Syria’s a short cut to Iran. No Iran, then no Hezbollah. No Hezbollah, then no resistance to another Israeli incursion into southern Lebanon, No resistance, then the Litani or Awali river becomes the new border. With a new border comes a cooperative CIA/Lebanese government, then the Zioconned U.S. gets unlimited access to the strategic ports of Sidon, Beirut, Tyre, the Kleia't military Airport, Rayyak air base, the Lebanese mountain tops and eventually Latakia … Study your geography, it’s much more economical to invade Iran from a Mediterranean port then to supply an army through the Persian Gulf. It cuts the exposure of your naval forces to any Iranian counter attack as well....
Zioconned MB, Salafism and Wahhabi thugs on Israeli wings, aiming for Damascus....
The rise and fall of Turkey's Zioconned Erdogan....
By M K Bhadrakumar
Israel's emergence from the woodwork can signal only one thing: the Syrian crisis is moving towards the decisive phase. The lights have been switched on in the operation theatre and the carving of Syria is beginning. What is going to follow won't be a pretty sight at all since the patient is not under anesthesia, and the chief surgeon prefers to lead from behind while sidekicks do the dirty job.
So far, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar have done the maximum they could to destabilize Syria and remove the regime headed by
Israel's emergence from the woodwork can signal only one thing: the Syrian crisis is moving towards the decisive phase. The lights have been switched on in the operation theatre and the carving of Syria is beginning. What is going to follow won't be a pretty sight at all since the patient is not under anesthesia, and the chief surgeon prefers to lead from behind while sidekicks do the dirty job.
So far, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar have done the maximum they could to destabilize Syria and remove the regime headed by
President Bashar Assad. But Bashar is still holding out. Thuggish and war criminality/Israeli expertise is now needed to complete the unfinished ZIO-business.
Someone is needed to plunge a sharp knife deep into Bashar's back. Jordan's king can't do the job; he measures up only to Bashar's knees. The Saudi and Qatari sheikhs with their ponderous, flabby body are not used to physical activity; the North Atlantic Treaty Organization prefers to be left alone, having burnt its fingers in Libya with a bloody operation that borders on war crime. That leaves Turkey.
In principle, Turkey has the muscle power, but intervention in Syria is fraught with risks and one of the enduring legacies of Kemal Ataturk is that Turkey avoids taking risks. Besides, Turkey's military is not quite in top form.
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan is also unable to carry the majority opinion within Turkey in favor of a war in Syria, and he is navigating a tricky path himself, trying to amend his country's constitution and make himself a real sultan - as if French President Francois Hollande were to combine the jobs of Prime Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault and Socialist Party chief Martine Aubry.
Obviously, Erdogan can't risk his career. Besides, there are imponderables - a potential backlash from the Alawite minority within Turkey (which resents the surge of Salafism under Erdogan's watch) and the perennial danger of walking into a trap set up by militant Kurds.
Al-Jazeera interviewed a leader of the Alawite sect in Turkey last week who expressed concern over the increasingly sectarian tone of Syria's internal strife inspired by Salafist Sunnis. They fear a Salafist surge within Turkey. The Alawites in Turkey see Assad "trying to hold together a tolerant, pluralist Syria".
Contingency plans
But all that is becoming irrelevant. The New York Times reported on Friday, quoting American officials in Washington, that US President Barack Obama is "increasing aid to the rebels and redoubling efforts to rally a coalition of like-minded countries to forcibly bring down the [Syrian] government".
It further reported that the CIA operatives who are based in southern Turkey "for several weeks" will continue with their mission to create violence against the Syrian regime. Meanwhile, the US and Turkey will also be working on putting together a post-Assad "provisional government" in Syria.
Accordingly, the leaders of Syria's proscribed Muslim Brotherhood held a four-day conclave in Istanbul and announced plans on Friday to create an "Islamic party". "We are ready for the post-Assad era, we have plans for the economy, the courts, politics", the Brotherhood's spokesman announced.
The New York Times said Washington is in close contact with Ankara and Tel Aviv to discuss "a broad range of contingency plans" over "how to manage a Syrian government collapse".
The emergent operational plan is that while Ankara steps up the covert operations inside Syria (bankrolled by Saudi Arabia and Qatar), Israel will cross the border into Syria from the south and attack Bashar's military and degrade its capacity to resist the Turkish threat.
Turkey has stepped up the psywar, projecting through the media that the Syrian regime is already tottering. Turkish commentators are spreading the word. Murat Yetkin of the establishment daily Hurriyet quoted a Turkish official as saying,
Someone is needed to plunge a sharp knife deep into Bashar's back. Jordan's king can't do the job; he measures up only to Bashar's knees. The Saudi and Qatari sheikhs with their ponderous, flabby body are not used to physical activity; the North Atlantic Treaty Organization prefers to be left alone, having burnt its fingers in Libya with a bloody operation that borders on war crime. That leaves Turkey.
