Rondo a la Turk

We want to thank everyone for the condolences we received.

Beni and Roni Kaye

Nine years ago when Ariel Sharon and a 1,000 strong police escort visited the Temple Mount in Jerusalem he declared that the complex would remain under perpetual Israeli control. This tactless show of force did in fact provoke a violent Palestinian reaction which in turn provided Arafat with a convenient reason for calling off the ongoing peace talks. The disturbances spread to the West Bank, with Palestinians citing the visit to justify an unprecedented wave of violence that quickly became known as the second intifada.

In 2007, the Jerusalem Municipality and the Israel Antiquities Authority began rebuilding the Mughrabi Gate, one of the main entrances to the Temple Mount, adjacent to the Western Wall. Although the work on the gate evoked only mild Palestinian protests and was suspended immediately it drew international condemnation and caused a Muslim outcry.

Recently there has been more violence on the Temple Mount. The difference in this case is that there was no purported Israeli "instigation" - no Sharon visit or renovations at the Mughrabi Gate. Instead, this time the demonstrations are a politically motivated campaign launched by Sheikh Raed Salah, head of the Israeli Islamic Movement's northern branch. The Sheikh was arrested and served with a court order denying him entry to the Temple Mount compound. Further restrictive measures have limited access to the mosques on the mount to older worshippers, the people less likely to cause trouble.

In June 1967 Colonel Motta Gur's historic announcement "The Temple Mount is in our hands," ended close to eight hundred years of continuous control of the site.

However once the battle smoke had cleared and the initial exuberance had deflated, the Israeli government decided it didn't really want full control of this proverbial "hot potato." Israel agreed to leave administration of the site in the hands of the Muslim guardians, namely the Waqf. So the Waqf's guardianship which has been enforced since Saladin recaptured the Kingdom of Jerusalem in 1187 was renewed almost without pause or interruption.

Although freedom of access was guaranteed by law, as a security measure to prevent demonstrations and violent outbreaks, the Israeli government enforces a ban on non-Muslim prayer on the Temple Mount.

Since the Six-Day War Haredi rabbinical scholars have decreed that religious law bans Jews from entering any part of the Temple Mount for fear of desecrating the Holy of Holies, whose exact location is unknown but is believed to be situated somewhere in the Temple courtyard

Last week ninety nine year old Rabbi Yosef Sholom Elyashiv, a renowned sage and arbiter of Jewish law reiterated the injunction forbidding visits to the Temple Mount.

A dissenting opinion held mainly by a few rabbis with a political axe to grind argues that a visit to this holiest of Jewish sites can be accomplished if you tread carefully. It appears that even an inconspicuous visit was too much for Sheikh Raed Salah and other Islamic leaders. They firmly deny any Jewish affinity to the site and regard archeological excavations as attempts to undermine the mosques there and use these claims to incite riots. The fact that the largest excavations conducted on the Temple Mount were carried out by the Palestinians themselves when they built an underground mosque is conveniently overlooked..

Large earth-moving equipment was employed in the excavation work destroying structures and artifacts dating back to the Second Temple period.

Nevertheless, some fragments from the excavated material have been recovered from waste tip where it was dumped.

The whole Temple Mount episode is part of the ongoing “Battle of the Narrative” being waged between Israel and the Palestinians, which is also the struggle of the conflicting accounts presented by Muslims and Jews.

Despite the conflicting narrative Turkey has long been considered one of Israel’s main strategic assets.

During a visit to Anatolia a few years ago I met a local English teacher who told me why Turks like Israelis. I failed to understand why he liked Israelis.

“We are brash, ill-mannered, we trash and vandalise your hotels and tourist sites, why should you like us?” I asked him obviously exaggerating our negative attributes. “Well you spend a lot of money in Turkey and we have a common enemy – Syria.”

Well this week it appears that the Anatolian English teacher was partly right.

Israelis are still spending money in Turkey. This week Turkey and Syria opened their common border facilitating free movement between the two countries.

Almost simultaneously Turkey’s Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu and his Armenian counterpart Edward Nalbandian signed a Swiss-mediated rapprochement in Zurich

The Turkish and Armenian parliaments must now approve the agreement in the face of opposition from nationalists on both sides and an Armenian diaspora which insists Turkey acknowledge the killings of up to 1.5 million Armenians during World War I.

About the same time, the government in Ankara decided to cancel Israel’s participation in NATO’s aerial drill in Turkey. The fact that both Italy and the US pulled out of the drill in protest is comforting. “However,” claims military and strategic analyst Ron Ben Yishai “this act must serve as a glowing warning sign in respect to the strategic and economic implications that may follow our growing diplomatic isolation.”

