The most important development in the last Palestine & Israel war was the results of opinion polls regarding the elections to be held in Gaza and the West Bank. It was clearly understood that the Fetih Movement would lose both the Presidency and its majority in the Assembly in these elections. This situation alarmed both Palestinian President Abbas and Netanyahu.
The first step came from Abbas and postponed the elections to an uncertain date. Then Netanyahu stepped up his plan to evict Palestinians around Jerusalem from their homes. He took action to evacuate the homes of about 500 Palestinians in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood. Radical Jewish Groups also started demonstrations and riots in this neighborhood. However, they encountered resistance from the Palestinians that they never expected. Netanyahu increased his pressure without understanding the religious importance of the month of Ramadan for Muslims. Netanyahu announced on Sunday (May 9th) that the Israeli army will hold a major military exercise in the Lebanese border, the West Bank and Gaza. This was actually the first announcement of the war. The attack of Israeli security forces on the Aksa Mosque ignited the fuse of the bomb. Hamas responded with the same harshness to Netanyahu’s attempt. It announced that if the Israeli Army does not withdraw from the Holy Land, they will respond strongly. Indeed, Hamas fired more than 1000 rockets at Israeli targets overnight.
The range of Hamas Rockets varied between 70 and 100 km. Such an attack came as a surprise to Israel. The rockets that reached TelAviv have killed 5 Israelis and injured dozens so far. A great panic started within the Israeli Police. On the evening of May 11, Palestinians demonstrated in all Israeli cities. Especially in the city of Lid, the Israeli Police lost control and a state of emergency was declared.
Netanyahu claimed that Hamas would pay a huge price. Warplanes hit hundreds of targets in Gaza on May 11-12. Around 50 Palestinians have died so far. 13 of them are children and 4 of them are women.
Although Netanyahu spoke harshly, he contacted Cairo and the United Arab Emirates and offered to mediate with Hamas. Hamas, on the other hand, refused mediation offers and declared that they “do not trust the Israeli government and are ready for a great war”. The Kassam Brigades, which are the Special Military Units of Hamas, said that: “Some of their commanders were martyred in Israeli attacks and they will hit an important target every day”.
It is the first time that Israel has faced such strong Palestinian resistance. Many Zionist writers within Israel and in the US admit that “Israel fell short for the first time”.
Although Netanyahu succeeds in staying in the Government by going to early elections last years, this time he will not be able to do so. This war seems to be Netanyahu’s Final War. The Israeli people are tired of the war, with the exception of some radical groups. Especially 17-year-old youth recruited into the army complain of long military service periods. The New Generation aspires to live in peace with the Palestinian people with whom they live on the street.
Israeli and Palestinian factions, long trapped in conflict, have routinely fallen into patterns of violence. A stalemated peace process, a fragmented Palestinian political system and an Israeli government often rewarded by voters for hard-edge approaches have kept these cycles going. But since 2014, Israel and its primary Palestinian antagonist, Hamas, have had a tentative understanding over Gaza. That understanding’s shelf life, however, may be expiring.
See Israel’s Survival Strategy
What Happened
Political developments within both Israel and the Palestinian Authority are exacerbating instability in the region and increasing the risk of violence between Israel and Hamas. In late December, a new party led by a former chief of the Israel Defense Forces joined the political fray in Israel, forcing Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to find new ways to shore up his national security credentials and to defuse criticism calling his Gaza policy weak. And on Jan. 29, Prime Minister Rami Hamdallah of the Palestinian Authority resigned, marking the formal collapse of the long-moribund Hamas-Fatah unity government. The disintegration untethers Hamas from the Palestinian national government and formalizes Gaza’s de facto long-standing isolation.
Why It Matters
Two sets of forces are in play here. In Israel, various parties are jockeying for position ahead of elections in April. A new party led by retired Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz and called Israel Resilience is the most serious challenge to Netanyahu. Gantz had been sanguine about his policy positions until Jan. 29. In his first political address on that day, he revealed that his attacks on Netanyahu would focus on accusations of corruption and would allude to weaknesses on national security. Political attacks on these two topics are particularly significant because Israel faces exceptionally tense security situations in the north and the south.