In principle, Turkey has the muscle power, but intervention in Syria is fraught with risks and one of the enduring legacies of Kemal Ataturk is that Turkey avoids taking risks. Besides, Turkey's military is not quite in top form.
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan is also unable to carry the majority opinion within Turkey in favor of a war in Syria, and he is navigating a tricky path himself, trying to amend his country's constitution and make himself a real sultan - as if French President Francois Hollande were to combine the jobs of Prime Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault and Socialist Party chief Martine Aubry.
Obviously, Erdogan can't risk his career. Besides, there are imponderables - a potential backlash from the Alawite minority within Turkey (which resents the surge of Salafism under Erdogan's watch) and the perennial danger of walking into a trap set up by militant Kurds.
Al-Jazeera interviewed a leader of the Alawite sect in Turkey last week who expressed concern over the increasingly sectarian tone of Syria's internal strife inspired by Salafist Sunnis. They fear a Salafist surge within Turkey. The Alawites in Turkey see Assad "trying to hold together a tolerant, pluralist Syria".
Contingency plans
But all that is becoming irrelevant. The New York Times reported on Friday, quoting American officials in Washington, that US President Barack Obama is "increasing aid to the rebels and redoubling efforts to rally a coalition of like-minded countries to forcibly bring down the [Syrian] government".
It further reported that the CIA operatives who are based in southern Turkey "for several weeks" will continue with their mission to create violence against the Syrian regime. Meanwhile, the US and Turkey will also be working on putting together a post-Assad "provisional government" in Syria.
Accordingly, the leaders of Syria's proscribed Muslim Brotherhood held a four-day conclave in Istanbul and announced plans on Friday to create an "Islamic party". "We are ready for the post-Assad era, we have plans for the economy, the courts, politics", the Brotherhood's spokesman announced.
The New York Times said Washington is in close contact with Ankara and Tel Aviv to discuss "a broad range of contingency plans" over "how to manage a Syrian government collapse".
The emergent operational plan is that while Ankara steps up the covert operations inside Syria (bankrolled by Saudi Arabia and Qatar), Israel will cross the border into Syria from the south and attack Bashar's military and degrade its capacity to resist the Turkish threat.
Turkey has stepped up the psywar, projecting through the media that the Syrian regime is already tottering. Turkish commentators are spreading the word. Murat Yetkin of the establishment daily Hurriyet quoted a Turkish official as saying,
Our people [Turkish intelligence] in the field are observing that the urban majority, which has preferred to remain neutral so far, has begun to support the opposition groups. We think the Syrian people have begun to perceive that the administration is breaking up.
But such riveting stories also reflect the Turkish establishment's worry that the Syrian regime is still not showing signs of capitulation despite all the hits it took from the "rebels".
Mission to Moscow
Erdogan's best hope is that the Turkish intelligence could orchestrate some sort of "palace coup" in Damascus in the coming days or weeks. What suits Ankara will be to have Bashar replaced by a transitional structure that retains elements of the existing Baathist state structure, which could facilitate an orderly transfer of power to a new administration - that is to say, ideally, a transition not different from what followed in Egypt once Hosni Mubarak exited.
But Erdogan is unsure whether Turkey can swing an Egypt-like coup in Damascus. His dash to Moscow last Wednesday aimed at sounding out Moscow if a new and stable transitional structure could be put together in Damascus through some kind of international cooperation. (Obama lent his weight to Erdogan's mission by telephoning Russian President Vladimir Putin on Thursday to discuss Syria.)
But curiously, just before Erdogan went into his scheduled meeting with Putin in the Kremlin, a massive terrorist attack took place in Damascus, killing the Syrian defense minister and its intelligence chief. In the event, Moscow politely heard him out and assured Erdogan it would make a clinical separation between Russia's long-term strategic ties with Turkey and the Syrian issue. At any rate, the Russian stance remained unchanged, as evident from its veto at the United Security Council a week later.
Clearly, Moscow sees that the end game is underway in Syria. In an interview with the Russia Today on Friday, Russia's ambassador to the UN, Vitaly Churkin, spoke in exceptionally strong terms about what is happening. He said the Western strategy is to "whip us tensions in and around Syria at every opportunity".
Churkin said derisively, "There is much more geopolitics in their policy in Syria than humanism." Churkin also brought in Iran: "I would not rule out that then they would move on to Iran ... And this growing tension between Iran, the West and the Saudis is not helpful."
Prior to the visit to Moscow, Erdogan also travelled to Beijing, which also senses that the US is closing the deal on Syria. The Global Times newspaper commented in an editorial on Friday that "It's likely that the Assad administration will be overthrown ... chances of a political solution are becoming increasingly small ... changes in Syria might come rapidly."
