Friday, January 15, 2010

Was Turkey able to repel Israel? Yes, it was. Famous for usually being obnoxious and because of that, leading the U.S. administration in a pretty dance, making its European allies sick and tired, Israel bowed before Turkey and apologized for the first time. Turkish President Abdullah Gül demanded an apology and gave time for Israel to respond.

This is an excellent opportunity to see what the “New Middle East” means. The “New Middle East” that is emerging with a “New Turkey in the region.”

If you cannot understand this and get panicked because of Turkey’s stance against Israel, or if you justify Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon’s arrogance with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoðan’s “Davos move,” you will find yourself, together with Ayalon, off to the side within 53 hours.

Why Israel Apologized

Do you think Ayalon and his boss Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have realized they made a mistake and apologized just to act virtuously?

No. They apologized because they were pressured to do so. They could not remove pressures and made political calculations. They were forced to make an apology. Israeli President Shimon Peres, who was personally and directly subjected to Erdoðan’s heavy criticism last year in Davos, seemed to play a critical role in this “apology.” As a matter of fact, he tried to turn this crisis into a “personal error” and said the other day it was a mistake of a man, not the state, and Ayalon’s behavior was not diplomatically accurate, and it was good he apologized. Why?

Because Peres is a well-experienced, smart man. He calculated Israel would be harmed more than Turkey in this “crisis” and reached the conclusion that an “apology” will help more to Israeli benefit. Was Israel not harmed by the apology? Yes it was, but if Israel had not apologized, the crisis could have deepened, and Israel could have been hurt more.

One of the people thinking similarly is Benjamin “Fuad” Ben-Eliezer, Israeli deputy prime minister. He is a politician exerting the outmost efforts to “keep relations with Turkey on track.” When the crisis occurred, Ben-Eliezer was in India. He spoke to the Israeli radio there and said, "We have enough problems with the Muslim world without picking a fight with a country that has 72 million Muslims." He said, “When I met Turkish officials in November, I told them what was needed to be said behind closed doors.”

Ben-Eliezer with his cynical expression both teaches a lesson to his coalition partner Ayalon and to Lieberman and teaches how Turkey should be regarded. In the eye of some Israeli politicians and possibly of top U.S. officials, Turkey is the leader of the Muslim world, a center of power. When you stand against Turkey, you invite the wrath of the entire Muslim world.

But what did Turkey do to be perceived as such?

Turkey did it through its regional policy since Erdoðan’s “one minute” move in Davos last year. Therefore, we should acknowledge that Turkey’s post-Davos policy was effective.

In the recent crisis that emerged this week between Israel and Turkey, let’s see who the really harmed party is. The Kadima Party in the Israeli opposition slammed the government’s policy followed in this “diplomatic crisis” with Turkey. Interestingly enough criticisms over the apology were made by the rightist newspaper Jerusalem Post, which endorses implicitly the Netanyahu line in the country. The daily stressed that Ayalon is no diplomatic neophyte. He has been around for quite some time, first in the Foreign Ministry, then in the Prime Minister's Office, then as Israel's ambassador to Washington and now as deputy foreign minister. The Jerusalem Post’s story went on:

“He knows the rules, the decorum, the etiquette, yet he violated them in his treatment Monday of Turkish Ambassador Oguz Çelikkol. In doing so, he diverted attention from Israel's justified complaints over Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoðan's ceaseless haranguing of the country and Turkey's viscously anti-Israeli television series, onto the fact that the Turkish envoy was intentionally seated on a lower sofa, with Ayalon and his aides looking down at him from up high.”

The end result: Turkey comes out looking like the victim, and Israel is forced to apologize, something Erdoðan never did – even after very undiplomatically upbraiding Israeli President Shimon Peres last year in Davos and then storming off the stage.

“In addition, and perhaps most damagingly, ammunition was given to those in Turkey who – like Erdoðan – want to distance Ankara from Jerusalem.”

Erdoðan is not a Turkish King Louis XIV: He is not the state. There are many inside Turkey – in the courts, the military, the civil service bureaucracy – who would like to see Turkey's sharp tone toward Israel change. The problem now is that it will be more difficult for those people to raise their voices.

“For instance, if the military says – for its own interests – it wants to begin warming the ties with Jerusalem, those – like Erdoðan – who want to distance the relationship, can answer, "After they humiliated us?"

This is a sincere expression of who the Israeli right is against in Turkey and which Turkish groups they feel close to. With one thing missing though: The Post forgot to mention the spin-doctors in the Turkish media lamenting, “Turkey is becoming a single-party dictatorship, a civilian dicta regime…” They forgot to talk about spokesmen of the insider friends aforementioned.

The damage: There are some people who believe, although Israel apologized, bilateral relations are “seriously damaged” as some accurately point a finger to the source of the most harmful damage.

The liberal Haaretz’s columnist Zvi Bar’el says in his article:

“The serious damage is really in the deep erosion in Turkish public opinion, which was the basis for Turkey's warm relations with Israel. But the Turkish public is not ready to suffer insult to its envoys. It is the public that takes to the streets when it is not satisfied with its government. They are vocal when their government's policies are not to their liking.

“It is this same public that in 2003 did not let the Erdoðan government permit American use of Turkish airspace en route to Iraq and the same public that turned out in huge numbers to protest Operation Cast Lead in Gaza. It is also the same Turkish public that viewed the Jews as a historic ally from Ottoman times.

“That foundation was shaken this week by treatment that reminded the Turks of the way Ottoman sultans humiliated foreign emissaries. That will be very difficult for the Turkish public to forgive.”

This is a realistic assessment of the Turkish public opinion’s feelings towards Israel. However, politics cannot seek revenge. In fact, Erdoðan, upon his return from Moscow, accepted Israel’s apology and said, “Israel should pull itself up and be fair.”

Perhaps, this is the “very difficult” thing for Israel, more “difficult” than forgiveness of the Turkish public opinion.

(emphases and subtitles added by Axis of Logic)

Hurriyet Daily News