February « 2009 « Tikun Olam-תיקון עולם: Make the World a Better Place

Archive for February, 2009

In the Israeli Elections It’s…Livni (or is it Netanyahu)?

Tuesday, February 10th, 2009

With 98% of the vote counted it appears that the exit polls were accurate for a change and Kadima gained 28 votes, Likud 27, Yisrael Beitenu 15, Labor 13, Meretz 3 and Hadash 4. There is big news here. Up to a few days ago, a Haaretz poll predicted virtually the opposite result between Likud and Kadima. It appears Livini has pulled a few irons out of the fire and Bibi did his usual campaign fizzle as Assaf Oron predicted. Proto-fascist Avigdor Lieberman is the big news of this election as he absorbed almost all the votes that deserted Likud and doubled his previous number of mandates.

Shmuel Rosner noted that every Israeli election seems to provide a flavor of the month party whose “new message” turns it into the “new, new thing.” Voters flock to it and give it 10 to 15 mandates (Shinui, Pensioners Party, etc.). Before the ink is dry on the invitations to the Knesset opening, the party sells out whatever single issue it was formed to promote. By the next election, it has receded into the woodwork. Lieberman’s single issue this election was the loyalty oath for Israeli Arabs.

The difference between Yisrael Beitenu and those other parties is that Lieberman is the strong man of this party with a well-rounded rightist ideological message, and the others actually focussed more on an idea than a personality. Parties based on strong personalities (Sharon, Ben Gurion, etc.) tend to do better and last longer in Israel. So it is possible that Lieberman and his party will play a kingmaker role not just in this Knesset but future ones as well.

The big news on the left is that Meretz has imploded as almost anyone who followed their deterioration could have predicted. It waffled on the Gaza war and lost over half its mandates as a result. Even a prominent endorsement by Haaretz publisher Amos Schocken couldn’t revive it from the dead. Hadash, the former Communist party, was a winner and its steadfastness in opposing the Gaza war was rewarded by voters looking for a truly progressive (as opposed to waffling) party.

Labor is another loser which has progressively receded with each recent election. It’s 13 votes will not guarantee Barak a major portfolio even if he chooses to join a Likud-led coalition along with Lieberman.

The coalition math looks bleak for Livni. The only way she can form one is if she gains the support of Shas. Which is ironic considering that Shas was precisely the stumbling block in her forming the previous government and the reason she chose to go to the polls rather than accept their deal.

The only good result here is that whoever forms a government will have an exceedingly weak coalition. If Netanyahu leads the goverment he is hostage to the far right and Lieberman. If Livni forms a government she is hostage to Shas (if she can even gain their support in the first place). It is another recipe for political stasis, a status Israel can ill afford.

The result doesn’t bode well for Barack Obama’s peace efforts. Netanyahu has absolutely no interests in any serious negotiations with the Palestinians and will stall like hell if the U.S. attempts to pressure him. Livni might want to play ball with Washington but even if she tries, Shas will severely constrain her.

Of course, there are all sorts of bizarre possibilities: Likud could join with Kadima and even Labor in a national unity government which would politically look like a cross between a camel and an elephant and function just as smoothly. At least this might exclude Lieberman from a governing coalition.

Tags: avigdor-lieberman, Kadima, likud
Posted in Mideast Peace, Politics & Society | 25 Comments »

Krauss, Plant Win Five Grammys for Raising Sand

Monday, February 9th, 2009

Raising Sand has been out, and I’ve enjoyed it for so long it almost seems like old news to have the Grammy’s honor this magnificent musical collaboration between Allison Krauss and Robert Plant. It pairs Plant’s fierce dedication to old-fashioned American blues refracted through his British rocker lens, with Krauss’ gorgeously refined voice and traditional musical sensibility. The collaboration works and offers musical choices both weird and wonderful. Its five Grammy awards are richly deserved.

