| 
 Al-Jazeerah History
 
 Archives
 
 Mission & Name
 
 Conflict Terminology
 
 Editorials
 
 Gaza Holocaust
 
 Gulf War
 
 Isdood
 
 Islam
 
 News
 
 News Photos
 
 Opinion 
	
	
	Editorials
 
 US Foreign Policy (Dr. El-Najjar's Articles)
 
 www.aljazeerah.info
 
	  
           |  | 
 Turkey's Difficult Choice in 
	  Palestine, Israel  By 
	Ramzy Baroud  
		Al-Jazeerah, CCUN, March 
		4, 2013 
		 An Israeli-Turkish rapprochement is unmistakably underway, but 
		unlike the heyday of their political alignment of the1990’s, the 
		revamped relationship is likely to be more guarded and will pose a 
		greater challenge to Turkey rather than to Israel.
 
 Israeli media 
		referenced a report by Turkish newspaper Radikal with much interest, 
		regarding secret talks between Turkey and Israel that could yield an 
		Israeli apology for its army’s raid against the Turkish aid flotilla, 
		the Mavi Marmara, which was on its way to Gaza in May 2010. The assault 
		resulted in the death of 9 Turkish activists, including a US citizen.
 
 The attack wrought a crisis unseen since the rise of the 
		Turkish-Israeli alliance starting in 1984, followed by a full blown 
		strategic partnership in 1996. But that crisis didn’t necessarily start 
		at the Mavi Marmara deadly attack, or previous Israeli insults of 
		Turkey. Nor did it begin with the Israeli so-called Operation Cast Lead 
		against besieged Gaza in Dec 2008, which resulted in the death and 
		wounding of thousands of Palestinians, mostly civilians.
 
 According to the Radikal report (published in Feb 20 and cited by 
		Israeli Haaretz two days later), Israel is willing to meet two of 
		Turkey’s conditions for the resumption of full ties: an apology, and 
		compensation to the families of the victims. “Turkey has also demanded 
		Israel lift the siege,” on Gaza, Haaretz reported, citing Radikal, “but 
		is prepared to drop that demand.”
 
 The reports of secret talks 
		are not new. Similar reports had surfaced of talks in Geneva and Cairo. 
		Turkish-Israeli reconciliation has, at least for a while, been an 
		important item on the US foreign policy agenda in the Middle East, until 
		few months ago when the US elections pushed everything else to the 
		backseat. But despite fiery rhetoric, the signs of a thawing conflict 
		are obvious. Writing in Al-Ahram Weekly on Jan. 16, Galal Nassar 
		attributed that Tel Aviv is working “its idiosyncratic ways to patch up 
		what it regarded as a passing storm cloud in its relations with its 
		friend, and perhaps strategic ally.” Turkey, responded in kind, in its 
		decision “to lift its veto against Israeli participation in non-military 
		activities in NATO.”
 
 Leaked news of a political settlement are 
		not the only headlines related to this topic. There is also the matter 
		of military and economic cooperation, which are even more common. 
		According to FlightGlobal.com, reporting on Feb. 21, the Israeli 
		government has agreed to the delivery of electronic support measures 
		(ESM) equipment “to be installed on the Turkish air force's new Boeing 
		737 airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) system aircraft.”
 
 Meanwhile, a large Turkish conglomerate Zorlu Group “has been working in 
		recent months to convince the Israeli government and the Leviathan gas 
		field partners to approve energy exports to Turkey,” TheMarker has 
		learned, as reported in Haaretz on Feb 14.
 
 This is only the tip 
		of the iceberg. If these reports are even partially credible, 
		Turkish-Israeli relations are being carefully, but decidedly repaired. 
		This stands in contrast with declared Turkish foreign policy and the 
		many passionate statements by Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip 
		Erdogan and other leading Turkish politicians.
 
 Following a Nov 
		16 Friday prayer, The New York Times reported from Istanbul that Erdogan 
		denied any talks between his country and Israel regarding resolving a 
		crisis instigated by another Israeli assault on Gaza. He went even 
		further, “We do not have any connections in terms of dialogue with 
		Israel,” he reportedly said. At a parliamentary meeting few days later, 
		he described Israel’s conduct in Gaza as “ethnic cleansing.”
 
