This is the season of hot air in the Middle East and PM Erdogan of Turkey has more of his fair share of it. Not a day passes without a threat/warning/challenge directed at Israel. One threat, which rose eyebrows, was to send the Turkish navy to escort and defend the next flotilla to Gaza. Hours after, the PM office published a clarification, according to which the translation to English was faulty. In the meantime, there were those in Israel who recalled the story about the Ottoman admiral who was sent to attack Malta, but did not find it... "Malta yok," he informed his superiors ("No Malta...).
Funny stuff aside, the current state of affairs between Israel and Turkey is bad enough. Belligerent statements can just inflame it and take it out of control. So was the case with the initial reaction of Foreign Minister Lieberman. As if by Pavlovian reflex, sources close to the hawkish FM that he would retaliate by meeting in public with Armenian and Kurdish adversaries of Turkey. It was PM Netanyahu who displayed enough diplomatic acumen and his office dismissed the hot air originating from the Foreign Ministry office.
Beyond that, the Israeli reaction is very muted, and there are those who argue on the basis of watching Erdogan in action, that this is the right reaction, if the idea is to calm the high tempers in Ankara. In the meantime, the dynamic Premier is issuing threats against Cyprus over plans to produce newly-discovered natural gas and oil off its shores, a threat that put the Greeks on guard. The Turkish Interior Minister threatens to invade Northern Iraq to put an end to Kurdish guerrilla operations against Turkey, and in the background there is the Turkish threat to intervene in Syria, in order to put an end to the massacre there. All in all, a lot of production for just one week of activity in Ankara.
Now Erdogan is visiting Cairo, in what is regarded, somewhat prematurely, as an historic visit, and the anti-Israel rhetoric is already in full force. Ahead of the visit, there is a choir of adulating commentators who already compare the Turkish leader to the late Egyptian and Arab icon, Gamal Abd Al-Nasser. Nasser, it needs to be mentioned, lost two wars to Israel, and with it the Sinai Peninsula and Gaza. In the last years of his reign, his regime had increasing difficulties providing enough basic food to millions of desperately poor Egyptians. But then, Nasser was the great hero of Pan-Arabism, as he stood up to the West and Israel. When he died, millions of Arabs poured to the streets of the entire ME and mourned the departure of the leader who, so they chanted, restored Arab national pride and honor. Honor is a precious commodity in the political culture of the Middle East, and no other than PM Erdogan acknowledged it the other day, when he declared that no matter what price would Turkey have to pay for its conflict with Israel, national Turkish honor was on the line.
This is the same Erdogan who publicly condemned the Netanyahu government for being arrogant, by preferring Israeli national honor over maintaining good relations with Turkey. So, national honor and pride played a major role in the political career of Nasser, but did not prevent him from leading his nation to defeats and humiliation. It is very doubtful whether this part of the Nasser legacy is what Erdogan wishes to emulate. Above and beyond, Nasser was an Arab leader, and even he failed in the sacred mission of his life, uniting the Arabs and defeating Israel. What an Arab leader failed to do, a non-Arab leader will fail as well. Nor the non-Arab and Shi'ite Ahmadinejad of Iran, neither a Sunni non-Arab Turkish leader.
Even the increasingly anti-Israel rhetoric and actions of Erdogan will not do the trick for him. If at all, a Turkish intervention in Syria could endear Erdogan on Arab leaders, as such an intervention will address two problems, much higher on the political agenda of many leaders in the Middle East, the desire to get rid of the Alawite regime in Syria and the setback to Iran as a result of that. This is an option that the Turks still keep open.
That said, the comparison with Nasser may very well be a dubious compliment to PM Erdogan, perhaps another comparison is in line with the true aspirations of the Turkish leader, that with the great Saladdin, who recaptured Jerusalem from the Crusaders in 1187, but alas, a little reminder is in place here. Saladdin was an ethnic Kurd... is there a need to elaborate beyond that?...
Stanley Weiss: A Brilliant Fraud
Not Saladdin's recapture of Jerusalem.
You have a hard time focusing, eh?
I think the trip was timely and if he achieves his goal admirable.