A hearty mazel tov to Pete Seeger for a Grammy possibly even more richly deserved, considering it comes at the age of 89. He won for Pete Seeger at 89. Also, highly recommended is Ladysmith Black Mambazo’s Grammy winner, Ilembe: Honoring Shaka Zulu.

For all the winners see the Grammy site.

Tags: music
Posted in Folk & World Music | 3 Comments »

Lieberman ‘Speaks Arabic’

Monday, February 9th, 2009

Imagine if you will George Wallace in the 1968 presidential campaign telling the white world he knew how to deal with Negroes. To convey this, he coins the slogan: “He speaks Negro.” Or imagine Strom Thurmond running as a Dixecrat for president in 1948 on a States Right platform. His slogan is: “He speaks Nigger.” I imagine too that it would’ve made a great campaign slogan for Ol’ Bull Connor when he ran for sheriff in Montgomery in the 1960s. Show those darkies who’s boss.

Of course, no presidential candidate in this country could get away with adopting such a slogan. We may have racism underlying our politics, but we’re much more genteel about it and speak in code rather than overtly as Avigdor Lieberman does.

All this by way of saying, I find it astonishing that Lieberman can make such a slogan the heart of his campaign and actually win votes by doing it. Not only win votes, but likely become the third largest political party in the process. I don’t want to ever read another pro-Israel comment here that dares to brag about Israeli democracy and the “good deal” that Israeli Arabs get.

Let’s lay bare what this slogan means. It means that Lieberman “speaks their language.” That he knows how to “deal with them.” He fights fire with fire (Arabs are viewed according to these terms as shiftless, violent, and malevolent). One way he will deal with them is by adjusting Israel’s borders so that Israeli Arab villages in northern Israel would be transferred to Palestinian sovereignty, while Jewish settlements in the West Bank would be transferred to Israeli sovereignty. It’s a slightly more sophisticated form of population transfer advocated by the Israeli far-right ultra-nationalists. Slightly more sophisticated but no less odious or racist for that.

"Without loyalty--no citizenship" (Rita Castelnuovo/NYT)

Lieberman’s slogan also conveys the hatred and mistrust that many Jews feel for Israeli Arabs. In fact, one of the hallmarks of his ‘populist’ campaign is a McCarthy-style demand for non-Jewish citizens to sign loyalty oaths to the Jewish state and “Israeli democracy.” Apparently the irony of demanding a loyalty oath from 20% of the nation’s citizens and believing that such an oath represents “democratic values” is lost on Lieberman.

Lieberman is the very same politician who on TV called an Israeli Jewish lawyer who brings human rights cases against the IDF for killing civilians in the midst of targeted assassination operations, a “kapo.” He’s the very same who said Israeli Arab Knesset members should be “strung up on lampposts.” Haaretz just revealed he was a member of Meir Kahane’s Kach party when he first arrived in Israel from the Soviet Union. Shortly thereafter, Kach was outlawed as a terrorist organization.

Haaretz’s Gideon Levy as usual puts it so well in Kahane Won:

Rabbi Meir Kahane can rest in peace: His doctrine has won. Twenty years after his Knesset list was disqualified and 18 years after he was murdered, Kahanism has become legitimate in public discourse.

If there is something that typifies Israel’s current murky, hollow election campaign…it is the transformation of racism and nationalism into accepted values…Now the instigator of the new Israeli racism will apparently become the leader of a large party once again in the government. Benjamin Netanyahu has already pledged that Lieberman will be an “important minister” in his government. If someone like Lieberman were to join a government in Europe, Israel would sever ties with it…

…The nightmare is here and now. Kahane is alive and kicking – is he ever – in the person of his thuggish successor.

All this is viewed in Israel as politics as usual, more or less typical jockeying for advantage. No one suggests that Lieberman be arrested for inciting race hatred or violence against an ethnic minority, as would certainly happen in any number of other western democracies. He’s not denounced by mainstream politicians as he would be here. In fact, many Jews believe Lieberman to be a “man’s man” for such disgusting utterances. Anyone who criticizes Lieberman is viewed as hopelessly effete and ineffectual.

