Israel’s Predictable Turn of Events
April 16, 2012 § 1 Comment
Another day, another public black eye for Israel of its own making that could have easily been avoided. Why am I not surprised? First, it turns out that 40% of the people barred entry to Israel yesterday as part of Jerusalem’s overreaction to the flytilla (more on that in a moment) were blacklisted despite a lack of any evidence connecting them to the planned pro-Palestinian protests. Israel’s use of a sledgehammer rather than a scalpel apparently ensnared even foreign diplomats, including a French couple slated to begin working at France’s Jerusalem consulate this summer and an Italian Communications Ministry employee. No doubt this will do wonders for Israel’s gold-plated image in Europe and convince doubters of its liberal character. One also did not need to be a foreigner to be kept out of Ben Gurion Airport, as several Israeli citizens were not allowed into the country either.
Far more damaging is the video of an IDF lieutenant-colonel beating an unarmed bike rider with his M-16. The beating of protestors, whose bike ride through the Jordan Valley must have been deemed an existential threat to Israel in order to prompt such a response, has been swiftly condemned by Netanyahu and IDF Chief of Staff Benny Gantz, but the damage is already done and will reverberate on Youtube forever. All in all, a great weekend for Israel and its supporters. Maybe next someone can leak the fact that Ehud Barak secretly hates kittens.
If my sarcasm seems trite, it is because I cannot contain my frustration with the way Israel consistently mishandles these events and turns them into massive, attention-grabbing p.r. victories for its opponents. Let’s dispense with the easy one first. Really, Lieutenant-Colonel Shalom Eisner? Beating people riding their bikes in the West Bank with the butt of your rifle? Even if nobody was filming it, in what universe is this behavior acceptable? How could anything that these protestors have done possibly warranted such a response? Congratulations, you have done wonders for those who believe in their feverish delusions that Israel is a fascist authoritarian rogue police state. None of that matters though, because you have neutralized the devastating threat of devious bike riding protestors bringing down the state. Seems like physically assaulting civilians worked out well for you.
The flytilla response, while not as egregious on its face, is actually the more worrying episode, because unlike an IDF officer suffering a temporary bout of insanity during a fit of rage, Israel’s strategy for dealing with the flytilla protestors was actually planned ahead of time. Let’s imagine for a moment that Israel had simply ignored the flytilla, allowed all of those who planned on gathering in Bethlehem in solidarity with the Palestinians to land in Ben Gurion and go along on their merry way. What’s the worst thing that could have happened? A bunch of Europeans marching in favor of Palestine is not a newsmaking event, and possibly not even a news-covering event. Unlike the Mavi Marmara flotilla, there is no evidence that the flytilla protestors were contemplating violence, and they would have exhausted themselves yelling and chanting, and nobody would have been any worse for the wear. Israel would have demonstrated that, like every other democratic state, it has no problem with peaceful protestors, and no long term damage would have been done.
Instead, Israel treated a bunch of harmless European and American leftists as if they were the combined Arab armies massing on Israel’s borders. The Shin Bet and the Foreign Ministry worked overtime to pressure airlines into canceling passengers’ tickets, cast an absurdly wide net to determine which travelers flying into Israel might have any connection at all to Palestinian groups, detained those who were able to land, and beat up people riding bikes in the Jordan Valley. And what did this accomplish? Well, Israel’s borders are now blissfully secure and the country will not be brought down by nefarious foreigners singing slogans and protest songs. Oh, and Israel made sure that these same protestors were given the most attention possible by the media, that they were treated by Israeli security and intelligence as far more important than anyone else on the entire planet actually thinks they are, and Israel’s reputation for tolerating dissent was dealt yet another severe and public blow. Clearly a well thought out and executed strategy.
Israel cannot continue to live in deathly fear of opposing speech and contrary views. There are legitimate security threats, and there are exercises designed to be circus side shows. By treating the latter as if they are the former, Israel betrays its insecurities and actually weakens its own defense, which is both the irony and the tragedy of this situation. Are Israel’s enemies supposed to quake in fear of Israeli deterrence efforts when it behaves like an elephant that is afraid of a mouse every time a few hundred protestors want to convene in the West Bank? If Israel cannot formulate an effective, measured, proportionately appropriate response to a bunch of people holding picket signs, how can the government be trusted to deal with actual security security situations in which the lives of its citizens are placed in genuine danger? Israel always comes out of these incidents with a black eye, ends up apologizing to some group of people or even a foreign government, and in the end has done nothing to make itself safer or burnish its democratic credentials. By providing the oxygen to sustain and fuel these tiny flames that explode into infernos, Israel only encourages more and more of this behavior, and puts itself into more no-win situations. Please Israel, stop paying heedless attention to flotillas, flytillas, bike-tillas, and any other type of meaningless non-threatening protest. Let pro-Palestinian protestors come to Israel, do their thing, and go home. The rest of the world will soon begin to ignore them, and before you know it, you will too.
