Category: Jordan

  • Can Turkey show Arab states the way to a brighter future?

    Can Turkey show Arab states the way to a brighter future?

    By Marco Vicenzino, who provides geo-political risk analysis and regular commentary for global media outlets and is director of Global Strategy Project (THE GUARDIAN, 12/12/10):

    Although Palestinian survival has been largely sustained by Arab countries, it is the Turkish government of Recep Tayyip Erdogan that has emerged as the Palestinians’ most resolute spokesman. By backing its rhetoric with diplomatic muscle, Turkey most recently influenced Brazil and Argentina to recognise an independent Palestine. Other Latin American countries will soon follow. In addition, Turkey is actively harnessing international support to end the Israeli blockade of Gaza.

    Despite general public sympathy for the plight of Palestinians, Turks are not united on ways of showing this support. Secular Turks allege that religiously inspired NGOs, with government encouragement, exploit the Palestinian cause to promote and strengthen themselves domestically and abroad. The recent flotilla fiasco off Gaza provides a prime example.

    It is common in the Middle East to attribute Arabs’ misfortunes to western colonialism and nearly four centuries of Ottoman rule. While significant antipathy toward the west persists, there has been a considerable shift in Arab public opinion toward Turkey in recent years. Turkey is increasingly looked upon by Arabs as “what we should be”.

    It has garnered enormous respect for its achievements and growing influence in the region. Although a majority Sunni state, Turkey thus far has been able to rise above the Sunni-Shia divide evident in many Arab and Muslim-majority states – shrewdly converting it into valuable political and diplomatic capital.

    After several false dawns, the Arab street remains largely cynical and frustrated. While pride in ancestors’ achievements provides some comfort, it is usually overwhelmed by current realities.

    Few if any leaders provide inspiration. Slow strides in Iraq seemed destined to be followed by greater slowness and fewer strides. Despite transparent elections, Palestinian infighting undermines real hope. After decades of martial law, ambiguity surrounding Egypt’s succession hangs like a dagger over its future. Assad’s fiddling with free markets and tight grip in Syria provides no vision or certainty for the next generation. Considerable progress in Jordan is difficult to replicate beyond its borders as its ability to influence others is limited by internal challenges and regional realities. Despite apparent progress, Lebanon remains a fragile powder-keg that could explode at any moment. The resource-rich pre-emerging market of Libya remains subject to the whims of an ageing autocrat whose stability is questioned clandestinely at home and openly abroad.

    The constantly recurrent question in western policy circles is whether Turkey can serve as a model for Arab states.

    While Turkey can serve as an inspiration and provide useful lessons, it cannot be a model. The unique dynamics and historical context within which the modern Turkish republic developed cannot be replicated. Contemporary Turkey is still evolving democratically. Internal power struggles, the Kurdish issue and the broader path to reform are just some reminders of the arduous road ahead. The government must strike a balance. With enormous challenges at home, it must avoid overreach abroad.

    With the overwhelming majority of Arab populations under the age of 30 confronting a bleak future, a demographic timebomb is ticking in the region. This further underscores the need for Turkey’s leadership to encourage its private sector to seize the initiative in the Middle East and unleash its potential. By creating opportunities it can help relieve regional pressures and contribute to a soft landing.

    Change in the broader Middle East will occur most effectively through an evolutionary process marked primarily by economic growth and not imposition of external designs. Gradually, over time, the potential for further reforms will increase. When needed, Turkey’s politicians should provide a gentle touch but leave it to its businessmen to produce results. After all, Turkey’s most effective ambassadors come from its private sector.

    For four centuries ending with the first world war, major decisions dictating the course of Arab history were largely made from Istanbul. History will not repeat itself. However, after nearly a century of absence, the return of real Turkish influence to Arab capitals, in a more benign form, must be welcomed. It is also fundamentally essential to the gradual transformation of a region whose instability poses a constant threat to global order.

    via Can Turkey show Arab states the way to a brighter future? « Tribuna Libre.

  • Works underway for formation of Turkey-Syria-Jordan-Lebanon Council

    Works underway for formation of Turkey-Syria-Jordan-Lebanon Council

    Davutoglu said, they discussed the 2nd High-Level Strategic Cooperation meeting to be held on December 21.

    Friday, 10 December 2010 10:15

    76179Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said on Thursday that they were working on establishment of Turkey-Syria-Jordan-Lebanon Strategic Cooperation Council mechanism.

    Davutoglu and Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Mualem held a press conference in Ankara.

