Those great humanitarians speak out

I received this e-mail from UN Watch today. Is it not delightful to see Arab and Islamic Blocs to get so worked up about human rights that they forget the obvious fact that Israel no longer occupies Gaza? Oh, and what happened about the UN and that South Korean ship torpedoed by North Korea?

UN Watch BriefingNews and Analysis from UN Watch in Geneva

June 1, 2010

"Urgent Debate" at U.N. Human Rights Council

Arab & Islamic Blocs Prepare Resolution Condemning Israeli Reaction to High Seas Intifada

Geneva, June 1 -- the UN Human Rights Council is now holding an "Urgent debate" on the "raid on the Flotilla." For detailed, first-hand facts not mentioned by the UN, see TIP Sheet at bottom.

Below is the draft resolution submitted this morning by the Islamic and Arab blocs, co-sponsored with the Palestinian delegation. It calls for another “Goldstone Report”-style inquiry, to perpetuate and increase global political pressure on Israel. Because they enjoy an automatic majority from the council's non-democracies like China, Cuba, and Russia, the resolution is certain to pass. Changes might come if the EU pushes for it.

To date, the 47-nation council -- to which Qaddafi's Libyan dictatorship and slave-holding Mauritania were just elected -- has devoted 33 out of its 40 censure resolutions to Israel, as well as 6 out of its 9 special sessions dealing with countries. By contrast, well-publicized killings of innocent civilians this year in Iran, China, and Nigeria have been met with a yawn, indifference, and inaction.

Below that is the UN Security Council statement that was adopted early this morning in New York. Its tone is much less extreme, and includes moderate language, but one still ought to ask
Follow today's UNHRC debate live through our twitter feed at www.twitter.com/

(Ed. note: Typos below are from original text.)

Draft Resolution L.1
Submitted on 1 June 2010 at 10.01 am

By Pakistan (Organization of the Islmaic Conference), Sudan (Arab Group), and Palestine

Agenda Item 1

The Grave Attacks by Israeli Forces Against the Humanitarian Boat Convoy

Guided by the purposes and the principles of the United Nations Charter, as well as by the provisions of the Universal Declaration for Human Rights,

Taking into consideration the provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention for the protection of civilian persons in times of war of 12 August 1949,

Emphasizing the importance of the safety and well-being of all civilians including humanitarian personnel,

Expressing grave concern also at the deepening humanitarian crisis in Occupied Gaza,

Emphasizing the need to ensure sustained and regular flow of goods and people into Occupied Gaza and welcoming the initiatives aimed at creating and opening humanitarian corridors and other mechanisms for the sustained delivery of humanitarian aid;

1. Condemns in the strongest terms possible the outrageous attack by the Israeli forces against the humanitarian flotilla of ships which resulted in the killing and injuring of many innocent civilians from different countries;

2. Deeply deplores the loss of life of innocent civilians and expresses its deepest sympathy and condolences to the victims and their families;

3. Requests the ICRC to seek and provide information on the whereabouts status and condition of the detained and injured persons

4. Demands the Occupying Power Israel to immediately release all detained men and material and facilitate their safe return to their homelands.

5. Calls upon the Occupying power Israel to ensure the unimpeded provision of humanitarian assistance, including of food, fuel and medical treatment to the occupied Gaza strip;

6. Welcomes the statements of the Secretary General UN and the High Commissioner for Human Rights condemning the Israeli attacks and calls for the full accountability and credible independent inquiries into these attacks.

7. Decides to dispatch an independent international fact finding mission to investigate violations of international law resulting from the Israeli attacks on the flotilla of ships carrying humanitarian assistance.

8. Decides to remain seized of this matter.

__________________

U.N. Security Council Statement on Gaza Flotilla

June 1, 2001

The Security Council deeply regrets the loss of life and injuries resulting from the use of force during the Israeli military operation in international waters against the convoy sailing to Gaza. The Council, in this context, condemns those acts which resulted in the loss of at least ten civilians and many wounded, and expresses its condolences to their families.

The Security Council requests the immediate release of the ships as well as the civilians held by Israel. The Council urges Israel to permit full consular access, to allow the countries concerned to retrieve their deceased and wounded immediately, and to ensure the delivery of humanitarian assistance from the convoy to its destination.

The Security Council takes note of the statement of the UN Secretary-General on the need to have a full investigation into the matter and it calls for a prompt, impartial, credible and transparent investigation conforming to international standards.

The Security Council stresses that the situation in Gaza is not sustainable. The Council re-emphasizes the importance of the full implementation of Resolutions 1850 and 1860. In that context, it reiterates its grave concern at the humanitarian situation in Gaza and stresses the need for sustained and regular flow of goods and people to Gaza as well as unimpeded provision and distribution of humanitarian assistance throughout Gaza.

The Security Council underscores that the only viable solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict is an agreement negotiated between the parties and re-emphasizes that only a two-State solution, with an independent and viable Palestinian State living side by side in peace and security with Israel and its other neighbours, could bring peace to the region.

