Category: Middle East

  • Marching for Hamas

    Marching for Hamas

    by Denis MacEoin
    Jerusalem Post
    January 22, 2009

    https://www.meforum.org/2056/marching-for-hamas

    Send RSS

    Hamas is a bully aided by a bigger bully, Iran. And, just as strident and threatening human bullies get away with their aggression so long as no one calls their bluff, so Hamas has been getting away with murder and torture because the UN and many states won’t call its two-faced self-portrayal as the victim in the piece. In the struggle to take over Gaza from Fatah, it went on a rampage that killed hundreds of Palestinians. Even during this most recent assault, in early January, it executed Fatah members for violating their house arrest. A few weeks ago, Hamas determined to hurt yet more of its compatriots by introducing Islamic hudud punishments to the Strip, from amputations and stonings, to crucifixions and hangings.

    Like all bullies, it likes to taunt its victims. It did just that for years after Israel left Gaza, firing rockets every day into towns like Sderot or Netivot. No one who has dismissed these rockets as harmless homemade toys has ever had the guts to spend a few weeks in Sderot, scurrying from shelter to shelter. And, oh yes, it also built up an arsenal (supplied by Iran) of Grad missiles that certainly aren’t anybody’s toys.

    Like all bullies, Hamas likes to make boastful threats. Its 1988 Covenant is replete with them. It threatens to destroy the State of Israel by violence and violence alone. It says it will never accept the work of conferences or peacemakers, and only jihad will solve its problems. Meanwhile, the Palestinians see their lives drained away in a culture that embraces death and martyrdom, their children exposed to a steady diet of military training and preparation for violent death as suicide bombers.

    Even if the Palestinians want peace, Hamas won’t let them have it, because Hamas knows best, and jihad “is the only solution.” Don’t believe me, read the Covenant. It likes nothing better than killing Jews, and the bigger bully in Teheran thinks that’s a damn fine thing too. No one says a word, because the UN is dominated by the Islamic states, and the Western governments know where the oil comes from, and nobody likes the Jews much anyway. The people calling for the end of Israel while they march on the streets of London and Dublin aren’t all Muslims by any means.

    There can be no greater indication of this boastfulness than what has happened in recent days. Having taken a heavy battering from Israel, Hamas now proclaims a “great victory,” and its supporters dance in the ruined streets of Gaza, drunk on their own demagoguery. For all its bluster, Hamas, like all bullies, is a coward at heart. Watch those films of Hamas gunmen dragging screaming children along with them to act as human shields, watch how they fire from behind the little ones, knowing no Israeli soldier will fire back. And even as they put their own children’s lives at risk, they shout to high heaven that the Israelis are Nazis and the Jews are child-killers. This blatant pornography spreads through the Western media, and people never once ask “what does this look like from the other side,” because they are addicted to the comforting news that the Yids are baby-killers as they’d always known, that they do poison wells, that no Christian child is safe come Passover. Hamas has become proficient at resurrecting the blood libel, just as its fighters use the Nazi salute, just as their predecessor in the 1930s and ’40s, Haj Amin al-Husseini, conferred with Hitler about building death camps in Palestine and raised a division of SS troops in Bosnia to fight for the Reich.

    We watch The Diary of Anne Frank on television, and some of us attend Holocaust Remembrance Day events, and others pay lip service to Jewish victimhood; we like our Jews emaciated and helpless under the SS boot. But the moment real Jews stand up and show themselves the stronger for all their deaths, it awakens an atavistic fear, and people recoil from them. Jews in uniform, how unseemly. Jews beating the bully, how unheard of. Jews with their own state, what upstarts.

    IN MY home country of Ireland, we glamorize the great nationalist heroes who rebelled against the bullying forces of imperial Britain in the uprising of Easter Sunday 1916. In France, they venerate the heroes of the Resistance against the occupying forces of Nazi Germany. In Spain, they have not ceased to heap praise on those who fought against the forces of fascist bullies and lost. To stand up against an enemy bent on your destruction is everywhere counted an act of bravery. But not when it comes to Israel. In 1948 and 1967 and 1973 and 2006, Israel fought off overwhelming forces who made no secret of their plans for an imminent massacre of the Jews. But nobody now seems to care, no one lauds the courage the Israelis displayed, and no one praises the extraordinary restraint they showed in victory.