In Gaza, the environment is moving increasingly away from compromise and conciliation, even though its Hamas rulers well understand how disastrous another war with Israel would be. The collapse of the Hamas-Fatah 2014 unity agreement came about largely because Hamas wasn’t willing to surrender control of key aspects of Gaza, especially security, to its Fatah rival — despite months of intense mediation by Egypt to bring about an accord. But the collapse also became fait accompli because the economic rewards of the unity deal never came through. Hamas has had to rely on trickles of aid from Qatar via Israel to maintain public services, and the U.S. aid cutoff has worsened the economy. The end of the unity agreement also blocks any future economic support from the Palestinian Authority, leaving Gazans with just the meager flow of Qatari aid. Ordinary Gazans are growing angrier at the situation, creating a boiling social cauldron pushing for more action to restore aid. But Hamas has few tools besides rockets and missiles to influence Israel and its allies — and as the streets in Gaza roil with anger, it will be increasingly disposed to use them.
Hamas has few tools besides rockets and missiles to influence Israel and its allies — and as the streets in Gaza roil with anger, it will be increasingly disposed to use them.
Further Background
Netanyahu’s ostensible right-wing allies dislike his approach to Gaza. A cease-fire in November quite nearly brought down his government after the nationalist Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman bolted from Netanyahu’s coalition in protest. That move forced the prime minister to pump up his national security credentials to stem a potentially fatal leakage of security-minded voters from the Likud Party and his allies. He has publicized military strikes in Syria and may do the same with Gaza. But those strikes may not be enough. Netanyahu may be tempted to hit high-profile targets, and that action could kick off a cycle of retaliation and violence between Israel and Syria or Gaza. Or he could take the risk of going farther afield and striking the Iraqi militias that Iran is arming with ballistic missiles.
Moreover, an escalation by Hamas ahead of Israel’s elections could play into Netanyahu’s hands. The prime minister might be pushed toward a wide-ranging operation in Gaza to stave off criticism from his right-wing allies and from Gantz’s supporters. In addition, if facing imminent indictment for corruption, Netanyahu could find political value in such a distraction ahead of polling.
Highlights Turkey and Israel’s strategic alliance in the Middle East, fostered by their shared aim to limit Iran and prevent Arab states from aligning against them, will preserve their relationship through most external shocks. Intensifying U.S. efforts to find regional allies it can rely on to contain Iran helps keep the two countries together. Turkey’s defense of Palestinian statehood will always be a caustic wedge between the two: While it provides Turkey with important credibility in the Muslim world, it conflicts with Israel’s defense strategy.
Israel and Turkey appear to be testing the waters in preparation for resuming diplomatic relations. Officials from the two countries are thought to have met in the United Arab Emirates last month to discuss improving their diplomatic ties, which have been on pause since May. Other signs also point to a rapprochement: Turkey recently sent an economic attache to Israel, and Israel recently opened an internal job listing for an ambassador to Turkey. The two countries — sometime allies, sometime enemies — are again being pushed toward reconciliation as they move to counter Iran, cope with U.S. demands and defend their positions in the Middle East.
The Big Picture
Among the countries that the United States depends upon in the Middle East, Turkey and Israel stand out as cornerstones. Though they vacillate between friendship and hostility with one another, their ties rest atop a foundation of mutually beneficial trade, which survives even the most contentious times. Since hitting a low in 2010, their relations have been slowly on the mend. In their regional balancing act, Turkey and Israel always find that strategically they have more in common than not, but they will never see the need to entirely bury the hatchet.
See Israel’s Survival StrategySee Turkey’s Resurgence The Search for Common Ground
Many strategic factors bind Turkey and Israel. They are two of the key non-Arab powers in the region and critical to its balance of power, which includes Persian Iran and Arab powers such as Saudi Arabia. They also have two of the strongest militaries in the Middle East. Turkey maintains the most powerful navy, and Israel the strongest air force. Each sees the other as too powerful to have as an enemy.