The Security Council expresses support for the proximity talks and voices concern that this incident took place while the proximity talks are underway and urges the parties to act with restraint, avoiding any unilateral and provocative actions, and all international partners to promote an atmosphere of cooperation between the parties and throughout the region.
(Source: Reuters)

__________________
See Gaza Footage For Yourself
Source: The Israel Project TIP SheetMay 31, 2010



Close-Up Footage of Mavi Marmara Passengers Attacking IDF Soldiers Video footage from idfnadesk, the Israeli Defense Forces' YouTube Channel, May 31, 2010

Video taken by IDF naval boat shows the passengers of the Mavi Marmara, one of the ships in the 'Free Gaza' Flotilla, violently attacking IDF soldiers who were trying to board the ship after having sent repeated requests for the boat to change course. [more]

Videos of today's tragic incident off the coast of Israelhttp://www.theisraelproject.org/videos
TIP will continue to monitor the situation and upload new royalty-free footage to our video player as new content is available.

MEMRI TV Clips on the Gaza Flotilla: Activists On Board Chant Songs of Martyrdom at Departure

Gaza flotilla participants created war atmosphere before confronting Israel Participants chanted Islamic battle cry invoking killing of Jews and called for MartyrdomArticle by Itamar Marcus and Nan Jacques Zilberdik, May 31, 2010

On the day before the Gaza flotilla confronted the Israeli navy, Al-Jazeera TV documented the pre-battle atmosphere created by men on board the flotilla, who chanted a well-known Islamic battle cry invoking the killing and defeat of Jews in battle: "[Remember] Khaibar, Khaibar, oh Jews! The army of Muhammad will return!" [more]

Statement from Israel's Ambassador to the United Nations, Gabriella Shalev
The Security Council is convened this afternoon following the serious event that took place today early morning local time, when a convoy of six ships attempted to break the maritime blockage off the cost of Gaza. [ Read More ]

The Gaza flotilla and the maritime blockade of Gaza - Legal background Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, May 31, 2010 A maritime blockade is in effect off the coast of Gaza. It has been imposed, as Israel is currently in a state of armed conflict with the Hamas regime that controls Gaza. [more]

IDF coordinates the transfer of truckloads of humanitarian aid on a daily basis. Archive Photo: IDF Spokesperson

Behind the Headlines: The Israeli humanitarian lifeline to Gaza Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, May 25, 2010

Well over a million tons of humanitarian supplies entered Gaza from Israel over the last 18 months equaling nearly a ton of aid for every man, woman and child in Gaza. Millions of dollars worth of international food aid continually flows through the Israeli humanitarian apparatus, ensuring that there is no food shortage in Gaza. [more]


Protesters Attack with Guns and Knives, Israel Regrets 10 Dead Injured Evacuated to Israeli Hospitals TIP Press Release, May 31, 2010

Israel’s Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon said in a press conference on Monday (May 31) regarding the Turkish-led flotilla that:"The armada of hate and violence in support of Hamas terror organization was a premeditated and outrageous provocation." [more]

Group with Terrorist Ties Attempts to Deliver Supplies to Gaza, Refuses to Deliver Letter to Captive Israeli Soldier TIP Press Release, May 28, 2010

A flotilla of pro-Palestinian demonstrators with links to terrorist groups is en route to the Gaza Strip in defiance of Israeli government requests to deliver their shipment through legal channels. [more]


IDF forces met with pre-planned violence when attempting to board flotilla Previously, Israel Navy warned the flotilla that the Gaza region is closed to maritime traffic.May 31, 2010
Early this morning (31 May), IDF naval forces intercepted six ships attempting to break the naval blockade of the Gaza Strip. This happened after numerous warnings from Israel and the Israel Navy that were issued prior to the action. [more]


Weapons prepared on the Mavi Marmara Photo: IDF Spokesperson

Behind the Headlines: The seizure of the Gaza flotilla Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, May 31, 2010

Despite attacks by Hamas, Israel maintains an ongoing humanitarian corridor for the transfer of food and humanitarian supplies to Gaza, used by internationally recognized organizations including the United Nations and the Red Cross. [more]

IHH head Bülent Yildirim aboard the Mavi Marmara, holding a young child. He said children were brought along to prevent Israel from attacking the ships (IHH website, May 30 2010).

The Flotilla to the Gaza Strip – Update The Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center (ITIC) Press ReleaseMay 30, 2010As of the afternoon of May 30, five ships were located near Cyprus and had not yet set sail for the Gaza Strip. The sixth boat, Challenger II, which belongs to the Free Gaza flotilla and carries 14 members of European parliaments, was expected to join the five ships between Cyprus and Gaza. [more]

Flotilla YouTube Videos from Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs:
IDF - Navy Warns Flotilla (31 May 2010)
MFA Spokesman on Gaza Flotilla - 24 May 2010

More Flotilla YouTube Videos:
True Human Rights Activists don't hug Vicious HR Violators Posted by user MHLE2010, May 27, 2010

Beating the Hell Out of Israeli Naval Commandos BBC Footage posted by user LetsFreeGaza, May 31, 2010

A brutal ambush at sea Article by Ron Ben-Yishai, May 31, 2010

Ron Ben Yishai recounts bloody clash aboard Gaza-bound vessel: The lacking crowd-dispersal means, the brutal violence of ‘peace activists,’ and the attempt to bring down an IDF helicopter. [more]

Source: The Israel Project TIP Sheet

Bwa-ha-ha!