    Davutoglu said that Turkish-Syrian relations were improving and the two countries had a full cooperation, stating that they discussed the 2nd High-Level Strategic Cooperation meeting to be held on December 21. Recalling that 51 agreements were signed between Turkey and Syria last year, Davutoglu said that the 2nd meeting would focus on these agreements and projects.

    “We believe this relationship is the one which will change fate of the region,” he said.

    Davutoglu said that they also discussed Lebanon and Iraq in their meeting. “Iraq’s stability is of great importance for Turkey and Syria,” he said.

    Turkey and Syria shared similar perspectives in regard to regional issues, he said.

    Syrian Foreign Minister Mualem said that they were pleased with Turkey’s role in the region.

    Mualem said that Syria hoped that its strategic cooperation with Turkey would be improved.

    Syria was determined to exert more efforts for settlement of stability in Lebanon, Mualem said.

    In regard to Israel’s new settlement construction, Mualem said that Syria would keep assisting Palestine.

    AA

  • Arabs Look to Istanbul

    Arabs Look to Istanbul

    Turkey and the Arab World

    Turkey is not wavering in the slightest from its pro-European course. Nevertheless, as a trading nation with a dynamic economy that is the living proof of the fact that Islam, a secular political landscape and a parliamentary democracy are indeed compatible, it has in recent times rediscovered its Arab neighbours. Rainer Hermann reports

    Assad and Erdogan Istanbul AP Bulent Kilic
    One of the success stories of Turkey's new foreign policy is Syria. In 1998, the two neighbours stood on the brink of war. Today, their economic and political ties are close

    There was one good thing about Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s recent visit to Lebanon: although it increased tension prior to the publication of the indictment by the special international tribunal into the murder of Rafiq Hariri, it also demonstrated that in the Arab world, Iran can now really only be sure of the support of Shiites. In Beirut and during his trip to South Lebanon, Ahmadinejad was almost exclusively cheered on by Shiites; Sunni Muslims in the Arab world, on the other hand, viewed his visit to Lebanon with considerable disquiet.

    There are many reasons why Iran’s influence in the Arab world has passed its zenith. One of them is the circumstances that surrounded Ahmadinejad’s re-election in June 2009 and the bloody crackdown on protests. Another is the growing influence of Turkey.

    Last July, Khalil Shikaki’s Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research discovered that 43 percent of all Palestinians consider Turkey to be their most important foreign policy ally, ahead of Egypt at 13 percent and Iran at only 6 percent. Support for Turkey in the West Bank and in Gaza is virtually the same.

    In Lebanon, Ahmadinejad did not succeed in reversing this trend. Shortly before his arrival in Beirut, the Turkish prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, was back in Damascus for another meeting with President Bashar al-Assad. In the race for the post of prime minister in Iraq, both these men support the secular Shiite Iyad Allawi, while the powers that be in Iran prefer Nouri Maliki.

    In addition to the matter of Iran, Erdogan and Assad spoke about opportunities for reviving the peace process. Assad made it clear that indirect talks with Israel could only be restarted if Turkey were to act as mediator.

    Turkey is a “success story” in the Middle East

    Up until ten years ago, Turkey was not a player in the Middle East, despite the fact that it shares borders with Syria, Iraq and Iran. It was a quiet neighbour. Today, the state that succeeded the Ottoman Empire is a popular go-between and trading partner. For the states and societies of the Middle East, Turkey – with its dynamic economy and practical evidence that Islam, a secular political landscape and parliamentary democracy are indeed compatible – is a “success story”; it has become a “soft power”.

    Erdogan Hamad Bin Khalifa Assad Sarko AP Michel Euler
    Up until ten years ago, Turkey was not a player in the Middle East, despite the fact that it shares borders with Syria, Iraq and Iran. Today, the state that succeeded the Ottoman Empire is a popular go-between and trading partner, writes Rainer Hermann

    There are heated debates in the West as to whether Turkey is currently just rediscovering the Middle East or whether it is actually returning to it and – if this is indeed the case – whether it is abandoning its foreign policy orientation towards the West. These questions were recently addressed at a conference in Istanbul organised by the Sabanci University, the German Institute for International and Security Affairs and the Robert Bosch Foundation.

    One of the conclusions reached at the event was that although Turkey has adopted a new, active foreign policy, it has not abandoned its pro-European, pro-Western course. Nor has it shifted the main lines of its foreign policy. The policy of opening up towards its neighbours in the Middle East is much more a matter of diversifying its diplomacy and increasing prosperity in Turkey by tapping into new sales markets.