Ultimately, for Israel to protect itself in an unfriendly neighborhood, it must maintain at least a working relationship with Turkey. The alternative means contending with a big regional power while living next door to hostile Arab nations. Also, Turkey is the larger, more influential and more strategically crucial power due in large part to its location between the Mediterranean and Black seas and its status as a counterbalance to Russia, Iran and other regional heavyweights. This same strategic value came into play during the Cold War when the United States joined with Turkey and Israel to offset Soviet penetration of the Arab world.
Over the past two decades, Israel has had to adjust to Turkey’s way of building regional relationships; that method included picking fights with Israel — particularly over the treatment of the Palestinians — to gain traction with the Arab public. And for Turkey, Israel’s relationship with certain Kurdish factions — some of which it has heavily armed in the past — hits close to home and hampers its goal of weakening a potential Kurdish state. Keeping Israel close could help prevent it from arming the Kurds again.
Despite their differences, some of their regional goals overlap, especially when it comes to containing Iran’s influence. This objective plays out most clearly in the Syrian conflict, where Turkey and Israel want to direct Damascus away from Tehran and toward Ankara. While Israel is concerned primarily about the stability of the corners of Syria that affect its border, the Iranian presense there unsettles it. Much like Russia, Turkey can influence the Iranian presence but not control it. Israel also knows that Turkey, more than any other power active in Syria, is critical to ensuring that rebel groups there remain distinct from extremists.
In Lebanon, both have sought to curb Hezbollah’s influence, though they have used different means. Israel fights Hezbollah from time to time, keeping its military expansion in check. Turkey has chosen to take a nuanced and more gradual approach by supporting political and security forces opposed to Iran, counteracting Hezbollah and other proxies of Tehran.
The Economic Ties That Bind
Improved trade is perhaps the most deeply shared goal, because even in times of diplomatic rupture, import-export commerce has continued apace. Israel imports about $3 billion worth of raw materials and manufactured goods, such as cement, steel and tomatoes, from Turkey, whose current economic fragility highlights the importance of their trade relationship. For Israel, the imports help ensure that its manufacturing companies have a steady supply of materials.
Israeli arms sales to Turkey have also played a significant role in their relationship. While Turkey’s weapons industry has matured considerably over the past decade, the arms trade remains a promising area of cooperation. The energy sector, as well, could eventually become another area for collaboration. The two have been competing for natural gas exploration in the Eastern Mediterranean even as they had discussed over the past couple of years the possibility of building a pipeline between them. But the deal between Noble Energy and Israel’s Delek Drilling and the Egyptian East Gas Co. signed in late September to deliver natural gas from the Tamar and Leviathan fields in Israel to Egypt, compounded with the difficulty of building a pipeline across contested Cypriot territory, puts to rest any Israel-Turkey pipeline dreams in the near term.
The Most Recent Split
The May 2018 breakdown in ties between Israel and Turkey was just one of many periodic ruptures in their carefully balanced relationship. In December 2017, the United States decided to move its embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, aggravating the most contentious issue between Turkey and Israel: the Palestinian conflict. In May, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan accused Israel of genocide and expelled Israeli Ambassador Eitan Naeh after dozens of Palestinians were killed in unrest in Gaza driven in part by the embassy move. Caustic rhetoric from Turkey about Israel’s actions against Palestinians has been a familiar refrain under Erdogan. Turkey is seeking to be a champion of the Palestinian cause because it raises Ankara’s stature and leadership influence in the Muslim world. In his role as a patriarch of political Islam, the president is building his strongman image at home and solidifying his domestic legitimacy.
