The Turkish-Israeli Reconciliation: A Balance Sheet

The Turkish-Israeli Reconciliation: A Balance Sheet
 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Turkish-Israeli reconciliation – while raising legitimate moral questions – yielded terms very much in Israel’s favor, compared to where things stood recently. Legal threats have been averted, Turkish pressure over the siege of Gaza has been lifted, and the prospects for full Israeli participation in NATO activities are significantly brighter. The rapprochement should have no ill effect on Israel’s relationships with other friends and allies in the Eastern Mediterranean.

In Israel, where last week's headlines often feel like ancient history, the cabinet's decision on the reconciliation package with Turkey faded fast. It was replaced by anguish and anger over the murder of a Jewish 13-year-old in her bed, and the shooting attack on a family car that took the life of the father – foul deeds that have yet to be denounced by Palestinian leadership.

Still, the Turkish-Israeli reconciliation remains a bold government decision that was taken in defiance of popular sentiment. The cabinet vote, seven to three in favor, was in roughly inverse proportion to public opinion.

The decision represented a conjunction of grand strategy and manipulative diplomacy; of national security and business interests; of cold calculation and identity politics; of raw power and legal finery. At the end of the day, the reconciliation leaves Israel morally bruised but strategically better off.

Many in Israel were outraged by the deal, in part because it did not (and indeed, could not) provide for the return of two individuals and the bodies of two soldiers held by Hamas. Others are angered by Israel’s apology and payment for the Marmara incident.

The Marmara was the lead vessel in a Turkish flotilla that was seeking to breach Israel's legal blockade of the terrorist entity in Gaza in 2010. Israeli commandos raided the vessel, and nine Turkish nationals were killed in the melee. On board the ship were a large number of activists from IHH, a radical Islamist group in Turkey.

For the Turkish victims’ families to be paid millions in compensation – albeit ex gratia – is not easy for Israelis to accept, particularly in light of the Palmer report that stated unequivocally that Israel acted within her rights during the raid. Several of the IDF soldiers who were involved have tried to petition the courts against the payment.

There is no hope, moreover, even among supporters of the deal, for a true change of mind on Erdoğan's part with regard to Israel. His hostility towards Israel is deeply ingrained, as is his sympathy towards Hamas. Our close associates of recent years, Greece, Cyprus, and Egypt, all view Turkey with extreme suspicion.

Why agree to the deal, then? The answer lies within the realm of strategic calculation, as well as within the dynamics of the negotiations. A cost-benefit analysis should be made not in the abstract, but against the background of what had already been conceded and what has now been gained.

The most painful “give” – the apology (not for the operation itself, which was legal under the law of the sea, but for "operational mistakes" during the raid) – was already made in March 2013, under heavy pressure from the Obama Administration. At the time, the principle of compensation was also agreed upon, roughly at the levels ultimately incorporated in the agreement. Three other considerations stood in the way, however, and a fourth constraint was added in 2014. But all four obstacles were overcome by mid-2016.

Politics: As long as Erdoğan was still fighting to impose his new model of Turkish constitutional practices, centered on an empowered presidency, Israel saw no need to lend him a helping hand. Once he had solidified his position, however, it became pointless to wait for a different political proposition in Ankara. Meanwhile, political changes in Israel secured Netanyahu against the prospect of an aggressive parliamentary campaign by the hard right to protest the decision.

Legal issues: It proved more difficult than initially expected to ensure an end to all claims and procedures launched against Israel and Israeli officers in the wake of the Marmara incident. Given the potential for trouble (demonstrated by the Turkish-instigated Comoro Islands appeal to the ICC), these issues had to be worked out in detail.

Gaza: Again and again, in his aggressive (and occasionally anti-Semitic) style, Erdoğan promised to insist on a “third condition” besides the apology and compensation: the lifting of the “siege” on Gaza. Working in close association with Qatar, he placed himself at the service of Muslim Brotherhood offshoots across the region, including Hamas.

For Israel, this was a deal breaker. Hamas cannot possibly be allowed to trade freely, or the Strip will soon be inundated with Iranian arms. Thus, a broad range of face-saving alternatives was offered to the Turkish side, designed to enable Erdoğan to retreat while claiming to advance.