Meanwhile, Lieberman’s campaign distracts attention from the real life and death issues that confront Israel: negotiating peace treaties with Syria and the Palestinians. Yisrael Beitenu provides the country with a political sideshow that enables voters to express their frustration and impotence with issues over which they have no control. It allows them to lash out at the weakest sectors of society and blame them for society’s ills.

It’s a shameful performance. A sign of the profound weakness of Israeli democracy. I fear that it hangs by a frayed thread and the least wind will sever it. Israel cannot stand the assaults upon common decency and tolerance represented by Arab-haters like Lieberman.

Looked at another way though, Lieberman’s obsession with Israeli Arabs does raise important questions about the future of Israeli democracy. Will Israel turn into an ethnocracy in which Arabs have little or no rights, while Jews are supreme? Or will Israel recognize that it simply cannot be a real democracy unless it offers ethnic minorities rights that are equal to the majority Jews? In this sense, Lieberman is laying down a marker and saying that for him Israel must become the equivalent to apartheid-era South African. Arabs who remain in Israel under Lieberman’s regime will accept explicit (and not tacit, as in the current system) second-class status. There will be no more talk of equality. Arabs will know who’s the boss. If they don’t like it they will be invited to deplane to any other Arab country that will have them.

This is an Israel that very few Diaspora Jews I know will embrace. Lieberman’s strategy will not only deepen the rift between homeland and Diaspora, it will sever ties except for all but the most hearty pro-Israel supporters. Unfortunately, the Israel lobby here in this country refuses to recognize the danger. They refuse to see that Lieberman is the Jorg Haider, Kurt Waldheim, David Duke, Jean Marie Le-Pen, or yes, the Meir Kahane of the State of Israel. He is the far-right politician who should be the last straw. The one that makes them put their foot down and demand that Israel clean up its act or risk permanent alienation of affection with American Jewry. Will it happen? Don’t hold your breath.

I suppose it could be worse. Back in Lieberman’s old home, Russian neo-Nazi skinheads mimic Al Qaeda and sever the heads of migrant workers and display their handiwork on videos they proudly offer to the public. Imagine Yisrael Beitenu’s youth wing showing Israeli Arabs that they won’t take shit from anyone by beating a few Arabs to within an inch of their lives or even decapitating one or two particularly uppity ones. That would teach THEM a lesson, wouldn’t it?

In the meanwhile, Lieberman stands to become the next defense, foreign or interior minister. In the latter post, he would control the nation’s entire social agenda, law enforcement and judicial apparatus. That’s quite rich considering the police are investigating him and his immediate family on money-laundering charges. Wouldn’t that be a bit of a conflict of interest? Perhaps not in that glorious democracy that is Israel.

Tags: arab, avigdor-lieberman, kapo, knesset
Posted in Jews & Judaism, Mideast Peace | 17 Comments »

Bibi: Israel’s Dick Cheney

Sunday, February 8th, 2009

Which Israeli pol does he remind you of?

Which U.S. pol does he remind you of??

I was just discussing the upcoming Israeli election with Assaf Oron, who feels a bit more sanguine than I about the outcome. He believes that Livni still has a chance to pull her irons out of the fire. I’m not sure but hope he’s right. Bibi would be an utter disaster.

This got me to thinking who Bibi reminds me of. At first I thought a used car salesman, but that’s not right. Bibi’s too cerebral for that. And then it hit me: he’s Israel’s Dick Cheney. The same ponderous baritone spouting vacuous sound bytes that sound reassuring until you examine what little content they contain. The same hyper-testosterone infused, angry political rhetoric. The same frightening laser-like gaze. The same obsession with national security, terrorism and global jihad. The same disdain for the common man and little guy.

Actually, Assaf doesn’t agree with my analogy:

I don’t think of him as Cheney at all; more like John Cleese in Fawlty Towers:…sweaty, running around, spineless, bullish – and always steps in that dogshit on the floor at the wrong moment.