    In a bizarre reversal of all their commitment to human rights and the struggle of men and women for independence and self-determination, the European Left has chosen again and again to side with the bullies and to condemn a small nation struggling to survive in a hostile neighborhood. It is all self-contradictory: The Left supports gay rights, yet attacks the only country in the Middle East where gay rights are enshrined in law. Hamas makes death the punishment for being gay, but “we are all Hamas now.” Iran hangs gays, but it is praised as an agent of anti-imperialism, and allowed to get on with its job of stoning women and executing dissidents and members of religious minorities. If UK Premier Gordon Brown swore to wipe France from the face of the earth, he would become a pariah among nations. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad threatens to do that to Israel and is invited to speak to the UN General Assembly

    Israel guarantees civil liberties to all its citizens, Jew or Arab alike, but it is dubbed “an apartheid state”; Hamas, ever the bully, kills its opponents and denies the rest the most basic rights, but we march on behalf of Hamas. The Left prefers the bully because the bully represents a finger in the face of the establishment? Almost no one on the Left has any understanding of militant Islam. Their politics is a politics of gesture, where wearing a keffiyeh is cool but understanding its symbolism is too much effort even for intellectuals.

    I have personally had enough of it all. The whining double standards, the blatant lies, the way their leaders have forced Palestinians to suffer for 60 years because peace and compromise aren’t in their vocabulary and because they won’t settle for anything but total victory. Painful as it was, in the 1920s Ireland created a republic by compromising on the status of the North. Ireland subsequently became a prosperous country and, in due course, one of the hottest economies in the world. When the Israelis left Gaza in 2005, they left state-of-the-art greenhouses to form the basis for a thriving economy. Hamas destroyed them to the last pane of glass. Why? Because they had been Jewish greenhouses.

    The writer is the incoming editor of the leading international journal Middle East Quarterly and the author of a blog entitled ‘A Liberal Defence of Israel.’

    Related Topics: Arab-Israel conflict & diplomacy, Palestinians

  • Israel, Turkey and the politics of genocide

    Israel, Turkey and the politics of genocide

    Globe and Mail Update

    President Obama — I love saying those words — has momentarily united the world. Almost. Among the exceptions, though barely noticed by the mainstream media, is the estrangement of Turkey and Israel, previously staunch allies in the turbulent Middle East.

    At first blush, this alliance may seem counterintuitive, but in fact it makes good strategic sense for both countries. Israel gets a warm working relationship with one of the largest Muslim countries in the world, while enriching Israel’s all-important industrial-military complex. Less than two months ago, for instance, came the news of a deal worth $140-million to Israeli firms to upgrade Turkey’s air force. In the hard-boiled, realpolitik terms that determine Israel’s strategies, it’s a no-brainer. Almost.

    In return, Turkey gets military, economic and diplomatic benefits. But it also gets something less tangible, something that matters deeply for reasons hard for outsiders to grasp. As part of the Faustian bargain between the two countries, a succession of Israeli governments of all stripes has adamantly refused to recognize that in 1915 the Turkish government was responsible for launching a genocide against its Armenian minority. Some 2.5-million Armenian women, men and children were successfully killed.

    I should make clear that this Israeli position is not held casually. On the contrary. Over the years Israelis, with a few notably courageous exceptions, have actually worked against attempts to safeguard the memory of the Armenian genocide. (The bible on this issue is the excellent book by an Israeli, Yair Auron, called The Banality of Denial: Israel and the Armenian Genocide, 2003.)

    For many, this may well be a pretty esoteric sidebar to the world’s many crises. But readers need to understand that every Turkish government for almost a century now has passionately denied that a genocide took place at all. Yet the vast majority of disinterested scholars of genocide have publicly affirmed that it was indeed a genocide, one of the small number in the 20th century (with the Holocaust and Rwanda) that have incontestably met the definition set down in the UN’s 1948 Genocide Convention.

