Or The Saga of an Israeli Mistake, an American Weakness, and an Islamic Victory
Georgy Gounev, georgygounev@yahoo.com – June 10, 2010
The dramatic events that took place on a sunny Monday morning in the Mediterranean Sea prompted a new rise in the already dangerous level of anti- Israeli and anti-Semitic moods and attitudes throughout the world. The events on June 1 possess three very different but equally important components: An Israeli one, an American one and a Turkish one. The first aspect expresses itself in the unforgivable failure of the Israeli Government to eliminate such a dangerous source of anti-Israeli emotions as the fate of the residents of Gaza City.
The acceptance of the principle involving unlimited access of humanitarian aid to Gaza from every state, institution or organization ready to accept an Israeli check of the arriving cargo would have prevented the loss of life that took place on June 1. It is obvious that this principle would have solved the most painful problems – the needs of the Palestinians and the security of the Israelis.
Besides a huge strategic mistake, the Israeli decision makers and military leaders committed a huge tactical one by deciding to send soldiers descending one- by-one on the ropes hanging over an angry crowd. Thus, the calamity became unavoidable.
The official American reaction constitutes the second component of the Mediterranean drama. The response of the United States was delivered not with the passion provided by the defense of important principles but with the uncertainty of mediocre politicians who have lost their moral compass. The Secretary of State Hillary Clinton condemned the violence per se, and the loss of life, not blaming anyone for the tragedy. On June 2, one of her high level associates made an outright idiotic statement based on the premise that not only the United States and Turkey are close allies but also that the miraculously undisturbed friendship between Israel and Turkey continues to provide a powerful bond between both countries!
This statement is not just stupid, but it is also entirely false. It is true that the United States and Turkey had a perfect relationship in the past. It is also true that the alliance between them had been forged by the fight against the common enemy during the Korean War. It was on this battlefield where the Turkish contingent proved itself one of the best fighting units in the United Nations’ force.
Undoubtedly, for a long time Turkey and Israel had a perfect partnership in all important areas of politics and defense. At least for the time being however, this period belongs to the past and doesn’t have anything to do with the present. The truth is that today Turkey is one of the most anti-American and anti-Israeli countries in the world. What prevents the American policymakers to shout loudly the truth? It is the truth that always made America strong, and there are lies like this that are creating the false image that the country is simultaneously weak, hesitant and mediocre.
Those who are burning flags nowadays and busy jumping to quick conclusions should realize that the entire trip to Gaza was nothing short of a major provocation that represents the third component of the incident. The Islamic addition to a fast developing conflict expressed itself by the actions of the Turkish Government that rendered its full support to Radical Islamic organizers of the voyage. The actions of Turkey exemplify the third dimension of the complicated situation, and its mishandling by Israel and the United States transformed it into a major victory for Radical Islam.
What qualifies the sending of the flotilla with an allegedly humanitarian purpose as a provocation? Well, simply because if the organizers of the trip had only the noble purpose of bringing supplies to the residents of Gaza, they would have acted in a completely different manner.
The simplest way would have been for the flotilla to sail to some port located in close proximity to Gaza – Ashdod for instance. Upon passing through the Israeli inspection of the cargo the supplies would have been distributed among the needy population without any problems.
If some hot-blooded individual who has compassion for the plight of the residents of Gaza is curious why the load should be inspected by Israeli authorities, there is no secret whatsoever. Simply, too much weaponry and explosives have been smuggled into the area in the past and too many rockets have been fired at the neighboring Israeli communities.
If the participants in the sea voyage didn’t use the available painless and bloodless opportunities to deliver their load to Gaza, there is no getting away from the fact that what the state of Israel was facing was nothing less than a deliberate set-up designed to bring about violence and bloodshed.
It was the Government of Turkey that stood behind the extremist Turkish organization that put together the logistics of the provocative journey. The main strategic goal slowly and consistently pursued by the current Turkish Government is the gradual transformation of Turkey into an Islamic state.
The internal aspects of the government’s strategy were developed with the elimination of the political role of the Turkish Army in mind. What should not be forgotten or ignored is the fact that for almost a century the army was the main guarantor of the secular system developed by the founder of modern Turkey Kemal Ataturk.
In the area of foreign policy the same strategy is executed by the gradual freeze of the relationship of Turkey with the United States, Western Europe and Israel. This cooling trend triggered a much faster warming of the Turkish-Iranian relations, which is in full-keeping with the powerful Islamic trend of the current foreign policy of Turkey.
Consequently, the provocation with the “humanitarian” sea expedition to Gaza was a very convenient way for the Turkish Islamists to inflict a heavy moral blow on Israel before justifying the termination of the excellent political and military cooperation that until recently existed between both countries. The fact that the Israeli authorities fell into the trap so carefully prepared for them is another issue that deserves a separate investigation. Now we are addressing the background and the nature of the provocation that triggered the bloodshed.
There were times when the Prime Minister of Turkey Tayyip Erdogan used to be more open about his intentions and ambitions. It was he who made the following statement involving the strategy of his party: “Democracy for us is like a train from which we could get off at any station we like.”
What could happen though is that the train of Turkish democracy will continue its way, leaving Mr. Erdogan and his associates at the station where they choose to leave the train…
Foreign Affairs Challenges 