Israel is focused primarily on its security, and denying Palestinian statehood is a means of ensuring that security as well as stability. Turkey will continue to be a bit unpredictable on how far it is willing to go to ensure Palestinian rights. And Israel can withstand all manner of tough rhetoric from the Turkish government; it is used to it. But any new, outright meddling by the Turkish government in the restive Palestinian territories will be seriously troublesome. Israel is already concerned about the Turkish funding of civic and Islamic associations in east Jerusalem. That support is meant to bolster Turkey’s soft power there in its competition with the Arab states of Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Egypt.
The Role of the United States
That the U.S. embassy decision could spur the most recent Turkish-Israeli split underlines the influence the United States has on their contentious relationship. The United States had previously played a key part in bringing them together. In 2013, President Barack Obama pressured Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to apologize for the deaths of Turkish activists killed when Israel intercepted the “Gaza Freedom Flotilla” in 2010 and agree to compensate their families.
Now, the United States needs the cooperation of both and a working relationship with both, as during the Cold War, to counterbalance Iran and reduce its own burden in the region. And the pressure this time, heightened by its economic problems, is on Turkey. Despite the low tide in U.S.-Turkish relations, the United States will continue to encourage Turkey to work with Israel. At the same time, the United States and Israel are in an unusually close period in their relations, which could embolden Israel in its regional and domestic policies, knowing that America has its back. Israel has exploited this greater U.S. pressure on Turkey when dealing with Ankara and has included its own pressure on the United States to not sell the advanced F-35 jet to Ankara.
Finally, Turkey must consider the quiet Israel-Saudi Arabia rapprochement. Their cooperation, encouraged by Washington and driven by the mutual desire to contain and combat Iran, could undercut Ankara’s goal to increase its influence across northern Syria and northern Iraq. This situation naturally leaves Turkey wanting to work more closely with Israel, so it can mitigate any Saudi moves that might threaten Turkish security imperatives, such as the possibility of arming certain Kurdish groups that fight against Iran. And an improved Turkish relationship with Israel could also help alleviate some of the U.S. pressure as well.
The Road Ahead
Though most signs point to an eventual reconciliation, Turkish actions could hinder progress. Turkey is still looking for ways beyond rhetoric to reinsert itself into the Palestinian issue. Ankara’s proposal for a Gaza seaport, which would facilitate Turkish aid reaching the area, could make some headway. And Ankara will forge ahead with building up ties in east Jerusalem, hoping that Israel would prefer to have it involved there in lieu of other powers, namely Iran. But Turkey likely would only provide funding with Israel’s approval. Otherwise, the resumption of further diplomatic ties could be restricted.
But for now, the ties between Turkey and Israel will remain pragmatic, limited and businesslike, subject to the influence of events in the region. Rapprochement could open economic opportunities for Israeli companies looking to invest in and with an economically weak Turkey. The two countries can be expected to continue discussions on the future of Syria and on ways to isolate Iranian influence there. Those two issues — trade and Iran — remain at the center of their on-again, off-again relationship.
Interrogation under caution takes place as questioning of suspects continues in other affair, involving the prime minister and media mogul Arnon Mozes. ‘Investigation won’t take too long,’ says Israel police chief.
The rise of Yair Netanyahu, the 25-year-old who has the prime minister’s ear
New leaks: Netanyahu and Mozes discuss how deeply Adelson’s daily must be cut
Israeli police were barred from questioning Netanyahu, wife simultaneously Harretz reports.
Police questioned Yair Netanyahu, the son of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, for four hours on Tuesday in connection with the so-called Case 1000, involving suspicions that the Netanyahu family received perks from wealthy businessmen. Israel Police’s Lahav 433 fraud investigation unit questioned the younger Netanyahu under caution, meaning he could be considered a suspect in committing a crime.
According to a Channel 10 television report, the police asked Yair Netanyahu about money he ostensibly received from Australian billionaire James Packer, and about the latter’s relationship with his father. According to the report, Yair Netanyahu’s line of defense was expected to be that his father had no idea who gave him the funds.