The sides ultimately agreed to these terms: Turkey will be allowed to build a power station and other facilities in Gaza. (This is actually a prospect welcomed by Israel, since the IDF is acutely aware of the need to overcome power and water shortages there). But all relevant supplies will be unloaded at Ashdod Port, inspected, and driven in by truck through the Kerem Shalom Crossing. In effect, the Turkish government conceded Israel's point.

Terror infrastructures: By the summer of 2014, Israel could no longer tolerate the presence in Turkey of an active Hamas terror network. This is not only because Salah al-'Aruri claimed responsibility on Hamas’s behalf for the abduction and murder of the three teenagers in June, but also because of his central role in the plans to launch a wave of terror and subversion to destroy the PA, foiled when Israel arrested some 100 of his operatives in the West Bank.

For Turkey, a member of NATO, to harbor and abet a major terrorist organization that most other member states (bar Norway) designate as such became increasingly untenable. Turkish diplomatic contacts with Hamas will remain intact, but Israel won this point as well.

Thus, the balance sheet of the deal – when viewed in context – justifies the decision to commit to it. The Israeli policy of slow progress, showing no eagerness to cut the deal, paid off in view of what has been achieved.

There is one more vital consideration in the deal’s favor. Integral to the deal, if not explicit in it, is the assumption that the reconciliation with Turkey will remove the obstacles to full Israeli participation in NATO activities. Unlike other Mediterranean Dialogue countries, Israel comes not as a supplicant but as a major potential contributor on a wide range of subjects, from intelligence to desert tactics. Rapid reaction will be needed to make good use of this opportunity.

In any case, Israel's friends and allies in the Eastern Mediterranean – Egypt, Greece, and Cyprus – have no reason to worry about the implications of this rapprochement. No return to the Israeli-Turkish military alliance of the 1990s (or the late 1950s) is in the cards. Better diplomatic and economic channels in the region are in everyone's interest.

It remains to be seen whether the deal signals a deep change in Turkish orientation. Meanwhile, every effort should be made to cement the links of truly like-minded nations in the Eastern Mediterranean.

Africa Sees Zion as a World Power. Netanyahu's Royal Tour of Africa continues. Long Live the King of Zion

Netanyahu: Africa sees Israel as a world power

As his Africa tour continues, PM Benjamin Netanyahu says shift of African attitudes toward Israel could lead to "a strategic change in Israel's international position" • PM: Israel's improved global status will obligate PA to come to negotiating table.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta in Nairobi, Tuesday | Photo credit: Ziv Koren

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is very satisfied with his ongoing visit to Africa. It's palpable. "Israel is seen here as a world power in a number of fields: technology, intelligence, water, agriculture, cyber, and much more," he said.

The prime minister feels that the continent is excited about its renewed love affair with Israel. Maybe not all of it, but the direction is a positive one. There are Muslim African nations like Senegal that prove that contact is possible with more than just Christian countries, and even South Africa is sending out signals that it might be possible to improve relations after Foreign Ministry Director General Dore Gold visited recently, and the right kind of contact is already underway.

It's worth mentioning that South Africa was the country that led to Israel being removed from the position of observer in the African Union.

Now, when so many countries on the continent are asked that Israel be reinstated, it could very well be that South Africa won't object. "We are seeing the beginnings of movement with South Africa," Gold said Tuesday.

Netanyahu said at a joint press conference Tuesday with Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta that "the president of Kenya ... said very clearly that he and his colleagues, whom I met with yesterday, would work to restore Israel as an observer to the African Union. This is very significant from our point of view.

"Africa is a continent of 54 countries. The possibility of changing their direction and their attitude toward Israel would be a strategic change in Israel's international position."

Netanyahu is pleased with Israel's current status in the world. He explained on Tuesday that Israel had a "special status" and that its biggest challenge was to find funding to fulfill its possibilities. Netanyahu said that groups he "never imagined" were "knocking on Israel's door."

Netanyahu explained that when it came to Israel's strategic relations, it had a special anchor -- the United States. Among Israel's close neighbors, there are Egypt and Jordan, and that circle is expanding. Netanyahu called the "Mediterranean alliance with Cyprus and Greece" something that could not be stopped, and noticed that the potential for natural gas exports ran through that same axis. The prime minister stressed that normalization with Turkey was of "great importance" and could be an economic boon.

Netanyahu intends to improve relations with Latin American nations, and already has an invitation from the president of Argentina. He also plans to visit Kazakhstan at the end of the year.