It’s Good To Be A NATO Member
April 12, 2012 § 1 Comment
Turkey did two things today to box Syria in that are extremely clever, and Erdoğan and Davutoğlu deserve a lot of credit for it. First, the army issued an order to its troops on the Syrian border not to engage with Syrian forces unless they are certain that they are being specifically targeted. This comes in response to the shots fired into a refugee camp in Turkey two days ago, which could have precipitated a real escalation but did not thanks to Turkish restraint. Turkey absolutely does not want to be drawn into open conflict with Syria for a variety of reasons, while at the same time it is in Assad’s interests to provoke Turkey in order to muddy the waters and change the conversation away from civilian massacres and also to gauge just how far Turkey is willing to go. The order not to get drawn into a conflict unless targeted – and to thus ignore more boundary-testing on Syria’s part – is a smart move, and lets Turkey play things out on its own terms rather than on Assad’s.
Second, Erdoğan has concluded that the U.N. is of only limited effectiveness and has turned to a more credible actor in using Turkey’s status as a member of NATO in order to pressure Assad. Following Erdoğan’s threat to invoke Article 5 of the NATO charter – which obligates all NATO members to respond to an attack on one of its own – should Syria continue to violate Turkey’s border, NATO announced that it is officially monitoring the situation on the border. This is also a great strategic move on Turkey’s part, since while Assad may want to test Turkey, he certainly does not want to deal with NATO, and unlike the P5 veto in the Security Council that relegates the U.N. to little more than a debate club, NATO does not have such hoops to jump through before acting. The combination of the NATO threat and the order for Turkish restraint gives Assad very little room to maneuver, since a real violation of Turkish sovereignty risks widespread and sustained NATO action but little pincer moves along the border will not trick Turkey into a pointless retaliation. All in all, a good turn of events for Turkey and a bad turn of events for Assad.
Furthermore, do not underestimate the effect of the NATO threat on Syrian compliance with the Annan ceasefire deal. It is not a coincidence that Assad violated the earlier deadline this week but is so far holding up its end of the deal right after Turkey’s NATO threat. Now that it is more than the U.N. that is potentially involved, Assad may wise up to the fact that continued fighting puts him in real danger. Give Erdoğan and Davutoğlu credit for this as well. Their principled position on Syria is beginning to pay dividends.
Netanyahu’s Smart Maneuver
April 12, 2012 § Leave a comment
Yediot reports today that Netanyahu is planning on responding to Abbas’s letter detailing Palestinian demands and preconditions for negotiations by dropping the one precondition of his own, namely that the Palestinians recognize Israel as a Jewish state. Irrespective of whether this is a serious step toward reinvigorating peace talks, or just Netanyahu’s way of winning the battle for public opinion by highlighting Israel’s willingness to negotiate compared to Abbas’s obduracy, it is a good move. I have written before about why insisting on preconditions before negotiating is a bad idea, and by removing his, Netanyahu is bargaining from a position of strength.
Aside from the strategic aspect, dropping the demand for recognition of Israel as a Jewish state is good policy as well, and Netanyahu should not let it become a sticking point should talks ever progress to a final stage. Israel’s status as a Jewish state is not dependent on any outside recognition of that fact, and demanding that other parties recognize it as such makes Israel appear insecure. Israel’s Jewish character does not require Palestinian validation, and Netanyahu’s years of incessant demands that Palestinians acknowledge Israel as Jewish has always seemed petty and nothing more than a naked appeal to nationalism. The Jewish connection to Israel is enshrined in the Declaration of Independence, Israeli law and custom, and Israeli society. Whether or not Mahmoud Abbas wants to admit this fact or not is of no consequence, and Israel should not elevate any outside party’s views on this issue to the point where it becomes an obstacle to a successful peace agreement. Let’s hope that this negotiating maneuver marks an end to the era of Israel being more concerned with irrelevant outside validation than with doing everything it can to implement a viable two state solution.