US National Security Advisor Tom Donilon is travelling to Beijing to explore if the Chinese stance on Syria can be moderated.
Both Russia and China view the Erdogan era favorably for the upward curve in their ties with Turkey. Russia won a $20-$25 billion contract to build nuclear power plants in Turkey. China pulled in Turkey as a dialogue partner for the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. Turkey hosted a second military exercise with China recently and is aspiring to be a bridge between NATO and Beijing.
A man for all seasons
However, both Russia and China would factor in that as a "new cold war" builds up, Washington expects Turkey to get back into the fold and play its due role as ally in a vast swathe of land stretching from the Black Sea to the Caucasus and the Caspian and all the way to Central Asia. In the ultimate analysis, the US holds many trump cards, finessed through the Cold war era, to manipulate Turkish policies. This is quite evident from the centrality attached by Washington to the Iraqi Kurdish leader, Massoud Barzani, in the overall US strategy.
Obama received Barzani in the White House recently. Barzani has become a "lynchpin" in the US-Turkish policies on Syria. This was within months of ExxonMobil signing up in October to develop the fabulous oil fields located in the Kurdistan region controlled by Barzani, ignoring protests from Baghdad that such a deal with a provincial authority bypassing the central government would violate Iraq's sovereignty.
Last week, the US oil giant Chevron announced that it too has acquired an 80% controlling share in a company operating in the region covering a combined area of 1,124 square kilometers that is under Barzani's control.
The entry of ExxonMobile and Chevron is a game-changer in the regional politics over Syria. The point is, the best transportation route to the world market for the massive oil and gas deposits in Kurdistan will be via the Syrian port city of Latakia on the eastern Mediterranean. Indeed, an altogether new dimension to the US-Turkish game plan on Syria comes into view.
Siyah Kalem, a Turkish engineering and construction company, has bid for the transportation of natural gas from Kurdistan. Evidently, somewhere in the subsoil, the interests of the Anatolian corporate business (which has links with Turkey's ruling Islamist party) and the country's foreign policy orientations toward Syria and Iraq are converging. The US and Turkish interests overlap in the geopolitics of northern Iraq's energy reserves.
But Barzani is not only a business partner for Washington and Ankara but also a key agent who could leverage Turkey's Kurdish problem. With Washington's backing, he has launched a project to bring together the various Kurdish factions - Turkish, Iraqi and Syrian - on to a new political track.
He held a meeting of the Kurdish factions in Arbil last month. Plainly, Barzani tried to bribe the leaders of various Kurdish factions with funds provided from Ankara. He claims he has succeeded in reconciling the different Kurdish groups in Syria. (The Kurdish insurgency in Turkey is led by ethnic Syrian Kurds.) He also claims to have persuaded the Syrian Kurds to snap their links with Bashar and line up with the Syrian opposition.
These tidings from Arbil have a vital bearing on Erdogan's future course on Syria. As a prominent analyst at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, Soner Cagaptay, pointed out recently, the bottom line is that "Syria's restless and well-organized Kurdish minority doesn't for the most part trust Turkey."
Salafism on Israeli wings
However, in the final analysis, only Israel can resolve Erdogan's dilemma. Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak stated over the weekend, "Syria has advanced anti-aircraft missiles, surface-to-surface missiles and elements of chemical weapons. I directed the IDF [Israeli Defense Forces] to prepare for a situation where we will need to consider the possibility of an attack."
Barak added that the "moment [Bashar] starts to fall, we [Israel] will conduct intelligence monitoring and will liaise with other agencies." He spoke after a secret visit by Donilon to Israel the previous weekend. Close on the heels of Donilon's consultations, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton travelled to Tel Aviv after a historic meeting in Cairo with the newly elected President Mohammed Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood, who assured Washington that he wouldn't contemplate creating any problems for Israel in a conceivable future.
Barak's disclosure tears apart the thin veil of indifference that Tel Aviv so far maintained over the Syrian developments. What emerges, in retrospect, is that Washington kept Israel in abeyance for the ripe moment to physically demolish Bashar's war machinery, an enterprise that Erdogan is unwilling or incapable of undertaking.
Most certainly, Erdogan was in the loop that he was going to partner Barak, but being a shrewd politician he kept up an appearance of agonizing publicly over the Syrian crisis - while, of course, covertly fueling it.
Simply put, Washington has outwitted Moscow and Beijing. It kept assuring Russia and China that a military intervention by the US all by itself or a Libya-style NATO operation was the last thing on Obama's mind. No doubt, Obama kept its word.