Netanyahu believes that the new approach of expanding Israel's circle of friends will obligate Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas to come to the negotiating table, and that eventually all these processes will lead to true reconciliation with the Palestinians, who are currently hoping to secure international pressure on Israel and are evading direct peace talks.

According to Netanyahu, the Palestinians are running to the international arena where they receive "automatic, global" support.

Netanyahu said he was talking about making a move that would leave the Palestinians no alternative but to undertake direct bilateral negotiations, which he said they have refused to do so long as they had an international escape haven.

The prime minister's visit to Kenya on Tuesday and Uganda the day before, where he spoke at a ceremony marking the 40th anniversary of the Entebbe hostage rescue operation, made waves in the local media. Kenya's Daily Nation newspaper ran a headline that touted Israel's "new African agenda." On Wednesday, Netanyahu and his wife, Sara, were scheduled to continue their African tour, making visits to Rwanda and Ethiopia.

Africa Sees Zion as a World Power. Netanyahu's Royal Tour of Africa continues. Long Live the King of Zion

Netanyahu: Africa sees Israel as a world power

As his Africa tour continues, PM Benjamin Netanyahu says shift of African attitudes toward Israel could lead to "a strategic change in Israel's international position" • PM: Israel's improved global status will obligate PA to come to negotiating table.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta in Nairobi, Tuesday | Photo credit: Ziv Koren

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is very satisfied with his ongoing visit to Africa. It's palpable. "Israel is seen here as a world power in a number of fields: technology, intelligence, water, agriculture, cyber, and much more," he said.

The prime minister feels that the continent is excited about its renewed love affair with Israel. Maybe not all of it, but the direction is a positive one. There are Muslim African nations like Senegal that prove that contact is possible with more than just Christian countries, and even South Africa is sending out signals that it might be possible to improve relations after Foreign Ministry Director General Dore Gold visited recently, and the right kind of contact is already underway.

It's worth mentioning that South Africa was the country that led to Israel being removed from the position of observer in the African Union.

Now, when so many countries on the continent are asked that Israel be reinstated, it could very well be that South Africa won't object. "We are seeing the beginnings of movement with South Africa," Gold said Tuesday.

Netanyahu said at a joint press conference Tuesday with Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta that "the president of Kenya ... said very clearly that he and his colleagues, whom I met with yesterday, would work to restore Israel as an observer to the African Union. This is very significant from our point of view.

"Africa is a continent of 54 countries. The possibility of changing their direction and their attitude toward Israel would be a strategic change in Israel's international position."

Netanyahu is pleased with Israel's current status in the world. He explained on Tuesday that Israel had a "special status" and that its biggest challenge was to find funding to fulfill its possibilities. Netanyahu said that groups he "never imagined" were "knocking on Israel's door."

Netanyahu explained that when it came to Israel's strategic relations, it had a special anchor -- the United States. Among Israel's close neighbors, there are Egypt and Jordan, and that circle is expanding. Netanyahu called the "Mediterranean alliance with Cyprus and Greece" something that could not be stopped, and noticed that the potential for natural gas exports ran through that same axis. The prime minister stressed that normalization with Turkey was of "great importance" and could be an economic boon.

Netanyahu intends to improve relations with Latin American nations, and already has an invitation from the president of Argentina. He also plans to visit Kazakhstan at the end of the year.

Netanyahu believes that the new approach of expanding Israel's circle of friends will obligate Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas to come to the negotiating table, and that eventually all these processes will lead to true reconciliation with the Palestinians, who are currently hoping to secure international pressure on Israel and are evading direct peace talks.

According to Netanyahu, the Palestinians are running to the international arena where they receive "automatic, global" support.

Netanyahu said he was talking about making a move that would leave the Palestinians no alternative but to undertake direct bilateral negotiations, which he said they have refused to do so long as they had an international escape haven.

The prime minister's visit to Kenya on Tuesday and Uganda the day before, where he spoke at a ceremony marking the 40th anniversary of the Entebbe hostage rescue operation, made waves in the local media. Kenya's Daily Nation newspaper ran a headline that touted Israel's "new African agenda." On Wednesday, Netanyahu and his wife, Sara, were scheduled to continue their African tour, making visits to Rwanda and Ethiopia.

Avigdor Lieberman: New Sheriff in Zion

Actually, Avigdor Lieberman Is Just What Israel Needs Right Now

Avigdor Lieberman believes Israel must end the cycle of Palestinian incitement and violence, not manage it.