Oh this is too funny for words. The BBC has been misreporting the Middle East for years as its own (unreleased but leaked) report acknowledged. It has refused to acknowledge the truth about the Gaza flotilla or its participants and still refers to those heavily armed thugs as "humanitarian aid workers". As Charles Krauthammer says, there is no humanitarian disaster in Gaza (well, apart from its bloodthirsty, oppressive government run by Hamas.

There’s no one starving in Gaza. The Gazans have been supplied with food and social services, education, by the U.N., by UNWRA, for 60 years, in part with American tax money.

Second, when there are humanitarian needs, the Israelis allow — every day — food and medicine overland into Gaza. The reason that it did not want to allow this flotilla is because, as the spokesman for the flotilla said herself, this was not about humanitarian relief. It was about breaking the blockade.

And the reason the Israelis have a blockade is because they only want to allow humanitarian supplies and not weaponry. Look, the proof of that is the fact that if you look at a map of Gaza, you'll see that Israelis only control three sides of this rectangle. There’s a fourth side on the Egyptian side. So it is an Egyptian-Israeli blockade.

Well, the BBC does not see it that way.

Yet the BBC's supine attitude is not good enough for some people.

Protesters demonstrating against the Israeli attack on a Gaza-bound aid ship have attempted to storm the BBC in Manchester.

More than 800 people marched through the city centre and down Oxford Road, where the crowd surged at the BBC's entrance, smashing its front doors.

One man climbed to the top of the building to plant a Palestinian flag and there were at least three arrests.

Protesters said they were also angry about the BBC's coverage of Israel.

One can't help feeling for those BBC inmates. Just what exactly do these demonstrators want, they might ask. What sort of coverage would satisfy them?

The next flotilla

The Jerusalem Post reports of the various preparations going on for the next flotilla, which is coming from Iran but will not be protected by the Islamic Revolutionary Guards.

The announcement quoted Mohammad Ali Nouraee, an aid official, who said one cargo will be sent to Turkey, and then shipped to Gaza from Istanbul while the other will leave from the port of Khorramshahr.

Nouraee said that the ships would sail without protective security because the Iranians “do not want to fight", however he emphasized that "we are willing to become martyred in this way.”

According to IRNA, a senior official of the the Islamic Revolutionary Guards, Deputy Commander Hossein Salami, has said that escorting the two cargo ships "was not on the guards agenda."

In addition three Iranian members of the Majlis are planning to visit Gaza through Egypt and the Egyptian government has announced that they will let them through the crossing at Rafah. Of course, they will. The wall is there to protect Egypt from the Gazan Palestinians not to protect the latter from Iranian parliamentarians.

Meanwhile, Israel has agreed to an international commission to investigate what went wrong over that flotilla (hint: maybe the Israeli government and the IDF should start paying attention to the fact that this is a PR war as well as a bang-bang war) and the Arab League has entered the fray. They may be attacking Israel but as this article points out, the main targets are Turkey and Iran. It has dawned on the Arab League that these two countries are muscling in on their political territory.

After enumerating all the levels on which Israel managed to botch what ought to have been a straightforward operation of prevention, Samuel Segev of the Winnipeg Free Press sums up the situation fairly accurately:

However, on the strategic level, Turkey lost. The blockade of the Gaza Strip, which was Turkey's main objective, is not lifted. Israel had shown Turkey that it was ready to pay the diplomatic price for defeating Turkey's goal in Gaza. In co-ordination with Israel, Egypt also eased some of the restrictions on travel by land from Gaza to Sinai, but it maintained the naval blockade of the Gaza Strip. Finally, the chairman of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, conveyed the same message. In his meeting with Obama at the White House last Wednesday, Abbas insisted that Hamas should not emerge as the victor from Operation Sea Breeze.

Finally, and as a result of fast consultations among all concerned, the moderate Arab countries have now re-entered the Gaza scene, after three years of absence. They realized that their absence created a void that Turkey was trying fast to fill. It is in this context that we should see the current visit of Amr Mussa, the secretary general of the Arab League to the Gaza Strip. In his discussions with Hamas local leaders, Mussa is trying to convince them to reconcile with Mahmoud Abbas, according to the Egyptian plan. Mussa's message has also a regional meaning: It is a message to Turkey and Iran that the Sunni Arab world will never agree to a non-Arab country dominating the Middle East.

I think the expression that best sums it all up is the old military one of SNAFU. But I don't think Israel is the biggest loser - that has to be, once again, the Palestinians.

And speaking of attacks and counter-attacks

Things are hotting up around Turkey as well. As Xinhuan and Christian Science Monitor among others report, Turkey has launched a series of strikes on what they affirm to be PKK strongholds within Iraqi Kurdistan "after the deadly attack claimed by the PKK early Wednesday morning which killed seven Turkish soldiers and one security guard in Turkey's southeastern area of Hakkari".