    For Armenians in the Western world, even after 94 years, nothing is more important than persuading other governments to recognize this. For Turkish authorities, even after 94 years, nothing is more important than preventing that recognition. In that pursuit, Israel has been perhaps Turkey’s most powerful ally. After all, if the keepers of the memory of the Holocaust don’t acknowledge 1915, why should anyone else?

    But the Israeli-Turkish bargain goes well beyond Israel. Not only is Israel, of all the unlikely states in the world, a genocide denier, but also many established Jewish organizations in other countries, especially the United States, have followed suit. In the United States, those who argue that denying the Holocaust is psychologically tantamount to a second holocaust have taken the lead in pressuring presidents and Congress against recognizing the reality of 1915. Resolutions calling for recognition are regularly pushed by American-Armenians and their many supporters. Jewish groups regularly lead the opposition. Some believe that members of these groups in fact understand perfectly well the rights and wrongs of the case. But a mindset that backs any and all Israeli government initiatives trumps all else. And successfully. Repeated attempts in Congress to pass this resolution has failed, even though the list of nations that now recognizes the Armenian genocide has grown steadily and, thanks to Stephen Harper, now includes Canada.

    It is this rather unseemly, if not unholy, Israeli-Turkish deal that has been among the many victims of the latest Israeli attack on Gaza. Whether the Israelis anticipated it or not, the Turkish government turned against its erstwhile ally with a vengeance, pulling few punches. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Erdogan accused Israel of “perpetrating inhuman actions which would bring it to self-destruction. Allah will sooner or later punish those who transgress the rights of innocents.” Mr. Erdogan described Israel’s attack on Gaza as “savagery” and a “crime against humanity.”

    Israel formally described this language as “unacceptable” and certain Israeli media outlets have raised the stakes. The Jerusalem Post editorialized that given Turkey’s record of killing tens of thousands of Kurds in northern Iraq, “we’re not convinced that Turkey has earned the right to lecture Israelis about human rights.” Israel’s deputy foreign minister was even more pointed: “Erdogan says that genocide is taking place in Gaza. We [Israel] will then recognize the Armenian-related events as genocide.” Suddenly, genocide turns into a geopolitical pawn.

    It isn’t easy to choose a winner in the cynicism stakes here. Here’s what one Turkish columnist, Barcin Yinanc, shrewdly wrote: “When April comes, I can imagine the [Turkish] government instructing its Ambassador to Israel to mobilize the Israeli government to stop the Armenian initiatives in the U.S. Congress. I can hear some Israelis telling the Turkish Ambassador to go talk to Hamas to lobby the Congress.”

    I’m guessing some readers work on the naïve assumption that an event is deemed genocidal based on the facts of the case. Silly you. In the real world, you call it genocide if it bolsters your interests. If it doesn’t, it’s not. It’s actually the same story as with preventing genocide.

    What happens now? Candidate Obama twice pledged that he would recognize the Armenian claim of genocide. But so had candidate George W. Bush eight years earlier, until he was elected and faced the Turkish/Jewish lobby. Armenian-Americans and their backers are already pressing Mr. Obama to fulfill his pledge. With the Turkish-Israeli alliance deeply strained, the position of the leading Jewish organizations is very much in question this time. Whatever the outcome, be sure that politics, not genocide, will be the decisive factor.

    Gerald Caplan, author of The Betrayal of Africa, writes frequently on issues related to genocide.

  • Israel-Turkey diplomatic spat worsens, despite end of Gaza fighting

    Israel-Turkey diplomatic spat worsens, despite end of Gaza fighting

     

     By Barak Ravid

     

    HAARETZ.COM


    The crisis in relations between Israel and Turkey, which began when the Gaza operation began three weeks ago, is getting worse. A political source in Jerusalem said that the head of the political-security bureau at the Defense Ministry, Amos Gilad, refused to meet with Ahmet Davutoglu, the senior foreign policy adviser to Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, while the two were in Cairo last week.

    Last Thursday, Amos Gilad visited Cairo for talks with Egypt’s Omar Suleiman on a cease-fire agreement. At the time, Davutoglu, who had served as a mediator in Israel’s talks with Syria in Istanbul, was in touch with Hamas politburo chief Khaled Meshal, who is based on Damascus.