What is unfolding is a startlingly refreshing sight - Salafism riding the wings of the Israeli air force and landing in Damascus. Erdogan will now set out with renewed vigor to shake up the Bashar tree in Damascus, while any day from now Barak will begin chopping off the tree's branches in a lightning sweep.
Erdogan and Barak will make the Bashar tree so naked and helpless that it will realize the futility of standing upright any more. There is no "military intervention" involved here, no NATO operations, no Libya-like analogy can be drawn. Nor is Erdogan to order his army to march into Syria.
Secretary of State Clinton would say this is the "smart power". In a magnificent essay titled "The Art of Smart Power" penned by her last week, as she surveyed the curious twist to the tale of the Arab Spring, Clinton wrote that the US is nowadays "leading in new ways". [1]
Clinton underscored that US is expanding its "foreign-policy toolbox [to] integrate every asset and partner, and fundamentally change the way we [US] do business ... [the] common thread running through all our efforts is a commitment to adapt America's global leadership for the needs of a changing world."
At the end of the day, Erdogan will bite the bullet, which is greased with pork fat. The plain truth is that Israel is going to complete the messy job for him in Syria.
Erdogan has no choice but to accept that he belongs to Washington's "toolbox" - nothing more, nothing less. He was never destined for the role to lead the Muslim Middle East. The West was merely pandering to his well-known vanity. That role is Washington's exclusive prerogative.
Note:
1. The art of smart power, New Statesman, July 18, 2012.
Ambassador M K Bhadrakumar was a career diplomat in the Indian Foreign Service. His assignments included the Soviet Union, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Germany, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Kuwait and Turkey.
Mission to Moscow
Erdogan's best hope is that the Turkish intelligence could orchestrate some sort of "palace coup" in Damascus in the coming days or weeks. What suits Ankara will be to have Bashar replaced by a transitional structure that retains elements of the existing Baathist state structure, which could facilitate an orderly transfer of power to a new administration - that is to say, ideally, a transition not different from what followed in Egypt once Hosni Mubarak exited.
But Erdogan is unsure whether Turkey can swing an Egypt-like coup in Damascus. His dash to Moscow last Wednesday aimed at sounding out Moscow if a new and stable transitional structure could be put together in Damascus through some kind of international cooperation. (Obama lent his weight to Erdogan's mission by telephoning Russian President Vladimir Putin on Thursday to discuss Syria.)
But curiously, just before Erdogan went into his scheduled meeting with Putin in the Kremlin, a massive terrorist attack took place in Damascus, killing the Syrian defense minister and its intelligence chief. In the event, Moscow politely heard him out and assured Erdogan it would make a clinical separation between Russia's long-term strategic ties with Turkey and the Syrian issue. At any rate, the Russian stance remained unchanged, as evident from its veto at the United Security Council a week later.
Clearly, Moscow sees that the end game is underway in Syria. In an interview with the Russia Today on Friday, Russia's ambassador to the UN, Vitaly Churkin, spoke in exceptionally strong terms about what is happening. He said the Western strategy is to "whip us tensions in and around Syria at every opportunity".
Churkin said derisively, "There is much more geopolitics in their policy in Syria than humanism." Churkin also brought in Iran: "I would not rule out that then they would move on to Iran ... And this growing tension between Iran, the West and the Saudis is not helpful."
Prior to the visit to Moscow, Erdogan also travelled to Beijing, which also senses that the US is closing the deal on Syria. The Global Times newspaper commented in an editorial on Friday that "It's likely that the Assad administration will be overthrown ... chances of a political solution are becoming increasingly small ... changes in Syria might come rapidly."
US National Security Advisor Tom Donilon is travelling to Beijing to explore if the Chinese stance on Syria can be moderated.
Both Russia and China view the Erdogan era favorably for the upward curve in their ties with Turkey. Russia won a $20-$25 billion contract to build nuclear power plants in Turkey. China pulled in Turkey as a dialogue partner for the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. Turkey hosted a second military exercise with China recently and is aspiring to be a bridge between NATO and Beijing.
A man for all seasons
However, both Russia and China would factor in that as a "new cold war" builds up, Washington expects Turkey to get back into the fold and play its due role as ally in a vast swathe of land stretching from the Black Sea to the Caucasus and the Caspian and all the way to Central Asia. In the ultimate analysis, the US holds many trump cards, finessed through the Cold war era, to manipulate Turkish policies. This is quite evident from the centrality attached by Washington to the Iraqi Kurdish leader, Massoud Barzani, in the overall US strategy.
Obama received Barzani in the White House recently. Barzani has become a "lynchpin" in the US-Turkish policies on Syria. This was within months of ExxonMobil signing up in October to develop the fabulous oil fields located in the Kurdistan region controlled by Barzani, ignoring protests from Baghdad that such a deal with a provincial authority bypassing the central government would violate Iraq's sovereignty.