Earlier on Tuesday, Arnon Mozes, publisher of the mass-circulation daily Yedioth Ahronoth, was questioned once again with respect to the second affair connected to the prime minister, dubbed Case 2000. The police previously questioned Mozes for three hours Monday, and for eight hours on Sunday. The police’s fraud unit also brought in Amos Regev, editor-in-chief of the free newspaper Israel Hayom, to give testimony in the same case.
The affair dubbed Case 2000 focuses on suspicions that Netanyahu and Mozes discussed a deal whereby Mozes’ daily would give more favorable coverage of the prime minister in return for weakening Israel Hayom as a competitor of Yedioth.
Ron Yaron, the editor of Yedioth, gave testimony Monday in the Netanyahu-Mozes affair, as part of the police’s effort to determine whether Mozes had spoken to the editor at any time, in order to enlist him in the scheme the publisher and the premier allegedly cooked up.
The police believe that if Mozes had made such a request of Yaron – even if the latter didn’t know about the conversations with Netanyahu – that would constitute proof that the deal was actually being implemented, at least on the part of Mozes.
The police did not investigate Yaron under caution because at this point they do not believe that he was involved in executing the alleged plan.
For his part, Yair Netanyahu was to be interrogated in the context of Case 1000, which involves suspicions that he and members of his family received valuable gifts and other perks from wealthy businessmen in Israel and abroad.
About a month ago Channel 10 reported that the younger Netanyahu stayed last summer in a luxurious apartment belonging to Packer, at the Royal Beach Hotel in Tel Aviv. According to the report, a few months ago Packer’s attorney in Israel, Jacob Weinroth, met with Interior Minister Arye Dery and requested that Packer be awarded permanent residency status in the country. It was also reported that the favors Packer allegedly gave Yair Netanyahu were not limited to allowing him to use the Tel Aviv apartment, but also included vacations, private flights and a stay at a luxury hotel.
On Tuesday morning, during a tour of the Bedouin town of Rahat in southern Israel, Police Commissioner Roni Alsheich spoke about the two affairs involving Prime Minister Netanyahu, and suggested that “the investigation won’t be very long.” Alsheich spoke generally about corruption among elected officials, and said of the police that, “our job is not to collect information about them or to initiate efforts that will reveal such information – our job is to eliminate corruption and to guard the state coffers.”
He added that, “information inevitably surfaces in a democratic country. Everyone talks about everyone else, so the information arrives.”
Alsheich also spoke of the police’s role vis-a-vis Attorney General Avichai Mendelblit, explaining that, “We have to be coordinated with the attorney general and to act according to his instructions. This is a subject in which the police have less freedom of action, and the real test lies in the results.”
The police commissioner also discussed the upcoming retirement of Maj. Gen. Meni Yitzhaki, head of the police investigations and intelligence division, noting that the rounds of appointments in the Israel Police are conducted in an organized fashion. He added that Yitzhaki has acceded to the request not to leave his job “before everything is over,” as Alscheich put it, saying, “He understands that it’s not proper to retire during the course of an investigation.”
Israel’s ambassador to the UK has apologized after a senior member of his staff was secretly filmed saying he wanted to “take down” Foreign Office Minister Sir Alan Duncan.
Israeli Embassy senior political officer Shai Masot made the comment in footage filmed in a London restaurant and obtained by the Mail on Sunday.
He told a reporter that Sir Alan was creating “a lot of problems”.
Ambassador Mark Regev said this was not the embassy or government’s view BBC reported.
Secret recording
The conversation involved Mr Masot and Maria Strizzolo, an aide to education minister Robert Halfon, the former political director of Conservative Friends of Israel, as well as an undercover reporter.
It was recorded in October 2016 as part of an investigation by Al Jazeera.
The BBC understands that Ms Strizzolo has resigned from the civil service.
Mr Masot asked her: “Can I give you some names of MPs that I would suggest you take down?”
Ms Strizzolo replied that all MPs have “something they’re trying to hide” and Mr Masot responded by saying “I have some MPs”, adding “she knows which MPs I want to take down” before specifying “the deputy foreign minister”.