Peaceniks may be up in arms about the appointment of Avigdor Lieberman as Israel's next minister of defense, but the country's enemies are worried — and rightly so.

Yes, as the inevitable flurry of articles accompanying his appointment are sure to point out, Lieberman once said that Israel could bomb the Aswan dam in the event of war with Egypt and he also said that captured Palestinian terrorists should be "drowned in the Dead Sea." But Lieberman, arguably the biggest loudmouth in Israel (herecently called Netanyahu — the man he's been angling to work for — "a liar, cheater and crook"), is also a reasonable politician.

Lieberman's core beliefs are squarely rooted in principles that most Israelis accept and that make good sense. He has expressed support for the establishment of a Palestinian state alongside Israel as part of a final settlement, but he also maintains , as he put it at the Saban Forum in 2006, that the negotiating process is based on three fundamentally erroneous assumptions: "that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the main fact of instability in the Middle East, that the conflict is territorial and not ideological, and that the establishment of a Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders will end the conflict."

Lieberman's core beliefs are squarely rooted in common sense principles that most Israelis accept.

Although willing to trade land (including the West Bank settlement of Nokdim, where he lives) under certain conditions, Lieberman resents the Obama administration's relentless pressure for upfront Israeli concessions, noting that two decades and more of concessions to the Palestinians "brought neither results nor solutions." He is correct that finding more things for Israel to give up, even as the cycle of Palestinian incitement and violence continues, is not the answer.

Having experienced poverty first-hand while growing up in the Soviet Union, Lieberman has spoken eloquently about the need to address the deplorable socioeconomic conditions among Palestinians. This is partly why he has long called for toppling the Hamas regime in Gaza, which Netanyahu, former defense minister Moshe Ya'alon and the rest of Israel's political and military establishment have come to accept as a manageable problem.

Lieberman believes the deplorable socioeconomic conditions among Palestinians must be improved to sustain peace.

Not everything Lieberman believes is nestled firmly within Israeli public consensus, but even his more extreme ideas are rooted in hard-nosed realism, not ideology or ethnic particularism. His long-standing advocacy of the death penalty for convicted terrorists, for example, is premised on the simple recognition that Palestinian terrorists are today free to murder based on the correct expectation that they will later be released in prisoner exchanges.

Lieberman is also cognizant of the fact that the U.S.-Israel relationship is of the utmost importance. When Israeli minister Naftali Bennett attacked U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry's attempt to rekindle the peace process, Lieberman quickly fired back, stating , "There can be disagreements among friends, but one [Israel] doesn't have to attack someone [the U.S]. When the supply of ammunition ran out during Operation Protective Edge, it was the United States that supplied it. The Americans were the ones who gave the money for Iron Dome. The United States was the one that helped us at the United Nations Human Rights Council and they prevent a lot of trouble in the Security Council with vetoes."

Of course, Obama administration officials hoped that Netanyahu would stabilize his coalition by drawing in the center-left, not someone like Lieberman. Just days before the announcement, it was widely expected that Netanyahu would form a coalition with Isaac Herzog's Zionist Union, which advocates greater accommodation of Palestinian demands.

A stable, right-leaning government is better-suited to pursue peace than a fragile 'unity' government.

But the Zionist Union has been paralyzed by internal divisions, with numerous members of this bloc openly opposing Herzog's coalition talks with Netanyahu, while Lieberman's MKs are expected to remain loyal. A stable, right-leaning government may have more credibility with the Israeli public than a fragile "national unity" government when it comes to making compromises for peace. After all, it was the "hard-line" Likud leader Menachem Begin who signed the Camp David Accords with Egypt in 1978.

My esteemed colleague David Makovsky worries that Netanyahu is "closing the door" on policies that "could have blunted a string of international initiatives" targeting Israel in the months ahead. This couldn't be farther from the truth. Lieberman accepts the Middle East Quartet's conditions for a two-state solution. Most important,he stated , "When there is a dispute between the integrity of the nation and the integrity of the land, then integrity of the nation is more important. I support a [peace] agreement...when we insist on security arrangements, this is just to avoid the crazy reality we are in."

The doom-and-gloomers are right that Lieberman's appointment to the defense ministry will almost certainly be consequential. Word has it that he demanded and received assurances regarding the latitude he will have in office. But Lieberman may just be the man of consequence Israel needs right now.