Jonathan Pollard Is Not Gilad Shalit
April 11, 2012 § 1 Comment
I cannot believe that I am writing about Jonathan Pollard for the second time in as many days, but today’s news from Pollard land is that Gilad Shalit’s father Noam met yesterday with Pollard’s wife Esther to offer his support. Noam Shalit believes that Israel must do more on Pollard’s behalf since the state sent him into action and it is therefore the state’s responsibility to bring him back home. Gilad Shalit himself signed a petition last week asking Shimon Peres to press the Pollard issue with President Obama.
Undoubtedly, it will not be long before Pollard’s supporters begin equating his situation with that of Gilad Shalit’s and begin using stronger language about the state’s duties toward him, asking why Israel paid such a high price for rescuing Shalit from his captives but is not willing to go out on a limb for Pollard. In the interests of grounding such comparisons before they even take flight, let’s review some basic facts. Shalit was a 19 year old conscript captured by a terrorist organization that illegally breached the border fence and abducted him on Israeli territory. Pollard was a 31 year old civilian analyst who committed espionage in exchange for cash and jewelry and pled guilty to spying against his own country. Shalit’s actions were in no way responsible for his abduction (and please, spare me the noxious theory that all Israeli soldiers everywhere are legitimate targets no matter the circumstance) and he was not engaged in any hostilities against his captors at the time of his being taken hostage. Pollard’s actions are directly responsible for his imprisonment, as he stole classified information and passed on thousands of documents to a foreign government. Shalit was held in terrible conditions in violation of the Geneva Conventions and despite calls from the U.N., the Red Cross, the G-8, and individual countries for his immediate and unconditional release. Pollard is a legitimate prisoner under the laws of the United States and in accordance with international norms, is housed in safe and sanitary conditions in a medium security federal prison, and no international governmental organizations or human rights groups have called for his release. Shalit was illegally held by Hamas as a hostage for the sole purpose of extorting Israel into complying with Hamas demands and not because Shalit had any information or intelligence that would be of value to his abductors. Pollard is alleged by the U.S. to have an unacknowledged accomplice (according to Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon) and the precise details of everything that Pollard passed on are still unclear. Shalit did not have to express remorse for his actions because he took no actions at all. Pollard remains unrepentant for spying against his own country. Shalit has been an Israeli citizen from birth, embraced both de facto and de jure by his country by virtue of being unambiguously and openly sent by Israel to serve in the military. Pollard did not become an Israeli citizen until 1995 after he had been arrested, convicted, and imprisoned, and Israel did not admit until 1998 that he was working on Israel’s behalf with its full knowledge and authorization. Shalit’s abduction did not subject any of his fellow citizens to additional danger or peril, nor did it damage Israel’s relations with any other country. Pollard’s spying cast serious aspersions on every Jewish citizen of the United States and created a backlash against Israel in the U.S. intelligence community. Shalit is an innocent kid who was held hostage by terrorists. Pollard is a traitorous spy who is wholly deserving of remaining in jail.
Gilad Shalit has gone through more than any person should rightfully be subjected to, and he has earned the right thousands of times over to hold and express any opinion he chooses without being questioned by anyone. The Shalit family, however, is doing itself a disservice by associating itself with Pollard. Gilad Shalit is in a completely different universe than Jonathan Pollard, and anyone who fully equates the two has a gross misunderstanding of who Pollard is and what he has done.
Turkey Should Revisit Its Kurdish Opening
April 11, 2012 § 3 Comments
Turkey’s heralded “Kurdish Opening” in 2009, in which the Erdoğan government took concrete steps to better integrate Turkey’s Kurds into political and civic life by relaxing restrictions on Kurdish language and culture and even offering an amnesty to PKK members, ended badly. PKK members returning to Turkey openly exhorted Kurds to fight against the government, Kurdish politicians began calling for Kurdish autonomy, and the AKP quickly backed away from its less restrictive policies. I have pointed out before – particularly during last month’s Nevruz unrest – how crucial it is that Turkey resolve its Kurdish issue, since if it does not it will continue to create a drag on Turkey’s political development and embroil the army in a constant low grade war against PKK separatists. As big of a headache that Syria is now causing for Turkey, there exists an opportunity to use the conflict in Syria as a spur to reinvigorate the Kurdish opening and drive a wedge between Turkey’s Kurdish population and the PKK.