I find little comic in Bibi’s political persona. In fact, both Bibi and Cheney are alike in their total joylessness and lack of a sense of humor. But I’m glad someone can see Bibi as a buffoon. I wish I could as well. He seems far too dangerous for that. But I trust Assaf’s take on Israeli politics and so he may have something there. Let’s see how the election turns out.

Tags: bibi netanyahu
Posted in Mideast Peace, Politics & Society | 9 Comments »

Livni, Barak’s Februrary Surprise

Saturday, February 7th, 2009

In U.S. presidential elections, an “October surprise” is a sneaky trick engineered by a candidate to ensure a big bump in the polls days before the election. It’s hard to tell if that’s what’s shaping up regarding the upcoming Israeli election scheduled for Tuesday. But signs are becoming clearer that Turkey and Egypt have been working hard to broker a comprehensive agreement between Israel and Hamas that would create a formal 18 month ceasefire, stop rocket fire into Israel and IDF operations in Gaza, lift the economic siege of Gaza, free up to 1,000 Palestinian prisoners, and free Gilad Shalit.

One thing that I’ve learned after many reports like this in the media is not to trust them till you see the whites of Shalit’s eyes inside Israel. But the reports now seem quite uniform and positive with little static indicating potential hiccups (other than the as yet unsecured crucial agreement of Hamas’ Syrian exile leadership). So I think it’s quite possible there might be a major development in the offing before Tuesday.

I can’t say whether Barak, Olmert and Livni orchestrated this deliberately to save their tucheses in the coming election or whether the timing is merely fortuitous in that regard. But if there is an agreement it would likely give Kadima the slight bump they would need to pull themselves from the jaws of defeat. It would quite a deft political achievement, a feat Israel hasn’t been known for lately–so I suppose we should automatically downgrade the chance of this happening before Tuesday.

Assaf Oron tells me that Bibi is a terrible “closer” and often loses support precipitously in the weeks before an election (as was Shimon Peres’ Achilles Heel). He’s optimistic. But I pointed out to him that Tzipi Livni seems a fairly dreary campaigner as well and has given the electorate absolutely no positive reason to choose her or Kadima. The entire election seems to be based around what perfidiousness the other guy will pull if you give him your vote.

What DOES seem to be happening is that as Likud is hemhorraging votes in the run-up to Tuesday the big gainer is neither Labor nor Kadima, but Yisrael Beitenu. I can’t decide whether the ascendancy of a flagrantly racist, proto-fascist political party on the far right is a good thing in the way that Akiva Eldar attempted to argue in a TV interview recently–that the mask of Israeli democracy will be ripped off to reveal the ugly face of fascism lurking underneath. Somehow, this will mobilize the U.S. and world community against the peril and thus pressure Israel to come to agreement with the Palestinians; OR whether it’s a tragedy of epic proportions for Israeli democracy and points to a downward spiral toward possible national self-destruction. I have to admit that either option is possible and neither is remotely reassuring.

Steve Clemons also makes the former argument in his Huffington Post piece, Give Us Netanyahu, Please. It’s entirely possible that those who make this argument are being too cute by half. What happens if Obama and the international community have a failure of will, do little or nothing to advance peace, and we’re left with a Bibi-Lieberman rightist government which does everything but ignite an Arab conflagration in the Middle East. This certainly will mean the end of a viable two-state solution and this certainly would be a disaster for prospects for Israeli democracy. I’m scare, I’m really scared. For Israel, for the Middle East.

Tags: gaza-siege, hamas
Posted in Mideast Peace | 3 Comments »

Trumpeldor, Zionist Martyr or Jewish Custer?

Saturday, February 7th, 2009

As usual Jeffrey Goldberg gets it wrong in this item he posted at The Atlantic about Josef Trumpeldor. For those who don’t know the national myth, Trumpeldor was a genuine Jewish Russian war hero who settled in post World War I Palestine and organized Jewish self-defense groups to battle local Arab groups hostile to both French colonial and Jewish interests.