We have had these events before and not just once. The one thing Erdogan's AKP government and the Turkish armed forces who seem to be losing the battle for influence agree on is their attitude to the PKK and, especially, the autonomous Iraqi Kurdish region that appears to harbour and help them.

Turkish foreign policy has been discussed by various people recently. Hürriyet Daily News, that opposes the government and sees itself as the media organ that is still carrying the secularist torch, had an article a few days ago in which it quoted the leader of the main opposition party as saying that the government has lost its way in foreign policy. (Isn't that opposition leaders always say?)

Turkey’s ruling Justice and Development Party, or AKP, has failed in both of its top foreign policy priorities – “zero problems with neighbors” and membership talks with the European Union, main opposition leader Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu said Thursday.

“The AKP’s foreign policy pillars were zero problems with neighbors and the European Union – today we have problems with all of our neighbors and relations with the European Union have frozen,” Kılıçdaroğlu told the Hürriyet Daily News in an interview.

Under Erdogan Turkey has certainly acquired problems with Israel over the Gaza flotilla, where stalemate has been reached. One can't say that Turkey's relations with Syria have become problematic since just about everybody's relations with Syria (excepting Lebanon) are problematic. In fact, Turkey has called for changes in Syria but not for Assad's resignation, voluntary or otherwise.

A statement published after a scheduled meeting of Turkey's national security council in Ankara said participants renewed calls for an end to the bloodshed in Syria, but they stopped short of following the example of the US and other major Western powers in demanding the resignation of Mr Assad.

The council said "democratic political change in line with the legitimate demands of the Syrian people … has to be implemented following a clearly stated timeframe". The meeting included a briefing by Omer Onhon, Turkey's ambassador in Syria, officials said. The council is chaired by Abdullah Gul, Turkey's president, and includes top government officials as well as top commanders of the armed forces and intelligence chiefs.

Since the start of the Syrian uprising in March, Ankara has repeatedly called on Damascus to end the crackdown on protesters that has cost about 2,000 lives and to implement democratic reforms. Lately, Mr Erdogan's government has grown increasingly frustrated with what it sees as empty promises by the Syrian regime.

The same, as Mr Erdogan explained, happened with Libya - the calls for change and an ending to the bloodshed were ignored.

It so happens that Walter Russell Mead had an interesting piece on Turkey, her history and her new "idea" on American Interest yesterday. Under Erdogan Turkey, Professor Mead avers, has turned away from the Kemalist secularist path and has turned back to the old history of the country, drawing inspiration from the achievements of the Ottoman Empire. As it happens, the turning away is not complete. Erdogan may want Turkey to be the leader of the Muslim world, at least in the Middle East, but there seems to be no particular desire to acquire an empire.

Nor is the turning away from the Kemalist tradition complete. It seems that Erdogan and his party recognize Kema's great achievement and that is the creation of a modern Turkey that could stand up for itself in the dark and ruthless days of the post-World War I treaties.

For many Turks, a new arc of history now looks clear. The Turks under Atatürk and the Kemalists modernized; now they are returning to their Islamic roots with a unique blend of advanced technology and economic success. This is not about conquest or the restoration of an actual empire — the Turks are subtler than were the Greeks. Where the Ottomans ruled by fire and the sword, the modern Turks will lead Islam by example and inspiration; Turks have achieved while Arabs can only dream. Now Turkey, in this view, returns to lead the Arabs into the light and Turkey’s unique role and prestige among the Arabs will give it new power and stature in the west. One can see why many young Turks are optimistic about the most glorious prospects Turks have seen since Mehmed II (Mehmed the Conqueror) entered Constantinople in 1453.

How will this affect Turkey's relationship with the West? Will Turkey really turn to the East and ignore the position it has acquired under Atatürk and his successors?

For Erdogan’s government, the first stages of its “return to the east” were generally pleasant. Strong criticism of Israel’s attack on Gaza and his tough response to Israel’s attack on last year’s Gaza flotilla made Erdogan enormously popular in the Arab world. His reputation for opposing the US war in Iraq also raised his profile. Better commercial relations with Syria and Iran boosted Turkish exports and trade. His intervention into the Iranian nuclear issue had little effect on the course of the dispute but played well at home where voters saw Turkey emerging as a global leader on an issue that mattered to them.

More, Turkey’s role as the de facto head of western Sunnism looked promising. The state of the Sunni Arab world is deeply depressing. The fall of Saddam Hussein, the ever-tightening relationship of Syria and Iran, the growing Shi’a power in Lebanon and more recently Iran’s success (with Syrian help) at building its influence in Gaza, paint a disturbing picture of Sunni fecklessness and decline. Dominated by corrupt dinosaurs like former Egyptian president Mubarak or ruled by immensely wealthy and not particularly courageous or attractive royal families, the western Sunni world hungered for leadership that Turkey might be ready to provide.
The great idea of a return to the east was looking good.