Last week, the US oil giant Chevron announced that it too has acquired an 80% controlling share in a company operating in the region covering a combined area of 1,124 square kilometers that is under Barzani's control.
The entry of ExxonMobile and Chevron is a game-changer in the regional politics over Syria. The point is, the best transportation route to the world market for the massive oil and gas deposits in Kurdistan will be via the Syrian port city of Latakia on the eastern Mediterranean. Indeed, an altogether new dimension to the US-Turkish game plan on Syria comes into view.
Siyah Kalem, a Turkish engineering and construction company, has bid for the transportation of natural gas from Kurdistan. Evidently, somewhere in the subsoil, the interests of the Anatolian corporate business (which has links with Turkey's ruling Islamist party) and the country's foreign policy orientations toward Syria and Iraq are converging. The US and Turkish interests overlap in the geopolitics of northern Iraq's energy reserves.
But Barzani is not only a business partner for Washington and Ankara but also a key agent who could leverage Turkey's Kurdish problem. With Washington's backing, he has launched a project to bring together the various Kurdish factions - Turkish, Iraqi and Syrian - on to a new political track.
He held a meeting of the Kurdish factions in Arbil last month. Plainly, Barzani tried to bribe the leaders of various Kurdish factions with funds provided from Ankara. He claims he has succeeded in reconciling the different Kurdish groups in Syria. (The Kurdish insurgency in Turkey is led by ethnic Syrian Kurds.) He also claims to have persuaded the Syrian Kurds to snap their links with Bashar and line up with the Syrian opposition.
These tidings from Arbil have a vital bearing on Erdogan's future course on Syria. As a prominent analyst at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, Soner Cagaptay, pointed out recently, the bottom line is that "Syria's restless and well-organized Kurdish minority doesn't for the most part trust Turkey."
Salafism on Israeli wings
However, in the final analysis, only Israel can resolve Erdogan's dilemma. Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak stated over the weekend, "Syria has advanced anti-aircraft missiles, surface-to-surface missiles and elements of chemical weapons. I directed the IDF [Israeli Defense Forces] to prepare for a situation where we will need to consider the possibility of an attack."
Barak added that the "moment [Bashar] starts to fall, we [Israel] will conduct intelligence monitoring and will liaise with other agencies." He spoke after a secret visit by Donilon to Israel the previous weekend. Close on the heels of Donilon's consultations, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton travelled to Tel Aviv after a historic meeting in Cairo with the newly elected President Mohammed Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood, who assured Washington that he wouldn't contemplate creating any problems for Israel in a conceivable future.
Barak's disclosure tears apart the thin veil of indifference that Tel Aviv so far maintained over the Syrian developments. What emerges, in retrospect, is that Washington kept Israel in abeyance for the ripe moment to physically demolish Bashar's war machinery, an enterprise that Erdogan is unwilling or incapable of undertaking.
Most certainly, Erdogan was in the loop that he was going to partner Barak, but being a shrewd politician he kept up an appearance of agonizing publicly over the Syrian crisis - while, of course, covertly fueling it.
Simply put, Washington has outwitted Moscow and Beijing. It kept assuring Russia and China that a military intervention by the US all by itself or a Libya-style NATO operation was the last thing on Obama's mind. No doubt, Obama kept its word.
What is unfolding is a startlingly refreshing sight - Salafism riding the wings of the Israeli air force and landing in Damascus. Erdogan will now set out with renewed vigor to shake up the Bashar tree in Damascus, while any day from now Barak will begin chopping off the tree's branches in a lightning sweep.
Erdogan and Barak will make the Bashar tree so naked and helpless that it will realize the futility of standing upright any more. There is no "military intervention" involved here, no NATO operations, no Libya-like analogy can be drawn. Nor is Erdogan to order his army to march into Syria.
Secretary of State Clinton would say this is the "smart power". In a magnificent essay titled "The Art of Smart Power" penned by her last week, as she surveyed the curious twist to the tale of the Arab Spring, Clinton wrote that the US is nowadays "leading in new ways". [1]
Clinton underscored that US is expanding its "foreign-policy toolbox [to] integrate every asset and partner, and fundamentally change the way we [US] do business ... [the] common thread running through all our efforts is a commitment to adapt America's global leadership for the needs of a changing world."
At the end of the day, Erdogan will bite the bullet, which is greased with pork fat. The plain truth is that Israel is going to complete the messy job for him in Syria.
Erdogan has no choice but to accept that he belongs to Washington's "toolbox" - nothing more, nothing less. He was never destined for the role to lead the Muslim Middle East. The West was merely pandering to his well-known vanity. That role is Washington's exclusive prerogative.
Note:
1. The art of smart power, New Statesman, July 18, 2012.
Ambassador M K Bhadrakumar was a career diplomat in the Indian Foreign Service. His assignments included the Soviet Union, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Germany, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Kuwait and Turkey.