According to legend, the far northern outpost of Tel Hai came under attack and Trumpeldor was summoned from a nearby kibbutz to command the defense. He and several other Jews died in the ensuing battle and he was supposed to have said on his death bed: “It is good to die for our country.”

An illuminating article at the Meretz USA site quotes a survivor of Tel Hai as saying Trumpeldor’s REAL last words, presumably addressed at the Arab who shot him, were in his native Russian: “Motherfucker.”

The late Baruch Kimmerling, in his seminal review of Death and the Nation, had this to say about Trumpeldor’s death:

As Zertal points out, the Zionist leadership made appeals to the defenders of Tel Hai to withdraw, citing their poor weapons and their immense numerical inferiority. After a heated debate, this option was rejected by the Jewish community leadership…

In other words, the political leadership appealed to the Tel Hai hotheads for a tactical retreat and instead they chose to make a nationalist statement at the risk of their lives. Zertal argues that this was the beginning of the Zionist cult of death which posited that it was as good to die for one’s country as to live for it. And it was certainly better, according to Zionist thinking, to die for one’s country than die like dogs as Diaspora Jews did during the Holocaust.

Yet another example of the death myth is the story of Masada’s holdouts against the Romans who died rather than surrender to the Jewish enemy. To this day, the IDF holds a major military ceremony for every trainee at Masada to inculcate this culture of sacrifice in the new troops.

But it is critically important to understand that like George Armstrong Custer at the Little Big Horn or even Jim Bowie and Daniel Boone at the Alamo, Trumpeldor and his fellow Jews had choices that made far more sense tactically. But they chose the route of defiant nationalism, seeking to make a statement to the Arabs that they would not give an inch no matter what. And they paid with their lives.

So, far from being heroes or martyrs (do I hear the word “shahid” anyone?), they are closer to the headstrong fool represented by Custer who allowed his stubbornness, self-regard, and underestimation of the enemy to cloud his judgment, thus leading to annihilation of himself and his comrades.

Contrary to Goldberg’s blithe, trite and superficial understanding of Trumpeldor, modern critical Zionism should learn a lesson that the object of Israelis must not be Trumpeldorian martyrdom, but a pragmatic resolution of conflict that embraces life for both peoples. Or to quote the Torah: “Seek life and pursue it.”

Thanks to Phil Weiss for making me aware of Goldberg’s piece.

Posted in Jews & Judaism, Mideast Peace | 11 Comments »

Netanyahu and Lieberman Rule Election Polls, But It’s Obama That Really Matters

Friday, February 6th, 2009

It’s becoming clearer and clearer that far from aiding their election prospects as they had calculated, the Gaza adventure has torpedoed the chances of Tzipi Livni and Ehud Barak. In Livni’s case she has lost the job of prime minister and sentenced Kadima to the opposition and possibly oblivion if her colleagues abandon her for their former roles in the pre-Sharon Likud. In Barak’s case, he not only hasn’t a hope in hell of being prime minister, he may’ve sentenced his party to the ignominy of being the fourth or fifth largest party in Knesset. This may be an outcome that will also consign Labor to an oblivion it so richly deserves.

Thanks to Sol Salbe for pointing to an Australian TV interview (WMP video stream) with Haaretz’s Akiva Eldar, which bravely faces this depressing electoral outcome, yet offers some hope if the American president can muster the type of tough love shown by George Bush toward Yitzhak Shamir in 1992. It’s an eye-opening interview (the transcript is riddled with errors which I’ve tried to correct):

Interviewer: Mr Eldar, given that the Israeli election seems to turn on one question, which is who is more hardline on national security, does it really make a difference to the peace process who wins?

AKIVA ELDAR: Well, I think that what really means is how tough the American President is going to be.

…There is no question that the next government is not going to put the peace process on top of its agenda, it’s more likely that the settlements will be on top of the agenda, deterring Iran and so forth.

And I am wondering what is President Obama going to say about all this, and so he made it very clear that he’s mostly interested in pursuing the peace process, putting an end to the occupation, to the settlements, and trying even to engage Iran and Syria in a kind of dialogue.