But Atatürk’s instinct that Turkey needed to turn west was based on more than a sense that the west was where the power and the money could be found. It was also based on a sense that the east was a trap: full of danger and complications that could endanger Turkey’s stability if Turks were sucked into its quarrels.

In the end, despite the various problems and tensions, the Turkish-American relationship will survive Turkey's growing strength as a Middle Eastern power, rather than just a faithful ally against the Soviet Union, and may even be welcomed.

So far, despite criticisms from the opposition, Erdogan's government seems secure. In the June election it won a renewed mandate with a handsome majority though not with the two-thirds it wanted and needed to change the constitution. It is winning the battle against the military, many of whose senior officers have been arrested and are being put on trial on the rather dubious charges of "seeking to undermine the government". Rather chillingly:

Turkish daily newspaper Taraf has been at the forefront of exposing the plot, claiming that many of the country's institutions were involved.

"It's very important," said deputy editor Yasemin Congar, who believes the trials will lead to greater democracy and reduce corruption. "It's basically about digging out the dirt within the state and digging out all these secret institutions and secret organizations, which are allegedly behind many crimes in this country."

The case is the second trial in connection with the conspiracy. In December, 200 officers went on trial on similar charges.

Prosecutors say there was an elaborate plan to cause chaos in the country, including provoking a conflict with neighboring Greece and bombing mosques in Turkey.

One cannot help remembering other political systems when these vague accusations were made and people tried and sentenced for ill-defined crimes. (And no, I am not thinking about Senator McCarthy here.)

Political analyst and retired Brigadier General Haldun Solmazturk claimed this particular probe is a political witch hunt instigated by a government intent on consolidating its power.

"It's aiming for one-party rule. They don't like democracy," said Solmazturk. "Once they eliminate the army there is not any other power that can challenge one-party rule, one-party regime. That is why the government has been so adamant in supporting this unjust justice system."

Questions over the origin of the evidence against the accused are growing. Earlier this year the police were forced to admit that they had planted evidence on one of the accused officers.

Concern has been increasing, both domestically and internationally, over the duration of the investigations. They've gone on for four years now, but still there haven't been any convictions.

Along with army officers, many of those on trial include journalists and well-known critics of the government.

The head of the AKP's parliamentary foreign affairs committee, Volkan Bozkir, has dismissed the idea that the investigations are politically motivated.

"The courts are independent in Turkey. It's the system which decides, and according to the constitution, the courts and the executive power and the parliamentary power are separate," he said.

Then came the mass resignation of senior Turkish officers, presumably as a gesture of defiance to the government. At the moment it looks like a wasted gesture as the government has been able to use it to strengthen its own control over the armed forces.

Interestingly enough, it was the EU that encouraged Erdogan to take on the army by insisting that the constitutional structure of Turkey must be changed and the army's special role as the guardian of secularism and Kemalism taken out of it or, as they prefer to call it, the army must be brought under civilian control. Erdogan's government is not as interested in joining the EU as its predecessor appeared to be but it is using the EU's insistence on that item to prosecute these dubious and, so far, inconclusive cases. Another great achievement by the EU.

Meanwhile, we have Turkish attacks on the PKK (as they say) or Kurdish areas (as the Kurdish media says) with the government showing its ability to take tough decisions against Turkey's enemies. Will this satisfy the Turkish military and are we going to see some kind of a rapprochement there?

A somewhat different view of Turkey's foreign policy

The ongoing row between Turkey and Israel, which has prompted the former to expel the latter's ambassador and to downgrade diplomatic relations between the two countries has prompted some analysts to describe Turkish foreign policy as a complete disaster.

Israel’s decision not to abide by the Turkish ultimatum about the need to apologize for the May 2010 Mavi Marmara flotilla incident brought the promised “Plan B” punishment: Turkey has decided to expel Israel’s ambassador to Ankara, downgrade its diplomatic ties to the lowest possible level, to hold on all military agreements and to halt trade between Turkey and Israel.

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said his government would now provide full support to the families of those killed to pursue prosecution of any Israeli military or government members responsible for the deaths.

Moreover, President Abdullah Gul strongly condemned the United Nations Palmer Report, because it considered Israel’s naval blockade of Gaza “a legitimate security measure” and stated that Turkey could have done more to dissuade the Turkish flotilla participants from their actions. He deemed it “null and void” and sent a veiled threat to Israel: “Turkey, as the most powerful country in the region, will not only protect its own rights but also those of all the people in need.”

Davutoglu declared that “Turkey would take measures to ensure free maritime movement in the eastern Mediterranean.”

Until several months ago Turkey’s policy of “zero problems” with all its neighbors, a “bridge between East and West,” and Middle Eastern activism, devised by Davutoglu, seemed successful.

The publicized incident of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan viciously attacking President Shimon Peres at the World Economic Forum in Davos in January 2009 and the May 2010 international flotilla incident led by the Turkish Islamist organization IHH brought Erdogan’s and Turkey’s standing in the Arab world to its peak.

The Mavi Marmara incident and the ensuing crisis with Israel mark also the beginning of the failure of this policy.