From my reading of the reports of his trip, he is trying to head off another Taliban like government in Egypt by the Muslim Brotherhood.
And trying to coax Egypt to have a secular government with Islamic roots like Turkey.
One that respects religious minorities.
http://www.almasryalyoum.com/en/node/495651
The picture is of his meeting with the head of the Coptic Church in Cairo.
Next time, try focusing a little harder.
Everything is not just about Israel.
As for the Kurds and Turks. Circumstances change and tides change and you never know when two past foes will set aside their differences to start building on common ground. Israelis and Kurds are not natural allies. Israel tends to attract "friends" in need and uses them for propaganda purposes or as a means to an end as in the case of Greece, but when that relationships starts to become a burden or inconvenient, these friends will rethink the relationship. It's not a question of "if" but "when".
http://en.aswataliraq.info/Default1.aspx?page=article_page&id=144792&l=1
“A panel of human rights experts reporting to the UN said Israel's naval blockade of Gaza violates international law, disputing a conclusion reached by the Palmer Report on the Israeli raid on the Mavi Marmara, Reuters reports. The panel said the blockade had subjected Gazans to collective punishment in "flagrant contravention of international human rights and humanitarian law." The International Committee of the Red Cross says the blockade violates the Geneva Conventions. Richard Falk, UN special rapporteur on human rights in the occupied Palestinian territories and one of the five experts who issued Tuesday's statement, said the Palmer report's conclusions were influenced by a desire to salve Turkish-Israeli ties.”
http://af.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idAFTRE78C58R20110913
Turkey - not so long ago was run by a military junta. In addition - there are still unhealthy vestiges of nationalism (even with some religious overtones) and an unrealistic idea that harbors fantasies of an Ottoman like hold and influence on a region which is increasingly reaching out to more democratic forces.
The behavior of Erdogan is an anachronism - dating back to pre Ataturk days and brings back ideals steeped not in democracy and moderation but in demagoguery, rhetoric and the corruption of the Pashas. In fact, this kind of nationalist and authoritarian reflex is part of the reason the EU is so reticent to grant Turkey full membership.
Regardless Israel's heavy reliance on Turkey is proving short sighted. Then again - this kind of myopia tends to be a characteristic of all governments throughout time and history.
You could justly criticize them for not using the past decades to achieve peace with the Palestinians (investing billions of dollars into settlements is a pretty clear sign that peace with the Palestinians was something they felt comfortable continually postponing) and working on establishing better relations with a wider array of neighbors so they aren't so dependent on two - Egypt and Turkey - for their entire regional strategy.
But since for whatever reasons, political, tactical, sincere belief, lack of creativity, whatever it was, they chose not to do that that really did solely leave them with the Turkey and Egypt alliances (if you can call them that) as The Option. I don't know that there was another choice for them in there that they would have found palatable.
In 2009, when he had his little outburst at Shimon Peres - no one understood what specifically triggered (the outburst) at that one particular moment in time... It is more obvious now that Erdogan had to break ties with Israel gradually (he did not have the authority or the political support in Turkey to do so in one particular moment at his leisure or without proper pretext.
Erdogan in short has been looking for the right moments to terminate his relationship with Israel. This is what most people simply do not get. There is absolutely nothing Israel can do to stop him. In fact, even if Israel should apologize to Erdogan (which would be the wrong move both politically and morally) - I truly believe Erdogan would simply find other excuses and demands against Israel.
Israel is doing good by not responding to his outbursts, ignoring him and distancing themselves from Turkey... By ignoring him; it will be very difficult for him to goad Israel and further damage the longterm relations between Turkey and Israel.
Bottom line: by choosing to remain a U.S. client state Israel is only increasing regional isolation and incurring all the costs associated with it. The longer they go down this path, the more painful and economically costly integration into the global community in the post-occupation era is going to be.
Your conclusions are erroneous however. Israel (like all democracies) will always be better off being friends with other democratic stable governments...
Let us know when you identify another one of those in the ME.
"Thank you Erdogan for convincing Egypt to take full responsibility of Gaza and provide it with aid, now we can close the border to Hamastan".
And then close the border, end all trade with Gaza, stop providing it with electricity, internet, and put a 6 month deadline to switch the water off.