So my big question is not who is going to be the next Prime Minister of Israel, but what is President Obama…going to tell him.

Here Eldar goes back in Israeli history to remind his listeners of the political price George Bush forced Yitzhak Shamir to pay when the latter embraced settlements over a strong relationship with the U.S.:

…If you look back to ’92…when President Bush senior decided to send a clear message to Prime Minister Shamir, that he has to decide what’s more important, peace or the relationship with the United States.

The special relationship that Israel has with the United States or settlements and occupation. And he made it very clear; if you decide the settlements are more important you can forget about American aid.

…The message to the Israel was clear; that the Likud is jeopardising the relationship with the United States and in the next election, the same year – ’92, Shamir lost, and Prime Minister Rabeen [sic] took over.

So it depends if the United States is willing to use its leverage because, you know, the most important thing to the Israelis, and if there is any consensus on anything, this is the significance of our special relationship with the United States, and that’s something that people would not let the Government undermine.

So if there will be a clear message from Washington, like the one in ’92, I think that Netanyahu will have to decide whether he wants to take the risk of being the second Prime Minister from the Likud who is undermining the relationship with the United States.

So the question becomes–does Obama have the cajones that Bush had in 1992? Can he withstand the onslaught of opprobrium that might emanate from Aipac and the pro-Israel lobby? Personally, I think it’s doubtful, but I’d like to be optimistic and say it’s still a possibility. So much of the most recent presidential campaign surprised the hell out of me in positive ways. So to write Obama off before he’s even had a chance to show his true colors is a mistake. I’d love to be surprised once again by him.

Eldar bears deeply depressing news about a Haaretz poll showing Avigdor Lieberman’s racist Yisrael Beitenu party becoming third largest in the Knesset ahead of Labor. This means (GAG!) that Lieberman will be in line for the portfolios of either defense, foreign affairs or interior. What a horrifying thought. Keep in mind this is the same man who, as a newly arrived Russian immigrant, joined Meir Kahane’s far-right Kach party, which was later ruled by Israel a terrorist entity. This is the same man who the Israeli police are investigating (along with close family members) for potential charges of moneylaundering.

For the first time in its history, Labor will be either fourth or (depending on Shas’ performance) fifth largest party:

…In the poll that my paper ‘Haaretz’ is going to publish tomorrow, he [Lieberman] is, and his party, is bypassing Labor.

They’re becoming the third party, with 19 seats in the Kinneset [sic], which means that, as you just mentioned, they’re going to be the king or queen makers.

And even Labour Party Chairman Barack [sic] indicated that he doesn’t rule out partnership with Lieberman sitting with him in the same Government, the same Coalition…

Now, Lieberman is clearly…a racist politician who is riding on…hatred [of] the Israeli Arabs. His slogan is there is no citizenship without loyalty…He expects the Israeli Arab minority…to sing an anthem that has clearly a Jewish motives [ed., motif?], and salute to Zionist flag, and put their loyalty to the test.

…I’m afraid that the next Israeli Government will be under much greater influence of this camp that is sending a very negative message not only to the Israeli Arabs, but to the Jewish community, which is a minority in other countries, including Australia, that will legitimise anti-Semitism on top of a very immoral message to the Arab citizens of Israel.

Eldar closes with a deeply pessimistic assessment of the potential rise of a radical right Israeli government, farther right than any previous one in Israeli history. And yet somehow he attempts to see a silver lining in even this prospect:

I started thinking in Lennonistic [ed., Leninist] terms, that perhaps we need to… somebody to remind us what happens once the radical right will take over, and the world see.

Maybe we should… it’s time to remove the mask and show the real face of Israel, and the real face is ugly. Perhaps we need some shock treatment before it gets better.

Maybe it has to get worse, and we will not hide behind a kind of negotiations that are actually going nowhere but giving us the credit that we want peace.