As Gonul Tol notes in Foreign Policy, the idea of a Syria-PKK alliance keeps Turkish leaders up at night, and separatist radicalization among Syrian Kurds will spill over into Turkey’s Kurds as well. In addition, the growing refugee crisis and mass migration into Turkey is bound to contain PKK members no matter how hard Turkey tries to keep them out, and the PKK has demonstrated its capacity to rile up Kurds in Diyarkabır province and other areas of southeastern Turkey. Tol’s takeaway from this is that Turkey needs to work especially hard to bring an end to the fighting in Syria, but any regular readers of this blog (to the extent that there are any) know that I don’t think Turkey will ever go so far as to send in its own military, and it has a very limited capacity to force an international response. I think that given the dangerous implications for Turkey with regard to its Kurdish population the longer that Syria’s descent into chaos continues, Turkey needs to be proactive and immediately take concrete steps to mollify the concerns of its Kurds. The only way to blunt the influence of the PKK is to make it clear that Turkey’s Kurds have plenty to gain through the political process and that violent separatists do the Kurdish population no favors.
There are some easy concrete steps that Ankara can take immediately. First, rather than continue to stonewall the parliamentary investigation into the Uludere airstrike that killed 35 civilians in December, the Justice Ministry should cooperate quickly and comprehensively to demonstrate that the government’s fight against the PKK will not adversely affect the Kurdish population in general.
Second, the constant demonization and harassment of the BDP and Kurdish journalists should end and Erdoğan must make clear that the BDP is a legitimate political party like every other party with seats in the parliament. Whether the BDP is the equivalent of Sinn Fein or legitimately a separate entity from the PKK, the bottom line is that the only way to isolate PKK terrorists is to prioritize a political, rather than a military, solution. Erdoğan last week declared that he would be willing to talk with Kurdish politicians who “can stand on their own feet,” but he needs to go further. Once the AKP normalizes its relationship with the BDP, the tensions between the BDP and PKK will quickly come to the surface in a public way, and which way the BDP turns will give the government a good indication of whether or not there is a serious actor willing to go the political route when speaking on behalf of Turkey’s Kurds. Relatedly, imprisoning scores of journalists for “advocating” on behalf of Kurdish autonomy is entirely self-defeating. It turns legitimate activity into criminal activity, and it sullies Turkey’s international reputation while radicalizing Kurdish civilians. Ending what is a poorly considered policy will go a long way toward building good will.
Third, Erdoğan must make sure that the new constitution gives Turkish Kurds full freedom to speak their language, celebrate their culture, and be secure in their Kurdish identity while remaining full Turkish citizens. A sense of comfort and stability in Turkey will stand in stark contrast to what is taking place right across the border in Syria, and the process of writing a new Turkish constitution is a golden opportunity to drive this point home. If Turkey’s Kurds feel that decades of official discrimination are coming to an end, they will be far less likely to sympathize with a violent separatist movement that feeds on Kurdish resentment.
Turkey is gearing up for its fighting season against the PKK, and it should pursue the PKK with all military means at its disposal. If Ankara wants to avoid a larger problem and contain Syrian blowback among its civilian Kurds, however, it needs to pair the military offensive with a goodwill offensive. This is both the ideal time to do so and an absolutely necessary time to do so with Syria quickly exploding. Bringing back and further extending the short-lived Kurdish opening of 2009 is the only way to deal with the problem at its root, and doing so will stabilize Turkish society and begin to roll back support for the PKK by presenting a real alternative to Kurdish separatism.
A Study in Contrasts
April 11, 2012 § Leave a comment
Omar al-Hayeb is a member of a legendary Bedouin family in Israel. The al-Hayebs were founding members of the IDF’s Desert Reconnaissance Battalion, which is composed of Bedouin volunteers (Bedouins are exempt from serving in the IDF) who serve as expert trackers, and Omar al-Hayeb was the highest ranking Bedouin member of the IDF while serving as a tracker along the northern border. In 2006, he was found guilty of espionage and drug trafficking on behalf of Hizballah after being caught in 2002 with classified maps of IDF troop positions and lists of IDF communications channels while on his way to a meeting with Hizballah members. Al-Hayeb’s story is a sad one in that he was severely injured by a Hizballah roadside bomb in 1996 and lost an eye as a result, and he ended up selling drugs supplied by the same organization that was responsible for his injury in order to make ends meet. Yesterday, Israel released al-Hayeb from prison after his sentence had already been commuted once before because he is in poor health and is deemed not to be a threat to the state.
On Saturday, Hamas hanged three men in Gaza, one of whom was convicted of spying for Israel. Palestinian law imposes the death penalty for treason and for drug trafficking, so if al-Hayeb had been a Palestinian subject to either Hamas’s or the PA’s jurisdiction, he wouldn’t have stood a chance. Israel is far from perfect, but its behavior in the West Bank sometimes makes people forget that its liberal democratic ethos stands in stark contrast to that of its neighbors. This is one of those times.