    Foreign policy in the service of trading interests

    Turkey’s former foreign policy was based on security considerations and the priority of territorial integrity. Its new foreign policy, on the other hand, is in the service of Turkey the trading nation and seeks to guarantee security and safeguard borders by increasing prosperity. Sükrü Elekdag, one of the best-known ambassadors in the country’s old diplomatic guard, often liked to say that Turkey always had to be ready for “two-and-a-half wars”, i.e. wars against Greece, Syria and the PKK.

    Aussenminister Istanbul AP Ibrahim Usta
    New diplomacy: Turkey's current foreign minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, has formulated a "policy of no problems" towards all neighbours, the aim of which is to maximize cross-border trade

    In sharp contrast to this, Turkey’s current foreign minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, has formulated a “policy of no problems” towards all neighbours, the aim of which is to maximize cross-border trade. With the exception of Armenia, this policy has worked so far.

    Turkish foreign policy is more than just classic diplomacy, it is trade policy. It is above all Turkey’s new, up-and-coming middle class – the backbone of the ruling AKP – that is benefitting from the new, economy-based foreign policy of Turkey the trading nation.

    The industrial cities of Anatolia, which have been dubbed the “Anatolian tigers”, are eyeing as yet unexploited market opportunities in neighbouring countries. While their entrepreneurs are also trading with Europe, they are increasingly focussing their efforts on the Middle East because of Europe’s restrictive Schengen visa policy, which also hits entrepreneurs and investors. This is why they support the visa-free zone which Turkey has established with Syria, Lebanon and Jordan.

    One of the success stories of Turkey’s new foreign policy is Syria. In 1998, the two neighbours stood on the brink of war. Today, their economic and political ties are close. The Turkish-Syrian rapprochement went hand in hand with a cooling of relations with Israel. This process had already begun under Erdogan’s predecessor, the left-wing nationalist Bülent Ecevit, who accused Israel of “genocide” against the Palestinians. That being said, Erdogan visited Israel as recently as 2005; two years later, Israeli President Shimon Peres addressed the Turkish parliament.

    Pro Hamas Demo in Gaza TRFlagge dpa
    Khalil Shikaki's Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research discovered that 43 percent of all Palestinians consider Turkey to be their most important foreign policy ally, ahead of Egypt at 13 percent and Iran at only 6 percent. Pictured: a Turkish national flag at a Hamas rally

    Turkey’s policy towards Israel and the Palestinians is very different to that of the EU. While both advocate a peaceful resolution to the conflict and a two-state solution, they are talking to different players. Turkey accuses European diplomacy of ignoring reality because it is only talking to Fatah and boycotting Hamas. The Turkish reasoning is that there cannot be a peaceful solution without the involvement of Hamas. This is why Turkey is trying to pull Hamas into the political “mainstream”.

    The differences of opinion between Turkey and the West are particularly blatant when it comes to Iran. While the West is toughening its sanctions against Iran, Turkey is developing its trade with the Islamic Republic.

    Westerwelle Davutoglu AP Kerim Okten
    Although Turkey has adopted a new, active foreign policy, it has not abandoned its pro-European, pro-Western course – that is the conclusion reached at at a conference in Istanbul organised by the Sabanci University, the German Institute for International and Security Affairs and the Robert Bosch Foundation. Pictured: the Foreign Ministers of Germany and Turkey, Guido Westerwelle and ahmet Davutoglu

    Last June, Turkey voted against harsher sanctions in the UN Security Council. Unlike the West, Turkey believes that the only way to normalise Iran is to normalise relations, which involves trade and diplomacy. Turkey is familiar with the kind of bazaar mentality that is needed for negotiations with Iran. For fear of destabilizing the region, neither the Ottoman Empire nor the Turkish Republic has ever supported rebellions in Iran. For centuries, the safeguarding of a regional balance of power has been more important than the pursuance of a foreign policy based on ideology. This is why Turkey’s sympathy with the dissident “green” movement is only modest.

    Just like the EU, Turkey only plays a secondary role in the Middle East behind the United States. At the end of the Cold War, however, it correctly identified the shifting of the tectonic plates in world politics and now, as a modern, self-confident, trading nation, wants to grasp the opportunities that are arising. Turkey still has its sights set on Europe. But the door to Europe remains locked and so this newly self-confident nation is pursuing its own interests in the Middle East and elsewhere.