     

     

    At the start of the Gaza operation, Erdogan instructed Davutoglu to serve as a conduit between Hamas and the West and also try to involve Turkey in the cease-fire negotiations. Egypt expressed its reservations at Turkey’s involvement and refused even to allow Davutoglu to sit in on talks with senior Hamas officials in Cairo.

    But it turns out that not only Egypt refused to have exchanges with Davutoglu. So did Israel. A political source in Jerusalem said that on Thursday, when Gilad was in Cairo, the Turkish ambassador to Egypt called his Israeli counterpart, Shalom Cohen. The Turkish ambassador asked for a meeting between Davutoglu and Gilad to deliver a message from Hamas. The political source said the Turks “asked for even a five-minute meeting” and that the ambassador called back several times.

    The Turkish request was relayed to Gilad by the Israeli ambassador, but he refused to meet with Davutoglu. The Israeli political source said the reason for the refusal was the deterioration in relations between Jerusalem and Ankara, stemming from the unprecedented verbal attacks by Erdogan on Israel.

    The source added that another reason was the unwillingness to allow the Turks to intervene in the cease-fire talks and the wish to rely solely on the Egyptian channel.

    Erdogan’s attacks on Israel in recent weeks have been particularly fierce, with Prime Minister Ehud Olmert specifically targeted for what the Turkish leader called “lying to him and acting behind his back.”

    The words of the leader of the AKP, Turkey’s ruling Islamist party, were a source of anger among Turkey’s military, where there is concern that the rift would undermine the strategic ties with Israel.

  • CONF./CFP- The Turkic World, the Caucasus, and Iran, July 10-12, Yerevan

    CONF./CFP- The Turkic World, the Caucasus, and Iran, July 10-12, Yerevan

    International Conference
    The Turkic World, the Caucasus, and Iran: Civilisational Crossroads of
    Interactions
    July 10-12, 2009
    Yerevan, Armenia
    http://www.armacad.org/civilizationica

    The International Journal Iran and the Caucasus
    (; Brill: Leiden-Boston), the Department of
    Iranian Studies at Yerevan State University, the Makhtumquli Feraqi
    Centre for Turkic Studies at ARYA International University (Yerevan),
    the Association for the Study of Persianate Societies (Armenian
    Branch), in collaboration with the International Society for the Study
    of Iran and the Caucasus (ISSIC;
    http://www.armacad.org/iranocaucasica), Caucasian Centre for Iranian
    Studies (Yerevan), the Armenian-Turkmen Cooperation Centre “Partev”
    (Yerevan), and the Armenian Association for Academic Partnership and
    Support – ARMACAD (http://www.armacad.org/; Yerevan) are organising an
    international conference entitled “The Turkic World, the Caucasus, and
    Iran: Civilisational Crossroads of Interactions”.

    The Conference will be held on July 10-12, 2009.
    Venue: ARYA International University, Yerevan, Armenia.

    The region of civilisational interactions from Central Asia to Eastern
    Europe and from Southern Russia to Iran has been one of the focal
    geographical points in world history. The main cultural, political and
    civilisational players in this domain have been the Iranian and Turkic
    peoples, while the Caucasus and the Transcaucasian region with their
    cultural, ethnographical and linguistic uniqueness have served as a
    connecting link and an arena for wars and peaceful cohabitation.
    Though the main stress of the conference will be on cultures,
    histories (including archaeology, etc.), languages and the literatures
    of this vast area, presentations on modern political and regional
    issues, as well as the human ecology topics are also welcomed. The
    conference seeks to emphasise links between the Turkic world, the
    Caucasus, and Iran.

    Working languages – English and Russian.

    Abstracts (not to exceed 300 words) are to be submitted via the web
    form (http://www.armacad.org/civilizationica/abstracts.php) by
    February 20, 2009.  A brief biography, including contact details, is
    also to be included.

    Once your materials have been submitted, a confirmation letter will be
    returned. If you do not receive a confirmation e-mail within 7 days,
    then we have not received your materials. Only in this case, please
    contact: khachik.gevorgyan@yahoo.co.uk

    A notification of acceptance will be sent by March 30, 2009.