Sounds like the ground under Erdogan's feet is trembling!!! IS the pressure getting to Erdogan?
"This is the Syrian opposition:
ADO, AKP, ASM, CAP, BSS, DASU, DBASP, DD, FSA, HCRS, KDP, KNC, LCC, MB, MJD, NCB, NCC, NDA, NSF, NPF, PFLC, PKK, PPW, PUK, PYD, SCP, SDP, SDPP, SNC, SNDB, SRGC, SSNP, SSNP/i, TYM, WRAP, CIA, MOSSAD, DIA, AMAN, MI6, DGSE, GID, GID2, MIT, SVR, KSA, QATAR, Jordan, Turkey, Iran, etc.
This abbreviation soup is from a recent policy paper: DIVIDED THEY STAND - An Overview of Syria’s Political Opposition Factions by Aron Lund from the Swedish Palme Center. Each abbreviation stands for a group or coalition involved in the Syrian opposition."
Good luck unifying the terror groups Erdogan!
Israel catches Turkey in two Zioconned minds....
By M K Bhadrakumar
The crisis in Syria has prompted the Israeli leadership to make a strong pitch for repairing the ties with Zioconned Turkey. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu personally took the initiative.
The Israeli leader's move most certainly enjoys Zioconned American backing, while Netanyahu also felt emboldened by his consolidation within Israel's ruling coalition to press ahead with the initiative. But the clincher would have been that Turkey is a manifestly divided house with regard to the policies to be pursued over the Syrian crisis. The ball is now on the Turkish side of the court.
On Monday, Netanyahu met in his office an eight-member team of senior Turkish journalists in a high-profile attempt to break the ice between Israel and Turkey. This is the first such meeting since
the incident in May 2010 involving the killing of nine Turks by Israeli commandos who tried to stop the Turkish ship Mavi Marmara from breaking the Gaza blockade, which pushed the ties between the two countries into a free-fall.
Turkey expelled Israel's ambassador when Tel Aviv refused to meet its demands, which included an official apology for the incident, compensation for the families of the victims and an end to the Gaza blockade. Ankara also froze all military and security cooperation with Israel and filed criminal charges against the chiefs of the Israeli armed forces.
Washington tried in vain to cool down tempers while Turkish and Israeli diplomats negotiated behind the scenes to reach a mutually acceptable formula. But Israeli hardliners including Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman refused to countenance an apology or to allow Ankara a say in the blockade of Gaza.
Israel today is in a mood to compromise. The recent inclusion of Kadima Party in the ruling coalition marginalizes "hardliners" like Lieberman. Netanyahu himself was never in two minds that rapprochement with Turkey was in Israel's interests.
The second factor is of course the upheaval in Syria. The alienation from Turkey hurts Israel and accentuates its regional isolation and limits its options on the ground to be proactive despite Israel's unquestionable military superiority over Syria.
The tumultuous flow of events in Syria vitally affects Israel's security - be it the civil war and fragmentation or the role of radical Islamists in the event of "regime change" in Damascus. The short point is that closest possible cooperation with Turkey at the level of the military and intelligence is needed to optimally handle the fallouts.
The Israeli statement following Netanyahu's meeting with the Turkish media personalities quoted him as saying:
Turkey expelled Israel's ambassador when Tel Aviv refused to meet its demands, which included an official apology for the incident, compensation for the families of the victims and an end to the Gaza blockade. Ankara also froze all military and security cooperation with Israel and filed criminal charges against the chiefs of the Israeli armed forces.
Washington tried in vain to cool down tempers while Turkish and Israeli diplomats negotiated behind the scenes to reach a mutually acceptable formula. But Israeli hardliners including Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman refused to countenance an apology or to allow Ankara a say in the blockade of Gaza.
Israel today is in a mood to compromise. The recent inclusion of Kadima Party in the ruling coalition marginalizes "hardliners" like Lieberman. Netanyahu himself was never in two minds that rapprochement with Turkey was in Israel's interests.
The second factor is of course the upheaval in Syria. The alienation from Turkey hurts Israel and accentuates its regional isolation and limits its options on the ground to be proactive despite Israel's unquestionable military superiority over Syria.
The tumultuous flow of events in Syria vitally affects Israel's security - be it the civil war and fragmentation or the role of radical Islamists in the event of "regime change" in Damascus. The short point is that closest possible cooperation with Turkey at the level of the military and intelligence is needed to optimally handle the fallouts.
The Israeli statement following Netanyahu's meeting with the Turkish media personalities quoted him as saying:
"Turkey and Israel are two important, strong and stable countries in this region, which is very turbulent and unstable. The Turkish people and the Jewish people have had a long relationship. Turkey and Israel have had a long relationship. We have to keep looking for ways to restart the relationship we had because I think it is important for which of our countries, and it is particularly important now for the stability of this region at this time."