Turkey’s Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu and the Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan have given contradictory and slightly different reasons for this change of heart. Looking beyond the obvious Israeli tourist value , the help extended to Turkey by IDF rescue teams when it was tragically rocked by earthquakes in the 90s and an ever growing volume of trade in military hardware ( Turkey buying and Israel selling), we can nevertheless, see an unmistakable erosion.

“New deals worth tens and hundreds of millions of dollars offered by Israel’s defence industries to the Turkish army, as well as cooperation with Turkish colleagues, are being put on hold or are cancelled altogether. Only recently, officials in Ankara preferred to purchase a spy satellite from Italy, even though it is inferior in quality and more expensive than the Israeli product offered to Turkey. “Concludes Ron Ben Yishai. Furthermore the cancellation of Israel’s participation in NATO’s aerial drill clearly indicates a profound change has taken place in Turkey. “The Turkish government (which is interested in gaining acceptance to the European Union) would not have dared adopt such a move in defiance of Washington and its European allies had its government not reached the conclusion that the benefit it can expect among regional states by shunning Israel is greater than the potential damage it might incur.

Ankara, for the time being at least, is no longer a dependable strategic and security partner for Israel, it erodes our deterrent power vis-à-vis Iran and Syria. Israel has indeed embarked on a process of seeking substitutes.”

Yediot Ahranot correspondent Eldad Beck relates specifically to the accord between Turkey and Armenia “The historic reconciliation agreement signed Saturday between Turkey and Armenia constitutes further testament to the positive changes undergone by Turkey in the past year. A government with an Islamic orientation was able to impressively promote two highly sensitive issues for Turkish public opinion: Recognising the cultural rights of the Kurdish minority and normalising ties with Armenia. “

The strong sense of Turkish nationalism previously prevented any compromise with the Kurds, for fear this will open the door for boosting their national demands and in turn for a renewed territorial disintegration by Turkey.

Tayyip Erdogan’s administration realised that it is precisely openness towards the Kurdish minority that will prompt a greater sense of belonging among them and weaken their aspiration to join other Kurdish areas, mostly in Iraq.

Erdogan faced a similar choice vis-à-vis Armenia: Perpetuating the frozen status-quo in the ties with Turkey’s neighbour would have boosted the global Armenian campaign for recognition of the massacre committed by the Turks as an organised and methodical genocide. Turkey would have been faced with all the possible implications of such recognition, especially if it would have also been backed by the US Congress.

“So,” explains Beck “Erdogan decided to preempt this blow, and while taking advantage of the weak Armenian economy (which suffered gravely as result of the closure of its borders with Turkey and Azerbaijan) managed to secure (with Swiss mediation) a reconciliation agreement that is difficult for both the Turks and for the Armenians – yet postpones to an unknown future date the question of addressing the Armenian holocaust and entrusts future research on its scope in the hands of historians. “

Fortunately we are blessed with a number of analysts who are very familiar with the internal political scene in Turkey. They claim that when Erdogan says his change in attitude to Israel came during and in the wake of Operation Cast Lead in the Gaza Strip, we should accept this explanation as only part of the cause. It seems that the Turkish government has made a reassessment of its chances of being fully accepted by the European Union and decided to opt to end its disputes with old enemies by achieving a situation of zero conflict. It sees its future on the eastern side of the Bosporus.

It is appeasing Iran before it acquires nuclear capability, eliminating the Kurdish question peacefully by appeasing the PKK in Iraq and Syria and settling matters amicably with the Armenians.

Ron Ben Yishai expands his thesis regarding Israel’s growing isolation.

“What should concern us about the deterioration in our ties with Turkey is that the Turks are not alone. Until recently, Israel’s intelligence community estimated that the fears of Arab Sunni-majority states in the face of the Iranian-Shiite threat would prompt a process of rapprochement between them and Israel. This assessment appeared to materialise during the Second Lebanon War: The positions adopted by most Sunni states, ranging from Egypt to Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states, towards Hezbollah and its patrons in Tehran left little room for doubt as to where they stood.

Then came Operation Case Lead in Gaza and changed the picture. The sights of casualties and ruin in the Strip, reinforced by the inciting commentary offered by Arab satellite networks, provoked unrest on the Muslim street. This unrest jeopardized the moderate regimes, which were forced to issue scathing condemnations of Israel’s actions

Furthermore the chances of tightening regional cooperation declined after a Netanyahu-led rightist government was formed in Jerusalem, with Avigdor Lieberman becoming a major partner in it. The wave of hostility and media incitement grew in the face of Israel’s refusal to freeze construction in the settlements and the building in east Jerusalem, which were accompanied by provocative statements on the part of Netanyahu and his ministers.”

Whenever we reach an impasse we tend to blame our public relations campaign (or “Hasbara” as we refer to it). P.R is always good , but usually we end up convincing ourselves and our friends who will always accept us “warts and all”.

This time we need to engage in some really constructive thinking and try to stop the decline while we can.

Beni 15^th of October, 2009.