    All whose abstracts are accepted for presentation at the conference
    have to send to the Conference Organising Committee 10 Euros before
    June 10 in order to ensure their participation. This amount of money
    will be reduced from the participation fee.

    Participation Fee:

    The conference participation fee is 70 Euros and a reduced rate of 35
    Euros for postgraduate students. Participants from the Caucasus and
    Central Asia will pay 35 Euros.

    For further information do not hesitate to contact:

    Dr. Khachik Gevorgyan,
    Secretary of the Organising Committee
    khachik.gevorgyan@yahoo.co.uk

    Makhtumquli Feraqi Centre for Turkic Studies,
    Arya International University
    Shahamiryanneri street, 18/2
    Yerevan
    Armenia
    Tel: +374 (10) 44-35-85
    Fax: +374 (10) 44-23-07
    www.arya.am
    Email: arya@arminco.com

    International Organising Committee

    Prof. Dr. Garnik Asatrian (Yerevan)
    Prof. Dr. Uwe Blaesing (Leiden)
    Prof. Dr. Ralph Kautz (Vienna)
    Prof. Dr. Vladimir Livshits (Saint Petersburg)
    Prof. Dr. Levon Zekiyan (Venice)
    Prof. Dr. Said Amir Arjomand (New York)
    Prof. Dr. Murtazali Gadjiev (Makhachkala)
    Prof. Dr. Rovshan Rahmoni (Dushanbe)
    Prof. Dr. George Sanikidze (Tbilisi)
    Dr. Gulnara Aitpaeva (Bishkek)
    Dr. Behrooz Bakhtiari (Tehran)
    Dr. Habib Borjian (New York)
    Dr. Babak Rezvani (Amsterdam)
    Dr. Mher Gyulumian (Yerevan)
    Dr. Mahmoud Joneydi Ja’fari (Tehran)
    Dr. Seyyed Said Jalali (Tehran)
    Dr. Kakajan Janbekov (Ashgabat)
    Dr. Filiz Kiral (Istanbul)
    Dr. Irina Natchkebia (Tbilisi)
    Dr. Vahram Petrosian (Yerevan)
    Dr. Tamerlan Salbiev (Vladikavkaz)
    Dr. Alexander Safarian (Yerevan)

  • Gaza op strains financial ties with Turkey

    Gaza op strains financial ties with Turkey

    https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3659765,00.html

    Tensions between Jerusalem, Ankara translate into slump in outgoing tourism industry, strenuous industrial relations

    Danny Sadeh

    Published: 01.22.09, 08:10 / Israel Money

    P{margin:0;} UL{margin-bottom:0;margin-top:0;margin-right: 16; padding-right:0;} OL{margin-bottom:0;margin-top:0;margin-right: 32; padding-right:0;} H3.pHeader {margin-bottom:3px;COLOR: #192862;font-size: 16px;font-weight: bold;margin-top:0px;} P.pHeader {margin-bottom:3px;COLOR: #192862;font-size: 16px;font-weight: bold;} The recent tension between Jerusalem and Ankara, brought about by the Israeli offensive in Gaza, is beginning to take a financial toll on what was once a prolific relationship.

    Various travel agencies have reported a 70% drop in the number of vacation packages sold to Turkish destinations. Once one of the Israeli tourist favorite vacations spots, Antalya has now been “left for dead”; although some in the industry prefer to see the situation is a passing winter trend.

    Risky Business
    Fear: Turkey may pull deals with Israel  / Arie Egozi
    Defense establishment says Ankara’s growing vex with Israel’s Gaza offensive may result in canceling ongoing contracts, suspending future negotiations
    Full story

    Tourism industry official said Wednesday that the Israeli tourism to Turkey is likely to hit a slump in the immediate run, but in the long run it is more than likely to pick up. “It things remain quiet, the Israelis will go back to Turkey, it’s a very attractive destination.”

    A Foreign Ministry official gave a more caution projection: “The tourism industry is hard to predict, especially now, at winter time. We don’t know what the spring and summer may bring. Turkish tourism official who have contacted us over the last few day practically begged for the Israelis not to shun Turkey, especially Antalya. They said they did not deserve to be boycotted because of their prime minister’s statements.”

    Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan recently stated that Israel should be barred for the UN over its Gaza campaign. His remarks sparked rage in the Israeli public; even promoting some Israeli members of Facebook to form a “Ban Turkey” group. More than 1,500 people have joined it so far; and a dozen similar groups have sprouted both in Facebook and in other social networks.

    ‘War tainted relations’

    Israel’s industrial ties with Turkey spanned $3.4 billion in 2008 – a 23% increase from 2007 – with exports to Ankara coming to $1.6 billion and imports to $1.8 billion.

    Israel’s major export to Turkey is chemicals, followed by metals, machinery and electrical equipment; making Turkey Israel’s eight biggest commercial partner.

    Ari Malmud, CEO of Hogla-Kimberly’s Turkish operation told Yedioth Ahronoth that “the company’s customer service department has been getting calls inquiring whether we were a Jewish company or an Israeli firm.”

    Another importer of Turkish consumer goods said that “it seems like the Muslim merchants in Turkey are trying to make things difficult and they’re severing ties with their local Jewish contacts.

    “Everyone is laying low for a while. I hope that at the end of the day, finances can prevail over politics.”

    Advertisement

    Doron Avrahami, Israel’s commercial attaché in Turkey said that “since the ceasefire only recently took effect, it is still too early to assess whether any permanent damage has been done to the commercial relationship between the two countries.

    “We do hope everything will get back to normal, but the Gaza offensive has left a ‘bad taste’ here.”

    Navit Zomer, Udi Ezion, Itamar Eichner, Arie Egozi and Itay Smuskowitz contributed to this report

  • Where Will Turkish-Israeli Relations Go After Gaza?

    Where Will Turkish-Israeli Relations Go After Gaza?

    Where Will Turkish-Israeli Relations Go After Gaza?

    Publication: Eurasia Daily Monitor Volume: 6 Issue: 11
    January 19, 2009
    By: Saban Kardas

    As Israel’s only ally in the region, increasingly vocal criticism from Ankara and the streets of Turkey about the operations in Gaza raises questions about the future of Turkish-Israeli relations. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan had refused to talk to Israeli leaders before a ceasefire was reached. Nonetheless, in response to growing calls from across the political spectrum for breaking off ties with Israel or imposing sanctions, Erdogan said that this was out of question, stressing that Turkey could not afford the political consequences of such a decision (Anadolu Ajansi, January 17).

    Likewise, on a live TV show Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Babacan ruled out severing diplomatic relations with Israel, because such a populist move would not serve regional stability and would undermine Turkey’s mediation attempts by closing channels of communication. Nonetheless, Babacan confirmed earlier press reports that he had refused to meet Israeli Foreign Minister “Tzipi” Livni, who wanted to visit Ankara. Babacan told Livni on the phone that unless she wanted to discuss conditions for a ceasefire, “it did not make sense to pay a good-intentions visit” (www.ntvmsnbc.com, January 16). Earlier, Babacan had indirectly criticized American support for Israel, by saying, “Israel will continue its operations as long as it gets a green light from some countries” (www.kanaldhaner.com, January 15).

    Erdogan uses every opportunity to express his criticism of Israel’s occupation of Gaza and the silence of the international community. He has addressed large public gatherings, such as party meetings preceding municipal elections, which have been important forums for airing his views on Gaza. During a party congress, for instance, he questioned the silence of the international community over Israel’s disregard of numerous UN Security Council resolutions (www.cnnturk.com, January 16). Similarly, when UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon visited Ankara on Friday, Erdogan told him that Turkey had expected the UN to be more proactive (Star, January 17).

    Before his departure to Brussels on Sunday, Erdogan called on the Western leaders to demonstrate a resolute attitude toward Israel. Criticizing international efforts to reach a settlement by excluding Hamas from the negotiation table, Erdogan maintained that “Hamas is a party that won elections. The West, which has failed to respect Hamas’s democratic openings, is responsible for the current situation” (Cihan Haber Ajansi, January 18).