Netanyahu told the Turkish journalists: "Since I believe in a common interest, both Israel and Turkey should do as much as they can to restore their relationship. We would like to restore our relations again and both countries are looking for opportunities to do so."
In background briefings to the visiting Turkish journalists, Israeli officials were more explicit:
In background briefings to the visiting Turkish journalists, Israeli officials were more explicit:
"What is happening in Syria is a tragedy, and a greater tragedy is imminent … Both Turkey and Israel have close ties with the Zioconned United States, and each of it shares important information about Syria with the Zioconned Americans. We share the same concern…"
Natural allies
The big question is whether or not the Syrian crisis could inspire a Turkish-Israeli deal. A recent article in the New York Times co-authored by Michael Herzog (former chief of staff to Israel's defense minister) and Soner Cagaptay at the influential Washington Institute for Near East Policy, toyed with this big question. The two prominent pundits argued that there could be a "new degree of openness" in Tel Aviv and Ankara to the idea of reconciliation, but a rapprochement will still probably require American mediation. They wrote:
The big question is whether or not the Syrian crisis could inspire a Turkish-Israeli deal. A recent article in the New York Times co-authored by Michael Herzog (former chief of staff to Israel's defense minister) and Soner Cagaptay at the influential Washington Institute for Near East Policy, toyed with this big question. The two prominent pundits argued that there could be a "new degree of openness" in Tel Aviv and Ankara to the idea of reconciliation, but a rapprochement will still probably require American mediation. They wrote:
"President Obama has a unique opportunity to help rebuild a strategically vital relationship between these two American allies. While their relationship is unlikely to return to past levels of strategic cooperation, normalizing it could advance important American interests in Syria, Iran and the eastern Mediterranean."
They estimated that Israel's national security establishment is "firmly in favor of a reconciliation initiative" and a partnership at the operational level between Turkey and Israel could be very productive to bring about over the regime change in Syria:
"A normalized Turkish-Israeli relationship would also open opportunities for cooperation against the Assad government, with the Turks taking the political and regional lead and the Israelis providing intelligence and additional practical assets … Any Israeli contribution would, of course, have to be invisible in order not to create a sense that Israel was behind the Syrian uprising. This makes Turkish-Israeli cooperation against Mr Assad even more valuable, for it would allow Israel to provide traceable Zioconned assets to support Turkey's efforts to undermine the Assad government."
Traditionally, Israel enjoyed deep pockets of influence in Ankara. The Zioconned "Kemalists" were drawn to Israel and the Turkish-Israeli partnership flourished in the recent decades. The Turkish security and military establishment (which used to be the "deep state" up until recently when the civilian elected leadership gained control) valued Israel's expertise and professional assassinations acumen. Among the Turkish elites, there was high regard for Israel as an outpost of democracy in a region dotted with despots. Suffice to say, in the a priori history of Turkey's politics, the mainstream secular parties saw Israel as Turkey's natural ally in the Muslim Middle East.
However, things began to change after the Islamist AKP stormed into power. In retrospect, a trend toward "downgrading" the ties with Israel began much before the Mavi Marmara incident. The leadership of Prime Minister Recep Erdogan moved according to a pre-determined plan to fundamentally reset Turkey's Middle Eastern relationships in which ties with Israel were downsized in a calibrated way. Arguably, Mavi Marmara episode provided a leitmotif to hasten the reset.
Many sub-plots
It cannot be that Israel is unaware of the reality that the deep chill in Turkey's relations with Israel is symptomatic of the massive transformations in Turkish society and politics during the past eight years, rather than being the inevitable consequence of an unfortunate incident, however tragic it might have been.
The fact that Netanyahu nonetheless made his overture on such a sensitive issue to a group of journalists rather than discreetly at a political level or through diplomatic channels shows that Israel hopes to appeal to Turkish public opinion. A spokesperson of the Israeli foreign ministry Yigal Palmor, while briefing the visiting journalists, alleged that there are personal dislikes and feelings of mistrust between senior Turkish and Israeli officials. All the same, he added, "We want to have strong ties with Turkey, and we have not given up on relations with Turkey. We need to work on it. We do want to extend our hand to Turkey. We need to understand what is hurting each other. The doors are open."
To be sure, Netanyahu's overture has many sub-plots. It weighs in on Turkey's acute predicament over the Syrian crisis and it most certainly enjoys Zioconned US support. It estimates that Turkey is going to make some crucial moves over the Syrian situation in the coming days and weeks. And it tries to rally the enduring sections of Turkish opinion (which are by no means insubstantial) that always favored strategic ties with Israel.