The attempt to mediate a peace agreement between Israel and Syria faded away; the excessive support to Hamas led to frosty relations with the then Mubarak regime in Egypt and even with the Palestinian Authority; Turkey appeared more and more as a potential Islamist threat rather than an asset to the West and NATO.

It is fair to say that during this year Turkey called it wrong several times about the Arab countries and developments in them but so have many Western countries and leaders. As for Cyprus, that remains a long-standing problem and to talk of the Turkish invasion without mentioning what prompted it is futile. Turks and Turkish Cypriots have long memories: they remember Greek ambitions of the early seventies and of the more recent past. Nor do they feel that the EU played entirely fairly by Northern Cyprus.

The question is really why is Turkey finding it so hard to finesse the issue of Gaza and the flotilla, to the point of violently opposing the UN report on the subject. Why, for example, is Prime Minister Erdogan discussing the possibility of visiting Gaza during his trip to Egypt? After all, given the situation in that country and the tense relationship between Turkey and various Arab states, there is enough to discuss without antagonizing Israel even further. Or so one would think.

Swedish students show good sense

This was sent to me by a reader of the blog, who was naturally rejoicing that good news came out of Sweden. I have a soft spot for the Scandinavian countries so I am a little less surprised. Well, no. As it happens, I am astonished.

To start with we have the usual and unutterably tedious story of Swedish dockworkers deciding to boycott Israeli ships, in protest against the treatment of the one ship of the Gaza flotilla that refused to obey international rules and was raided after Israeli servicemen who boarded it were attacked.

Bjoern Borg, the union's chairman, said they were calling for an international investigation into the May 31 raid and added Israel's recent easing of its Gaza blockade was insufficient.

"We don't think it is far-reaching enough," he said. "We want them to lift the blockade".

Borg said stevedores in the southwestern port of Gothenburg had already refused to handle about a dozen containers containing cargo from Israel or goods destined for it.

However, officials said they expected the boycott to have a minimal impact on Swedish-Israeli trade, which accounts for 0.2 per cent of the Nordic country's
total imports and exports.

The goods most likely to be affected will be fruit, vegetables, spices and skin care products on their way from Israel to Swedish shops.

So, not only is this blockade of very little significance, though some Swedish shoppers might be somewhat annoyed, it also demonstrates the sublime indifference of Swedish (and other Western) trade unionists to the facts of life. The truth is that there is only one country in the Middle East that has free trade unions with all the rights Mr Bjoern Borg and his members take for granted, and that is Israel. Hamas does not believe in having trade unions and yet the Swedish stevedores support them.

However, the story does not end there as the Wall Street Journal writes.

That Sweden's dockworkers' union staged a week-long protest against Israel in the wake of the Turkish flotilla incident is hardly surprising. But the response of a 2,500-strong student union that supports Sweden's leading Moderate Party is worth noting. Last month, the student union showed Israel some welcome support by offering to load and unload Israeli cargo themselves. The students slammed the longshoremen in a press release and declared that "It is Hamas's fault that people are suffering in Gaza, not Israel's."

Their statement contains more clarity on Palestinian-Israeli relations than most anything we've heard lately from Europe's grown-ups. Stockholm has been particularly vociferous in denouncing Israel's efforts to defend itself, with Swedish Foreign Minister and Moderate Party elder statesman Carl Bildt having called for an investigation into Israel, and telling the Swedish press that Israel's Palestinian policy is "catastrophic" and "leads to one problem after another." All of which is pro-Israel compared to statements from Mr. Bildt's colleagues on the left.

Gustaf Dymov, 24, who chairs the contrarian student union, stressed in a phone interview that the offer to scab on the boycotting dockworkers was almost entirely for show—but then, so was the "boycott" itself, since very little cargo actually passes between Israel and Sweden by sea. Mr. Dymov says that's what outrages him the most: "It's very obvious [the dockworkers] did this not out of a will to support the Palestinians but to show hatred toward Israel."

Mr Dymov may not have much of a future in politics but is shaping up to be a very fine person, indeed, one who understands what freedom is about.

Aspects of hypocrisy

In the first place, here is an excellent cartoon by A. F. Branco, which came my way through Facebook, so I am stealing it quite unapologetically.

Secondly, as one reader of this blog pointed out to me, not so long ago (just about a week, in fact), Turkey, whose government (though not, I think, the armed forces) backed that Gaza flotilla and financed one of the boats as well as huffing and puffing with indignation, was censured for its unpleasant habit of imprisoning Kurdish children for alleged terrorist acts.

Now you might argue what business it is of the Council of Europe and of its envoy what Turkey does with its own citizens even if said citizens are still children. I wouldn't myself argue that but other people might. However, there is a corollary: what business is it of Turkey's that Israel refuses to allow people to land arms in Gaza?

Thirdly, a news item from another reader. There is, indeed, another blockade going on in the Middle East, one that is not receiving any attention from the world media. Yemen has been blockading South Yemen for over three weeks. And that, my friends, is a real blockade. No pussyfooting with aid or medication or basic necessities being let through.