Sir Alan, who has described expanding Israeli settlements as a “stain on the face of the globe”, was seen as more of a problem than Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson – who was “basically good”, according to Mr Masot in a transcript of the conversation.
“He just doesn’t care. He is an idiot but has become minister of foreign affairs without any responsibilities. If something real happened it won’t be his fault… it will be Alan Duncan.”
Sir Alan launched a scathing attack on Israel in 2014, when MPs backed Palestinian statehood, deeming Israeli settlements as an “act of theft”.
“Occupation, annexation, illegality, negligence, complicity – this is a wicked cocktail which brings shame on Israel,” he told BBC Radio 4’s World At One programme.
Sir Alan, who was special envoy to Yemen and Oman at the time, said “international law must be upheld” to prevent further settlements.
Labour has demanded an immediate inquiry into the extent of Israeli “interference” in British politics.
Shadow foreign secretary Emily Thornberry said improper interference was “unacceptable whichever country was involved” adding Mr Masot’s comments were “extremely disturbing”.
She said it was a national security issue and that the Foreign Office’s response was “not good enough”.
‘Completely unacceptable’
Crispin Blunt, Foreign Affairs Select Committee chairman, said Mr Masot’s “apparent activity” was “formally outrageous and deserving of investigation”.
But Sir Craig Oliver, David Cameron’s former communications director, said the undercover video was a “classic piece of mischief-making” by the Mail on Sunday.
He told the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show that Mr Masot’s comments should be viewed as “extremely comic” rather than “extremely chilling”.
“The Israeli government just wants to shut [the story] down,” he added. “It’s embarrassing”.
Lord Stuart Polak, director of Conservative Friends of Israel, said: “We utterly condemn any attempt to undermine Sir Alan, or any minister, or any member of Parliament.”
Ms Strizzolo told the newspaper that her conversation with Mr Masot was “tongue-in-cheek and gossipy”.
In a statement, the Israeli Embassy said it “rejects the remarks concerning minister Duncan, which are completely unacceptable”.
“The comments were made by a junior embassy employee who is not an Israeli diplomat, and who will be ending his term of employment with the embassy shortly,” it said.
“Ambassador Regev on Friday spoke with minister Duncan, apologised for the comments and made clear that the embassy considered the remarks to be completely unacceptable.”
A Foreign Office spokesman said: “The Israeli Ambassador has apologised and is clear these comments do not reflect the views of the embassy or government of Israel.
“The UK has a strong relationship with Israel and we consider the matter closed.”
A former Westminster official has resigned after footage emerged appearing to show her discuss “taking down” pro-Palestinian MPs.
According to Independent Maria Strizzolo, who is a former chief of staff to Conservative MP Robert Halfon, was recorded talking to Israeli embassy official Shai Masot.
The footage, obtained by Al Jazeera, shows Mr. Masot say: “Can I give you some MPs that I would suggest you would take down?” In response, Ms Strizzolo appears to laugh, before responding: “Well you know, if you look hard enough, I’m sure there is something that they’re trying to hide.”
Ms. Strizzolo has reportedly now resigned from her post at the Skills Funding Agency.
Israel’s ambassador to the UK Mark Regev has apologized for Mr. Masot’s comments, describing them as “unacceptable”.
Labour has demanded an investigation to probe alleged Israeli “interference” in British politics.
During the conversation between the pair, which took place at the Aubaine restaurant near the Israeli embassy in Kensington, Mr. Masot also described Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson as “an idiot”.
Ms. Strizzolo told the Mail on Sunday that her conversation with Mr. Masot was “tongue-in-cheek and gossipy”, adding: “Any suggestion that I … could exert the type of influence you are suggesting is risible.”
She said she knew Mr. Masot “purely socially and as a friend. He is not someone with whom I have ever worked or had any political dealings beyond chatting about politics, as millions of people do, in a social context.”
Interrogation under caution takes place as questioning of suspects continues in other affair, involving the prime minister and media mogul Arnon Mozes. ‘Investigation won’t take too long,’ says Israel police chief.