Prominent commentator Mehmet Ali Briand probably drew attention to just one such intriguing sub-plot when he sized up Netanyahu's olive branch in this way:
However, things began to change after the Islamist AKP stormed into power. In retrospect, a trend toward "downgrading" the ties with Israel began much before the Mavi Marmara incident. The leadership of Prime Minister Recep Erdogan moved according to a pre-determined plan to fundamentally reset Turkey's Middle Eastern relationships in which ties with Israel were downsized in a calibrated way. Arguably, Mavi Marmara episode provided a leitmotif to hasten the reset.
Many sub-plots
It cannot be that Israel is unaware of the reality that the deep chill in Turkey's relations with Israel is symptomatic of the massive transformations in Turkish society and politics during the past eight years, rather than being the inevitable consequence of an unfortunate incident, however tragic it might have been.
The fact that Netanyahu nonetheless made his overture on such a sensitive issue to a group of journalists rather than discreetly at a political level or through diplomatic channels shows that Israel hopes to appeal to Turkish public opinion. A spokesperson of the Israeli foreign ministry Yigal Palmor, while briefing the visiting journalists, alleged that there are personal dislikes and feelings of mistrust between senior Turkish and Israeli officials. All the same, he added, "We want to have strong ties with Turkey, and we have not given up on relations with Turkey. We need to work on it. We do want to extend our hand to Turkey. We need to understand what is hurting each other. The doors are open."
To be sure, Netanyahu's overture has many sub-plots. It weighs in on Turkey's acute predicament over the Syrian crisis and it most certainly enjoys Zioconned US support. It estimates that Turkey is going to make some crucial moves over the Syrian situation in the coming days and weeks. And it tries to rally the enduring sections of Turkish opinion (which are by no means insubstantial) that always favored strategic ties with Israel.
Prominent commentator Mehmet Ali Briand probably drew attention to just one such intriguing sub-plot when he sized up Netanyahu's olive branch in this way:
"One important factor we should not ignore is that a Turkey which has no dialogue with Israel is not as interesting as it used to be in the eyes of the countries of the region … The change in the Arab world is also reflected in Turkey. And Turkey, involuntarily, has lost its former influence. Everyone knows that no Middle East policy can be conducted without Israel. It is also obvious that in the chess game of the Middle East, one cannot go anywhere with only Zioconned Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf countries, or be influential just by forming a Zioconned Sunni front. Turkey also should make a decision now. Paths in diplomacy never come to an end; there is always an exit."
Meanwhile, ironically, one of the main Turkish conditions for reconciliation with Israel - ending the blockade of Gaza - has also been partly fulfilled. On Monday, Cairo announced the easing of restrictions for Palestinians from Gaza into Egypt. The unprecedented move followed last week's meeting in Cairo between President Mohammed Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal.
Thus, it becomes highly significant that on Tuesday - within a day after Netanyahu made his overture - at an Iftar dinner at Erdogan's residence, there were surprise guests - a team of Hamas officials led by Mashaal.
Mashaal used to be based in Damascus but his equations with the Syrian regime have lately become ambivalent. An estimated 500,000-strong Palestinian community lives in Syria. Zioconned Hamas is also a "branch" of the Zioconned Muslim Brotherhood and Turkey is currently hosting the exiled leadership of Syria's Zioconned Brotherhood.
Erdogan's talks with Mashaal lasted well over three hours and it seems they will have substantial bearing on the Syrian situation. Erdogan was assisted at the meeting by Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu and the head of the Turkish intelligence Hakan Fidan. There will be a sigh of disappointment in Tel Aviv - and in Washington.
Ambassador M K Bhadrakumar was a career diplomat in the Indian Foreign Service. His assignments included the Soviet Union, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Germany, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Kuwait and Turkey.
Thus, it becomes highly significant that on Tuesday - within a day after Netanyahu made his overture - at an Iftar dinner at Erdogan's residence, there were surprise guests - a team of Hamas officials led by Mashaal.
Mashaal used to be based in Damascus but his equations with the Syrian regime have lately become ambivalent. An estimated 500,000-strong Palestinian community lives in Syria. Zioconned Hamas is also a "branch" of the Zioconned Muslim Brotherhood and Turkey is currently hosting the exiled leadership of Syria's Zioconned Brotherhood.
Erdogan's talks with Mashaal lasted well over three hours and it seems they will have substantial bearing on the Syrian situation. Erdogan was assisted at the meeting by Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu and the head of the Turkish intelligence Hakan Fidan. There will be a sigh of disappointment in Tel Aviv - and in Washington.
Ambassador M K Bhadrakumar was a career diplomat in the Indian Foreign Service. His assignments included the Soviet Union, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Germany, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Kuwait and Turkey.
(e)SP_A0012_edited.jpg)