The blockade began 17 days ago when the Western Armored Division established new checkpoints on roads and at city entrances preventing the flow of persons and commerce including food, medicine, oil and water. The blockade has cut off Radfan, Yafea, al Dhala, al Melah, al Habeelan, al Shaib, Gahaf, Lazarik, and parts of Shabwah.

The main road between Aden and al Dahlie is closed. Al Habaleen, Lahj was indiscriminately shelled three days ago after two soldiers were killed in an ambush. Another ambush in al Melah killed one soldier, and authorities have accused renegade elements of the southern independence movement with the attacks.

Nearly one thousand have fled Radfan, al Habaleen and al Bilah seeking safety. Like the 250,000 internally displaced by the Sa’ada War, these are mostly women and children. On May 24, a pregnant woman en route to a hospital in Aden was stopped at a military checkpoint and later died in childbirth.

Where, one wonders, is the outrage? The furious demonstrations? The angry denunciations and feeble condemnatory statements? Oh yes, there was one. Yemen condemned Israel for its inhumane treatment of the flotilla denizens.

Do I hear the word insane?

For obvious reasons I usually attack left-wing feminist organizations that tend to side with Islamist groups and states in their insane hatred for America, the West in general and Israel. In order to express that hatred they manage to ignore the way women are treated in Islamic societies and even Islamic groups in the West. In other words, they just do not care about Muslim women and their very basic rights to life and liberty.

There are other organizations of that kind around. The Guardian reports that organizers of the Gay Pride parade in Madrid have banned Israeli participants because of the events that surrounded the Gaza flotilla. Needless to say, that means there were no organized groups from the Middle East participating in the march because Israel is the only country in the region where you can have Gay Pride marches, where you do not run the risk of being tortured and murdered if you are openly gay. Yet the Madrid organizers side with the murderers of people like themselves. One can only surmise that they do not care about the fate of gays as long as they are Muslims. Can we call that racist?

The height of hypocrisy

It is not often that I link to an article signed by a politician but I shall make an exception for this one by Israel's Deputy Foreign Minister, Danny Ayalon in the Wall Street Journal of about a week ago that has, rather belatedly, come my way. It is, in some respects, out of date as the promised flotilla from Lebanon from Gaza did not actually set out though it seems that the Irish Ship to Gaza Committee is planning to revive the glory days of early summer. It might be a good idea for the tender-hearted Irish organizers to read this article with its description of the life of Palestinians in Lebanon first.

Today, there are more than 400,000 Palestinians in Lebanon who are deprived of their most basic rights. The Lebanese government has a list of tens of professions that a Palestinian is forbidden from being engaged in, including professions such as medicine, law and engineering. Palestinians are forbidden from owning property and need a special permit to leave their towns. Unlike all other foreign nationals in Lebanon, they are denied access to the health-care system. According to Amnesty international, the Palestinians in Lebanon suffer from "discrimination and marginalization" and are treated like "second class citizens" and "denied their full range of human rights."

Amnesty also states that most Palestinian refugees in Lebanon have little choice but to live in overcrowded and deteriorating camps and informal gatherings that lack basic infrastructure.

Perhaps, something should be done to help them. Hmmm?

Then again, little enough was done or said at the time of the ferocious war waged between the Lebanese army and the Palestinian militants who were said to have infiltrated the Nahr al-Bared refugee camp back in 2008, a war that claimed something like 500 lives many of them civilians, and displaced many thousands of people into even worse conditions.

I am glad to say that I wrote about it several times on EUReferendum at the time here, here, here, here and here. The last of those postings was also about the Mohammed al-Dura hoax but at the end I said:

Nobody is going to compare Nahr al-Bared to Stalingrad or any other important battle.

The Palestinians may be perennial victims but some victims are more equal than others. If you want the West to pay attention to what is happening to you, try to ensure that you get under the Israelis' feet. Then it really does not matter that you are treated far better than your brethren in Lebanon or Gaza – the world will know with many advantages of your plight.

All of that remains true.

Erdogan wins referendum in Turkey ...

... and immediately pledges more constitutional changes if his party wins a third term next year.

The victory in the referendum was 58 per cent to 42 per cent, which is a decisive one but not a landslide, as described in the Washington Times article. Despite various statements by Prime Minister Erdogan about this being the end of tutelage, the way forward and even references to freedom and legality, the truth is that the new rules as voted through in the referendum gives politicians far greater powers over the army (a number of whose officers have been arrested recently for supposedly plotting coups but, quite possibly, in order to pre-empt any move they might make after this referendum) and, most importantly, the judiciary.

Many of the 26 amendments to the country's 1982 post-coup constitution garnered support from across the political spectrum, such as those promoting gender equality and union rights for public employees.

However, the proposed changes to the judiciary had sparked heated debate between the Islamic-rooted AKP and the nationalist and secular opposition parties that feared they would only consolidate the ruling party's power.

The judicial reforms will increase the number of justices on the nation's historically secular Constitutional Court from 11 to 17 while giving AKP-dominated institutions such as the parliament more power in appointing them.