This tells you just how horrific the political situation is in Israel when the best that a decent, humane journalist can hope for is a government so completely beyond the norms of western civilization that the U.S. president will recognize his obligation to bring it to heel.

I should add that the Haaretz poll Eldar refers to actually shows the gap narrowing between Likud and Kadima with the latter picking up seats. So it’s conceivable if Kadima continues to close the gap that Kadima could win as many seats as Likud or perhaps one or so more. In that case, Kadima might still have a chance to form a government. But given that the right wing parties like Lieberman’s stand to do so well, it may be much harder for Kadima to form a governing coalition than for Likud.

Tags: avigdor-lieberman, bibi netanyahu, haaretz
Posted in Mideast Peace | 6 Comments »

Israel: Losing the Few Muslims Friends It Has

Thursday, February 5th, 2009

Operation Cast Lead has dropped a wrecking ball on the Turkey-Israel relationship which had been so promising for both nations, but especially for Israel. It allowed the latter to point to a major Muslim nation with which it had good trade and military ties. The two countries appeared to have much in common with domestic guerrilla insurgencies that threatened their respective national security. Close relations allowed each country to point out that relations with the other indicated how moderate its own political, ideological and religious views were. Just as Turkey needed credible western allies in its effort to join the EU, so Israel needed allies to show it was not a pariah in the Arab world. It was a win-win for both sides. Until now.

The N.Y. Times wrote yesterday of the deep freeze into which the bilateral relationship has sunk:

Israel’s Arab allies stood behind it in the war, but Turkey, a NATO member whose mediating efforts last year brought Israel into indirect talks with Syria, protested every step of the way in a month of angry remarks capped when Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan stalked off the stage during a debate in Davos, Switzerland, on Jan. 29.

A minor correction in the first sentence: to say that Israel’s Arab allies “stood behind it on the war” seems an exaggeration. First, Israel has no Arab “allies” to speak of. Perhaps Ethan Bronner means to say “Arab nations with which Israel has diplomatic relations.” But that is different than calling them allies.

I don’t know to whom Bronner is referring. If he means Jordan and Egypt, I would say “standing behind” Israel in support of the war isn’t accurate. The citizens of both countries were overwhelmingly opposed to the Gaza war and said so. Their governments acquiesced in the war, which is different than saying they stood behind it.

Returning to the impact of the war on Turkey and Israel, here is the former’s view and eminently reasonable in my view:

Turkish officials argue that Mr. Erdogan’s stance against the war was simply healthy criticism — words of warning from a close friend who sincerely believed that Israel had gone too far.

“Turkey has lost its patience with the status quo in the Mideast,” said a senior Turkish official, who requested anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly on the matter. “Gaza is the bankruptcy of the military solution.”

The official added, “Israel is there to stay, and Palestinians are there to stay, and they need to be talking right now.”

…“The world has not respected the will of the Palestinian people,” he said in an interview with Newsweek on Jan. 31. “On the one hand, we defend democracy and we try our best to keep democracy in the Middle East, but on the other we do not respect the outcome.”

He also rejects Hamas’s use of violence. “I’m not saying Hamas is a good organization and makes no mistakes,” he said.

It is indicative of the distorted mirror through which Israel views the world that it does not understand that it has much more to lose in this relationship than Turkey. Why would any Israeli official making the following statement believe it would cause the least concern to Erdogan?

“He has burned all the bridges with Jerusalem,” said one senior Israeli official, who spoke anonymously because of the delicacy of the issue. “He won’t be seen as an honest broker anymore.”

If I were an Israeli prime minister losing the support of my main Muslim neighbor would be a red flag regarding whatever policy drove it away. I would be bending over backwards to repair the damage instead of thumbing my nose and taking my marbles home in a huff.

Israel mistakenly believes it only needs neighbors who accept it on ITS terms. While most relationships are bilateral with give and take each way. The Israeli version seems to be we take and you give. Once you stop giving what we want we walk away in a huff.

What a way to run a country’s foreign affairs.

Tags: shimon-peres, turkey
Posted in Mideast Peace | 11 Comments »