    Rainer Hermann

    © Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung/Qantara.de 2010

    Translated from the German by Aingeal Flanagan

    Editor: Lewis Gropp/Qantara.de

    ,

  • Turkey and Russia: Cleaning up the Mess in the Middle East

    Turkey and Russia: Cleaning up the Mess in the Middle East

    There has been no magic hand guiding Turkey and Russia as they form the axis of a new political formation. Turkey, once the ‘sick man of Europe’, is now ‘the only healthy man of Europe’, notes Eric Walberg.

    The neocon plan to transform the Middle East and Central Asia into a pliant client of the US empire and its only-democracy-in-the-Middle-East is now facing a very different playing field. Not only are the wars against the Palestinians, Afghans and Iraqis floundering, but they have set in motion unforeseen moves by all the regional players.

    The empire faces a resurgent Turkey, heir to the Ottomans, who governed a largely peaceful Middle East for half a millennium. As part of a dynamic diplomatic outreach under the Justice and Development Party (AKP), Turkey re-established the Caliphate visa-free tradition with Albania, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya and Syria last year. In February Turkish Culture and Tourism Minister Ertugrul Gunay offered to do likewise with Egypt. There is “a great new plan of creating a Middle East Union as a regional equivalent of the European Union” with Turkey, fresh from a resounding constitutional referendum win by the AKP, writes Israel Shamir.

    Turkey also established a strategic partnership with Russia during the past two years, with a visa-free regime and ambitious trade and investment plans (denominated in rubles and lira), including the construction of new pipelines and nuclear energy facilities.

    Just as Turkey is heir to the Ottomans, Russia is heir to the Byzantines, who ruled a largely peaceful Middle East for close to a millennium before the Turks. Together, Russia and Turkey have far more justification as Middle Eastern “hegemons” than the British-American 20th century usurpers, and they are doing something about it.

    In a delicious irony, invasions by the US and Israel in the Middle East and Eurasia have not cowed the countries affected, but emboldened them to work together, creating the basis for a new alignment of forces, including Russia, Turkey, Syria and Iran.

    Syria, Turkey and Iran are united not only by tradition, faith, resistance to US-Israeli plans, but by their common need to fight Kurdish separatists, who have been supported by both the US and Israel. Their economic cooperation is growing by leaps and bounds. Adding Russia to the mix constitutes a like-minded, strong regional force encompassing the full socio-political spectrum, from Sunni and Shia Muslim, Christian, even Jewish, to secular traditions.

    This is the natural regional geopolitical logic, not the artificial one imposed over the past 150 years by the British and now US empires. Just as the Crusaders came to wreak havoc a millennium ago, forcing locals to unite to expel the invaders, so today’s Crusaders have set in motion the forces of their own demise.

    Turkey’s bold move with Brazil to defuse the West’s stand-off with Iran caught the world’s imagination in May. Its defiance of Israel after the Israeli attack on the Peace Flotilla trying to break the siege of Gaza in June made it the darling of the Arab world.

    Russia has its own, less spectacular contributions to these, the most burning issues in the Middle East today. There are problems for Russia. Its crippled economy and weakened military give it pause in anything that might provoke the world superpower. Its elites are divided on how far to pursuit accommodation with the US. The tragedies of Afghanistan and Chechnya and fears arising from the impasse in most of the “stans” continue to plague Russia’s relations with the Muslim Middle East.

    Since the departure of Soviet forces from Egypt in 1972, Russia has not officially had a strong presence in the Middle East. Since the mid- 1980s, it saw a million-odd Russians emigrate to Israel, who like immigrants anywhere, are anxious to prove their devotion and are on the whole unwilling to give up land in any two-state solution for Palestine. As Anatol Sharansky quipped to Bill Clinton after he emigrated, “I come from one of the biggest countries in the world to one of the smallest. You want me to cut it in half. No, thank you.” Russia now has its very own well-funded Israel Lobby; many Russians are dual Israeli citizens, enjoying a visa-free regime with Israel.

    Then there is Russia’s equivocal stance on the stand-off between the West and Iran. Russia cooperates with Iran on nuclear energy, but has concerns about Iran’s nuclear intentions, supporting Security Council sanctions and cancelling the S-300 missile deal it signed with Iran in 2005. It is also increasing its support for US efforts in Afghanistan. Many commentators conclude that these are signs that the Russian leadership under President Dmitri Medvedev is caving in to Washington, backtracking on the more anti-imperial policy of Putin. “They showed that they are not reliable,” criticised Iranian Defence Minister Ahmad Vahidi.

