings, Antalya rose to fifth place, a 250% jump from last year and similar to Rhodes.”

    According to Shai Pardo, chief executive of KTA International, which represents Turkish charter operators in Israel, “I’m pleased with the news, as is Israel’s entire airline and tourism industry. I hope the normalization of diplomatic relations between Israel and Turkey will restore normal tourism relations.”

    Pardo is gearing up to add flights to holiday destinations Israelis once frequented besides Antalya. “Most travelers during the Passover period will be Jewish, but trips are also in the cards for the Arab community during their Muslim holiday,” he said.

    The number of passengers traveling between Israel and Turkey rose 58.6% to 85,200 in January and February compared with the same period last year, according to the Israel Airports Authority. In 2012, 687,100 passengers flew between Ben-Gurion and Turkey, 18% more than in 2011.

    Meanwhile, the Shin Bet security service is revisiting its policy for safeguarding Israeli airlines in Turkey following Arkia’s request to reinstate flights to Antalya. This began before the normalization was declared.Israeli airlines stopped flying to Turkey amid plummeting demand following the Mavi Marmara flotilla incident in 2010 and differences between the two countries over security arrangements.

    via Turkey rises again as a leading resort destination for Israelis – Business – Israel News | Haaretz Daily Newspaper.

  • Feiglin: Turkey should apologize for ‘Struma’

    Feiglin: Turkey should apologize for ‘Struma’

    Likud MK says Ankara towed and abandoned ship headed to Palestine, which resulted in death of 800 Jewish refugees in 1942.

    ShowImage

    The only extant photo of the Struma Photo: Courtesy Turkey must apologize for sinking a ship and killing nearly 800 Jews in 1942, MK Moshe Feiglin (Likud) said over a week after Israel apologized to Turkey for the 2010 raid of the Mavi Marmara.

    Feiglin recounted in a Facebook post the tragic story of the ship filled with Jews hoping to immigrate to pre-state Israel.

    The merchant vessel Struma left the Romanian port of Constanta in December 1941 at the initiative of the New Zionist Organization and the Betar Zionist youth movement. Its 781 passengers hoped to sail to Mandatory Palestine despite British-imposed Jewish immigration quotas, and escape the fascist regime of Romanian dictator Ion Antonescu.

    The ship docked in Istanbul on December 16, 1941, due to engine failure. Waiting at the port, the Struma’s passengers learned the British would not give them visas to enter Mandatory Palestine and that they could not disembark in Turkey.

    After a 10-week impasse between British and Turkish diplomats over the refugees, during which the Jewish community of Istanbul provided them with food, the Struma was towed into the Black Sea. The vessel was abandoned about 16 kilometers from the shore. On February 24, 1942, the Soviet Submarine Shch-213 torpedoed the ship, which sank quickly.

    The only survivor of the Struma’s sinking was a 19-year-old refugee, David Stoliar. The ship’s wreck has yet to be found.

    “This was the greatest tragedy in the history of ha’apala [illegal Jewish immigration to mandatory Palestine],” Feiglin wrote. “On the Turks’ giant peninsula, known as Asia Minor, a real continent, they could not find a permanent place of refuge for the refugees of fascism. The Turkish expelled the immigrants to their death.”

    Still, Feiglin concluded that Israel does not need Turkey’s apology or money.

    “The Jewish people have a special talent – they remember,” he wrote.

    via Feiglin: Turkey should apologize for ‘Struma’ | JPost | Israel News.

  • A Turkey-Israel Opening

    A Turkey-Israel Opening

    By SOLI OZEL and CHARLES A. KUPCHAN

    During his recent visit to Israel, President Barack Obama pulled off a major breakthrough in relations between Israel and Turkey. After forging very close ties during the 1990s, Jerusalem and Ankara have of late gone their separate ways. The estrangement peaked as a result of Israel’s 2010 interdiction of the Mavi Marmara, a Turkish ship that was attempting to break the blockade of the Gaza Strip. The Israeli operation resulted in the death of nine activists on board the vessel. The Turkish government was incensed, and an Istanbul court went on to indict four Israeli commanders allegedly responsible for the mission.

    On March 22, Obama succeeded in orchestrating a phone call from Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, to his Turkish counterpart, Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Netanyahu apologized for the loss of life on the Mavi Marmara, a gesture that sets the stage for the repair of relations between the two countries.

    This breakthrough, however, is only a tentative beginning; the rupture between Israel and Turkey runs deep. Unless Netanyahu’s apology is followed by a robust action plan for rekindling cooperation between the two countries, the current opening will prove nothing more than a fleeting flirtation.

    For the better part of a decade, Turkey and Israel have been growing apart politically. Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party has Islamist leanings; confrontation with Israel is part of its popular appeal. The A.K.P. caters to a more conservative and religious cross-section of the Turkish electorate than the secular governments that preceded it. Indeed, Erdogan has undermined the political strength of Turkey’s traditional power base: the business elite and the military. The Turkish military has long had strong ties to Israel’s security establishment, meaning that its diminished domestic influence has weakened one of the main institutional linkages between Turkey and Israel.

    Meanwhile, Israeli politics has been undergoing its own transformation. Netanyahu has presided over a rightward shift in the Israeli electorate, producing governments committed to expanding Israeli settlements on the West Bank. By diminishing the prospects for a two-state solution, this stance has alienated the Turkish government as well as its electoral base. Iran’s nuclear program and the turmoil arising from the Arab Awakening have contributed to a siege mentality among many Israelis, weakening moderates who lament Israel’s growing international isolation.