    When addressing the representatives of the Turkish community in Brussels, the developments in Gaza and Turkish diplomatic efforts again occupied a central place. Although he found Israel’s unilateral declaration of a ceasefire important, he said that the continuing presence of Israeli forces in Gaza was an issue of concern and asked Israel to give assurances that it would allow uninterrupted humanitarian aid. Referring to Hamas’s decision to halt its military activities, Erdogan maintained that the new situation approximated what he had sought to achieve through his earlier diplomatic initiatives (www.ntvmsnbc.com, January 18).

    Erdogan’s claim of credit for Turkey’s contributions to regional diplomacy is not baseless. Despite its critical tone toward Israel, Ankara has maintained ties with both parties to the conflict, hoping to find a peaceful solution. In addition to its own diplomatic efforts (EDM, January 5), Turkey has supported the Egyptian plan of January 6, which was also backed by France and called for an end to violence first, followed by talks on allowing access into Gaza and ensuring the security of Gaza’s borders.

    In the run up to Sunday’s Sharm el-Sheikh summit, co-hosted by Egypt and France, a Turkish delegation led by Ahmet Davutoglu shuttled between Cairo and Damascus meeting with Hamas leaders in Syria in an effort to mediate between the parties. On Friday, Turkey had offered the parties its own draft agreement for a ceasefire, which Babacan called a “solid offer.” On Saturday the Turkish delegation told reporters that parties were close to a mutual understanding on the terms of a ceasefire. On Sunday Israel and then Hamas declared a ceasefire (Anadolu Ajansi, January 17).

    President Abdullah Gul represented Turkey at the Sharm el-Sheikh summit, which was also attended by leaders of Egypt, Jordan, Germany, Spain, Britain, Italy, and the Czech Republic, as well as Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and the Secretaries General of the UN and Arab League. Gul welcomed the conclusions of the summit but asked Israel to pull out from Gaza entirely and to lift the embargo. He also emphasized the need to reach reconciliation between Palestinian factions for a sustainable peace in the region, which Turkey had advocated since the beginning of the crisis (Hurriyet, January 19).

    Although following the summit the European leaders went to Israel to a dinner hosted by Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Gul returned to Ankara. Turkish reporters speculated that Gul had not been on the invitation list and interpreted this as Israel’s grave disrespect toward Turkey (www.stargundem.com, January 18). Gul, however, dismissed these claims and maintained that the European leaders went to Israel to discuss the details of an earlier deal between Israel and the United States, which would regulate American involvement in monitoring the border crossings between Gaza and Egypt (www.ntvmsnbc.com.tr, January 18).

    Since the beginning of the crisis, Turkey has said that it was ready to send troops to the region as part of an international force to monitor either a ceasefire or patrol the border between Gaza and Egypt in order to allay Israel’s concerns about weapons smuggling. Gul told reporters that there had been no decision to for such an international force in Sharm el-Sheikh. As a matter of fact, specific arrangements for monitoring weapons traffic remained unresolved at the summit, with French President Nicolas Sarkozy pledging that the European leaders would provide Egypt and Israel with the necessary technical, military, and naval assistance.

    Gul also emphasized that Turkish-Israeli relations would continue, although Turkey would not hesitate to criticize Israel’s blatant human rights violations, which outraged the entire Turkish population. He maintained that such misguided policies were the greatest threat to Israel’s own security and noted that the Palestinian problem was the source of many problems throughout the world. He asked the incoming Obama administration to contribute to the peace process, noting that “the just and determined involvement of the United States will go a long way toward a long-term resolution of the problem” (ANKA, January 18).

    Turkey’s policy toward the Israeli invasion of Gaza continues to reverberate in its external relations. Whereas Erdogan is praised by people in Muslim countries (EDM, January 15), Ankara is criticized by Western observers who view the recent developments as potentially damaging to Turkey’s relations with the West. According to Dr. Ian Lesser, Senior Transatlantic Fellow at the German Marshall Fund, although Turkey’s initiatives are worthy of praise, by departing from “the transatlantic consensus on how to deal with Hamas,” Turkey “loses credibility as an interlocutor” (Hurriyet Daily News, January 18).

    https://jamestown.org/program/where-will-turkish-israeli-relations-go-after-gaza/