    Russia is fence-sitting on this tricky dilemma. It is also siding, so far, with the US and the EU in refusing to include Turkey and Brazil in the negotiations over Iran’s nuclear programme. “The Non-Aligned countries in general, and Iran in particular, have interpreted the Russian vote as the will on the part of a great power to prevent emerging powers from attaining the energy independence they need for their economic development. And it will be difficult to make them forget this Russian faux pas,” argues Thierry Meyssan at voltairenet.org.

    Whatever the truth is there, the cooperation with Iran and now Turkey, Syria and Egypt on developing peaceful nuclear power, and the recent agreement to sell Syria advanced P-800 cruise missiles show Russia is hardly the plaything of the US and Israel in Middle East issues. Israel is furious over the missile sale to Syria, and last week threatened to sell “strategic, tie-breaking weapons” to “areas of strategic importance” to Russia in revenge. On both Iran and Syria, Russia’s moves suggest it is trying to calm volatile situations that could explode.

    There are other reasons to see Russia as a possible Middle East powerbroker. The millions of Russian Jews who moved to Israel are not necessarily a Lieberman-like Achilles Heel for Russia. A third of them are scornfully dismissed as not sufficiently kosher and could be a serious problem for a state that is founded solely on racial purity. Many have returned to Russia or managed to move on to greener pastures. Already, such prominent rightwing politicians as Moshe Arens, political patron of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, are considering a one-state solution. Perhaps these Russian immigrants will produce a Frederik de Klerk to re-enact the dismantling of South African apartheid.

    Russia holds another intriguing key to peace in the Middle East. Zionism from the start was a secular socialist movement, with religious conservative Jews strongly opposed, a situation that continues even today, despite the defection of many under blandishments from the likes of Ben Gurion and Netanyahu. Like the Palestinians, True Torah Jews don’t recognise the “Jewish state”.

    But wait! There is a legitimate Jewish state, a secular one set up in 1928 in Birobidjan Russia, in accordance with Soviet secular nationalities policies. There is nothing stopping the entire population of Israeli Jews, orthodox and secular alike, from decamping to this Jewish homeland, blessed with abundant raw materials, Golda Meir’s “a land without a people for a people without a land”. It has taken on a new lease on life since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Russian President Dmitri Medvedev made an unprecedented visit this summer, the first ever of a Russian (or Soviet) leader and pointed out the strong Russian state support it has as a Jewish homeland where Yiddish, the secular language of European Jews (not sacred Hebrew), is the state language.

    There has been no magic hand guiding Turkey and Russia as they form the axis of a new political formation. Rather it is the resilience of Islam in the face of Western onslaught, plus — surprisingly — a page from the history of Soviet secular national self-determination. Turkey, once the “sick man of Europe”, is now “the only healthy man of Europe”, Turkish President Abdullah Gul was told at the UN Millennium Goals Summit last week, positioning it along with the Russian, and friends Iranian and Syrian to clean up the mess created by the British empire and its “democratic” offspring, the US and Israel.

    While US and Israeli strategists continue to pore over mad schemes to invade Iran, Russian and Turkish leaders plan to increase trade and development in the Middle East, including nuclear power. From a Middle Eastern point of view, Russia’s eagerness to build power stations in Iran, Turkey, Syria and Egypt shows a desire to help accelerate the economic development that Westerners have long denied the Middle East — other than Israel — for so long. This includes Lebanon where Stroitransgaz and Gazprom will transit Syrian gas until Beirut can overcome Israeli-imposed obstacles to the exploitation of its large reserves offshore.

    Russia in its own way, like its ally Turkey, has placed itself as a go-between in the most urgent problems facing the Middle East — Palestine and Iran. “Peace in the Middle East holds the key to a peaceful and stable future in the world,” Gul told the UN Millennium Goals Summit — in English. The world now watches to see if their efforts will bear fruit.

    Eric Walberg writes for Egypt’s Al-Ahram Weekly. You can reach him at .

    , 30.09.2010

  • Four in Middle East to open free trade

    Four in Middle East to open free trade

    Davud Oglu Leads The WayNEW YORK, Sept. 27 (UPI) — Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and Turkey had agreed to move forward on a regional free-trade zone.

    Davutoglu told reporters in New York that a summit meeting in Istanbul would likely concluded with an announcement that the four-country trade agreement, including “visa-free” travel for the region, would begin in January.