    With Turkish and Israeli politics heading in opposite directions, a meaningful and lasting repair of relations will be an uphill battle. Especially when it comes to the peace process and the fate of the Palestinians, Ankara and Jerusalem are miles apart. Turning back the clock is impossible; the traditional Turkish and Israeli constituencies in favor of strong ties are today too weak. Instead, a new partnership must be built from the ground up.

    The new partnership should rest on three pillars, all of which entail concrete acts of cooperation.

    First, Turkey and Israel should closely coordinate their efforts to contain the conflict in Syria and facilitate the prompt downfall of the Assad regime. Ankara and Jerusalem should share intelligence, team up to prevent arms flows to Hezbollah and other extremist groups, and work together to aid the Syrian opposition.

    Over the horizon, Israel has a strong interest in securing a post-Assad Syria in which Turkey enjoys broad sway. The likely alternatives are chaos or a regime under the influence of radical forces. In the meantime, Israeli willingness to host Syrian refugees would improve its standing throughout the region.

    Second, Turkey and Israel should further deepen their economic linkages, nurturing new constituencies in favor of a lasting rapprochement. Even since the Mavi Marmara incident, trade and investment between the two countries have continued to expand, a clear sign that private sectors on both sides are hungry for more commerce. Flights between Turkey and Israel are increasing in number. Jerusalem has also broached with Ankara a proposal to build an underwater pipeline from new Israeli gas fields in the Mediterranean to Turkey, affording Israel access to Europe’s lucrative energy market. Such joint projects would provide a firmer societal foundation for political reconciliation.

    Third, Turkey and Israel, with support from the United States and the European Union, should launch a regional forum to address urgent issues of common concern, such as the violence in Syria, its implications for Lebanon and Iraq, and Iran’s nuclear program. Egypt should be at the table, and drawing Cairo into this forum would help anchor the country’s new leadership in regularized regional engagement. Israeli movement on the Palestinian peace process would help immeasurably in improving the prospects for constructive dialogue.

    Progress on these three fronts is urgent. Netanyahu and Erdogan are both taking political risks by reaching out to each other. Their bold stroke may come to naught unless it is followed up by demonstrable cooperation between their two countries.

    Charles Kupchan is a professor of international affairs at Georgetown University and a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. Soli Ozel is a lecturer at Kadir Has University and a columnist for the newspaper Haberturk.

    A version of this op-ed appeared in print on April 2, 2013, in The International Herald Tribune.

    via A Turkey-Israel Opening – NYTimes.com.

  • More on the “apology” to Turkey

    More on the “apology” to Turkey

    More on the “apology” to Turkey

    Posted on 03/31/2013 by Meryl Yourish

    Lee Smith says that it wasn’t President Obama who got what he wanted. It was Bibi.

    According to Obama’s senior advisers quoted in the New York Times, the president “prodded” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to apologize to Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, with Obama “raising the importance of a makeup phone call every day he was in Jerusalem.” Netanyahu’s apology, according to the Washington Post, was “bowing to a long-standing Turkish demand.”

    The reality is somewhat different than the official administration account. Jerusalem has long been looking to mend relations with its onetime strategic ally in Ankara. Contrary to popular narrative, it was Erdogan who was intransigent—not Netanyahu. Nor was Obama the prime mover here, “prodding” the Israeli prime minister to do his bidding. If anything, it was Netanyahu who used the commander in chief as something like a blunt instrument to force Erdogan to accept the same deal that his government had first put on the table at least 18 months prior: Israel would apologize; it would pay compensation; but it would not, as Erdogan had demanded, end the maritime blockade of the strip.

    From Netanyahu’s perspective, it’s all to the good that Obama is getting the credit for the reconciliation. Bibi got what he wanted from Erdogan and gave Obama a big trophy to put on his shelf. The Turkish premier, despite his bluster, has little choice but to swallow it, and the American president now owes Bibi a favor. Netanyahu—often denigrated as a clumsy politician and preachy ideologue—is in fact a much more adroit statesman than he is typically believed to be.

    There is a lot of anger against Netanyahu for “apologizing” to Turkey. They cite stories like this, where the families of the terrorists killed on the Marvelous Marbles insist that they will not drop their lawsuit against the Israelis. Or the billboards in Turkey that thank Erdogan for “defeating” Israel. But Israel was not defeated, and her enemies are not emboldened. Saying it doesn’t make it so.

    Erdogan wanted a full apology in which Israel took blame for killing Turkish citizens. He didn’t get it. Erdogan wanted Israel to completely lift the Gaza blockade. He didn’t get it. Erdogan wanted Israel to pay millions of dollars in compensation directly to the victims’ families. He didn’t get it.

    This was not a win for Erdogan. It is a win for Netanyahu, and a win for Israel. Normalizing relations with Turkey gets one more thing out of the way during a very dangerous time for Israel. The Syrian war is threatening to run over all of its borders, not just the ones with Arab nations. Israel has set up a field hospital on its border with Syria.

    Here’s Lee Smith’s conclusion:

    What Obama truly deserves credit for—and it’s no small thing—is realizing that an ally in whom he’d invested so much confidence was essentially a blowhard. Moreover, he saw that Israel, with whom he’d had contentious relations, was an ally he could count on. And that’s a very big win in Netanyahu’s column.

    I’m sticking with him and Barry Rubin on this issue. It’s a thorn out of Israel’s side, using the time-tested “I’m sorry if what I said offended you” non-apology apology. I can live with it.

    via More on the “apology” to Turkey | Yourish.com.