 On 
		Nov 20, Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu was in Gaza on a 
		solidarity visit, along with an Arab League delegation in an 
		unprecedented show of solidarity. In a strange contrast with the spirit 
		of his mission, however, “Davutoglu suggested to reporters that 
		back-channel discussions had been opened with Israeli authorities,” 
		according to the Times.
 
 But why the contradictions, the apparent 
		Turkish turnabout and if full rapprochement is in fact achieved, will 
		the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) be able to sustain its 
		still successful brand in the Middle East that was largely achieved as a 
		result of its pro-Palestinian policies?
 
 Here, we must get 
		something straight; the strong and growing pro-Palestinian sentiment in 
		Turkey is not the outcome of self-serving political agenda, neither of 
		the AKP nor of any other. The support for Palestinians was most apparent 
		in the June 2011 elections, which was convincingly won by the Erdogan 
		party. “Turks voted on two ‘p's’ -- their pocketbooks and Palestine,” 
		Steven A. Cook wrote in the Atlantic on Jan 28. “Erdogan, who plans to 
		be Turkey's president one day and who believes that the AKP will be 
		dominant for at least another decade, is unlikely to be receptive to a 
		substantial improvement in Ankara's ties with Jerusalem.” If the 
		centrality of Palestine is so essential to Turkish political awareness, 
		then no ambitious politician – for example, Erdogan, Davutoglu or 
		President Abdullah Gül - are likely to gamble with a major departure 
		from their current policies.
 
 That might be entirely true if one 
		discounts the Syria factor, which along with the so-called Arab Spring 
		has complicated Turkey’s regional standing that until two years ago was 
		predicated on reaching out to Iran, Syria, Libya and other Middle 
		Eastern partners. For years prior to the current turmoil, Turkey had 
		cautiously yet cogently adopted a new foreign policy that aimed at 
		balancing out its near total reliance on NATO and the West in general. 
		It mended its ties with its immediate neighbors in the East, including 
		Iran, but polarization created by the Syria civil war has ended Turkey’s 
		balancing act, at least for the time being.
 
 Turkey’s request for 
		the deployment of Patriot missile batteries along its border with Syria, 
		its role in supporting the Syria National Council and its attempt at 
		coaxing various Kurdish groups in northern Iraq and Syria are all 
		proving consistent with old Turkish policies. Indeed, Davutoglu’s 
		zero-problems with neighbors doctrine is but a historical footnote.
 
 The Syrian war has placed Turkey back within a Western camp, although 
		not with the same decisiveness of the past, when Turkey’s generals 
		discounted all other alliances in favor of NATO’s. This is representing 
		an opening for Israel, which with the support of US President Barack 
		Obama’s new administration is likely to translate to some measures of 
		normalization. The degree of that normalization will depend largely on 
		which direction the Syrian civil war is heading and the degree of 
		receptiveness on Turkish streets in seeing Israel once more paraded as 
		Turkey’s strategic partner.
 
 Some commentators suggest that 
		Egypt’s own foreign policy towards Israel – Egypt currently being the 
		main country in the Middle East with the ‘leverage’ of talking to both 
		Israel and the Palestinians – is depriving Turkey from a strong 
		bargaining position within NATO. By having no open contacts with Israel, 
		some suggest Turkey is losing favor with the US and other western 
		partners. Interestingly, Israel’s planned apology, according to Radikal, 
		is supposedly timed with Obama’s visit to Israel in March.
 
 Neither Turkey and Israel, nor the US and NATO are able to sustain the 
		status quo – the rift between Israel and Turkey – for much longer. But 
		returning to an old paradigm, where Turkey is no longer an advocate of 
		Palestinian rights and a champion of Arab and Muslim causes, could prove 
		even more costly. There can be no easy answers, especially as the region 
		seems to be changing partly through unpredictable dynamics.
 
 Erdogan and his party may eventually concoct an answer. This could 
		include Israel and a new set of balances that would allow them access to 
		both East and West. But that answer would no longer be the upright, 
		high-minding politics Erdogan constantly advocates, but instead good old 
		self-serving policies and nothing else.
 
 - Ramzy Baroud (www.ramzybaroud.net) 
		is an internationally-syndicated columnist and the editor of 
		PalestineChronicle.com. His latest book is: My Father was A Freedom 
		Fighter: Gaza's Untold Story (Pluto Press).
     
 
 |  |  |