    “We will declare at that summit that this economic zone is in effect,” Davutoglu said after meeting with foreign ministers of Jordan, Syria and Lebanon at U.N. Headquarters, Today’s Zaman reported.

    Turkey and Lebanon have already entered into a formal free-trade and visa-free arrangement with a deal signed this summer.

    But the deal may well be a first step towards a Middle East version of the European Union, Today’s Zaman reported.

    Turkey has been openly pursuing membership to the EU since 2005, but the application process has moved slowly.

    In New York, Davutoglu said, “The EU is of course a good model of cooperation and we can look into it. But this cooperation, after all, is a product of our history.”

    https://www.upi.com/Business_News/2010/09/27/Four-in-Middle-East-to-open-free-trade/UPI-79101285623196/, Sept. 27, 2010


  • Struggle isn’t about Israel’s existence

    Struggle isn’t about Israel’s existence

    st augustine logoBy RON ESTES

    In an Aug. 1 column in The Record, Henry Hirschman presented an interesting point of view: the perspective of Israel and its diaspora supporters of the root cause of the struggle in the Middle East. That point of view is important to help put dissenting views in sharper focus.

    Hirschman notes the oft-repeated Israeli claim that Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East: an important issue to some U.S. lawmakers on whom Israel depends for U.S aid. Overlooked are Lebanon and Turkey, both secular democracies, and Jordan, a constitutional monarchy, modeled after that of Britain.

    Hirschman also makes the case that Israel is hard put to spend resources on infrastructure, education and other pursuits, when it must defend itself against those who threaten its very existence, and proclaim the destruction of Israel as their life’s mission. In fact, the crux of his column is that the struggle in Palestine is not about land: It is about Israel’s existence.

    One might ask, who threatens that existence?

    In March 2002, the Arab League offered a comprehensive peace plan to recognize the State of Israel, establish full relations between Israel and all 22 Arab states, including Palestine, in return for Israel’s withdrawal from occupied Arab territories, a just and agreed upon solution to the Palestinian refugee question, and the establishment of a sovereign Palestinian state, with East Jerusalem as its capital. The offer was repeated in April 2007, and included all 57 states of the entire Muslim world. Israel didn’t respond.

    In August 1993, in an exchange of letters with Palestinian President Yasser Arafat, Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin insisted on changes to the Palestinian Charter. Arafat responded declaring the PLO recognized the State of Israel, is committed to the peace process, and said the PLO renounces terrorism and other acts of violence, and will discipline violators. On April 24 1996, the Palestinian National Council voted 504 to 54, with 14 abstentions, to change the articles in their charter to conform with the letters exchanged between the P.L.O. and the Government of Israel in 1993.

    Another Israeli enemy, Hamas, in Gaza, is also described as determined to destroy Israel. But In February this year, Hamas leader Khaled Mesha’al acknowledged Israel as a reality, adding, “formal recognition will only be considered when a Palestinian state has been created.” In 2006, Mesha’al stated Jews have a covenant with God that is to be respected and protected. In 2009, Mesha’al, said Hamas would accept the creation of a Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders of Israel.

    Israel has not faced an Arab nation’s armed forces in 37 years. The PLO hasn’t endorsed a terrorist act since 1993. The Lebanese Shia militant organization, Hezbollah, attacked Israel in Lebanon in 1996, and again in 2006 to resist Israeli occupations. There has only been one suicide bomber from Gaza since Hamas took over in 2007.

    One could speculate whether this constitutes an effective campaign to drive Israel into the sea.

    It is true that Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005, but put in place a blockade considered by UN human rights organizations as the worst violation of human rights in the world. Israel contends the blockade is essential for its national security. In retaliation, Hamas sporadically fires rockets into Israel. Best estimates are that there are approximately 1,000 members in the Hamas military wing. That represents .0006 percent of the Gaza population: hardly a threat to the existence of Israel, with the fourth or fifth most powerful armed forces in the world.

    This struggle is not about Israel’s existence, it is about land.
    “There is no Zionism, colonization, or Jewish State without the eviction of the Arabs and the expropriation of their lands.”
    — Ariel Sharon

    *

    St. Augustine resident Ron Estes served 25 years as an operations officer in the CIA Clandestine Service. Six of those years were spent in Middle East operations.

    https://www.staugustine.com/story/opinion/2010/08/29/guest-column-struggle-isnt-about-israels-existence/16224558007/, August 29, 2010