Meanwhile, a long article by Claire Berlinski in the latest issue of Standpoint describes the gradual control of the media by the Turkish government, not complete, as we know from the story of those pictures of the Gaza flotilla, but ever more strident.

Follow the money

Jonathan Schanzer does in the Weekly Standard. Interesting but unsurprising links there between the non-profit (and that, in itself, covers a multitude of sins) organization behind the Gaza flotilla IHH (Islan Haklary Ve Hurriyetleri Vakfi in Turkish) and some others, who are known to be financiers of terrorism. I am shocked, I tell you, shocked.

I wonder why ...

... The Hindu can provide a story, which is reasonably accurate, full of facts and gives both sides while Reuters and AFP merely give propaganda.

Incidentally, I am intrigued by what the White House, which against American opinion is siding with the terrorists on board those ships aid flotilla, thinks it can achieve. According to Reuters and I presume this is accurate:

"We are working urgently with Israel, the Palestinian Authority, and other international partners to develop new procedures for delivering more goods and assistance to Gaza," a spokesman for the White House National Security Council said.

Ahem, Hamas? Remember, the organization that took power after a bloody coup directed exclusively at other Palestinians, that continues to oppress the people of Gaza and whose leaders have no problem in using aid that pours into the area for a very pleasant life for themselves? Oh yes, the organization, whose aim it is to destroy Israel because then all the Palestinians' problems will magically vanish.

Charles Krauthammer has an excellent article in the Washington Post that gives some indication (with links) of a good deal of American opinion. (Not the White House, though.) You cannot better his summary of "world opinion":

What's left? Nothing. The whole point of this relentless international campaign is to deprive Israel of any legitimate form of self-defense. Why, just last week, the Obama administration joined the jackals, and reversed four decades of U.S. practice, by signing onto a consensus document that singles out Israel's possession of nuclear weapons -- thus de-legitimizing Israel's very last line of defense: deterrence.

The world is tired of these troublesome Jews, 6 million -- that number again -- hard by the Mediterranean, refusing every invitation to national suicide. For which they are relentlessly demonized, ghettoized and constrained from defending themselves, even as the more committed anti-Zionists -- Iranian in particular -- openly prepare a more final solution.

Is "world opinion" actually embarrassed by a country that prefers to defend itself and by a people who really mean that trite slogan: Never Again?

Humanitarian disaster, eh?

Getting away, for the moment, from the organization behind the flotilla or what was actually carried on those boats, let us stop to consider that famous humanitarian disaster in Gaza, which receives, as we have shown time and time again, more aid per man, woman and child than any other part of the world.

Tom Gross has an interesting description of how some people live in Gaza and links to various Arab media outlets.

One wonders how an area that claims to be starved of water and building materials and depends on humanitarian aid builds an Olympic size swimming pool and creates a luxury lifestyle for some while others are forced to live in abject poverty as political pawn refugees

One does, indeed.

Everyone is an expert

Watching events in Tunisia, Algeria and, especially, Egypt, I have been struck by the number of people who probably would be hard put to place various Egyptian cities and all the different countries of North Africa, the Horn and the Middle East on the map are, in fact, apparently experts on events there.

Expertise varies from people who are certain that Egypt without Mubarak will be a far greater threat to Israel and the West than it was under him to those who think all Muslims are "nutjobs" anyway.

Readers of this blog will know that I do not think all Muslims are "nutjobs" and have been very doubtful about Mubarak's good faith though, to be fair, he did have a difficult task, as will anyone who emerges as Egypt's leader in the near future. Will it be ElBaradei (a gruesome prospect as Claudia Rossett points out) or will he be supported by the Muslim Brotherhood the way a hanged man is supported by a rope?

I have no doubts that the demonstrators in Tunisia and Egypt and any other country run by some Arab despot are there because they have finally realized that it is not the West, the Great Satan, the Lesser Satan or Israel who is causing their problems but their own governments. As they do not have free and fair elections (unlike us in Britain and what a success we have made of that privilege) they have been rioting in order to overthrow those governments. What next? Nobody seems to know for certain.

Will it be 1989 for the Middle East? One hopes so, of course, but that seems unlikely for a number of reasons. The East European countries and Soviet republics (most of whom have not actually done terribly well out the last twenty years) had one coherent enemy though the situation was different in different places. In the Middle East and North Africa the enemy is diffuse though there are similarities, so each country will have to cope on its own.

There was a civil society present in many of the then Communist countries and the ones in which it was weak are still suffering from post-Communist traumas. There is a civil society in Egypt but not so much in the other countries and even there it may not be strong enough to create a political structure. Even non-experts have realized that the Muslim Brotherhood, not the leaders of the demonstrations or the riots are, nevertheless, waiting in the shadows, hoping to grab power if they can. Possibly they will be able to and the Islamists will return to Tunisia and take over in Algeria.

It may well turn into a re-run of 1979 when Khomeini took over in Iran and imposed a far worse regime than anyone could dream of under the Shah.

Meanwhile, one lot of tourists are showing their faith in ... well, something or other. It would appear that nothing will stop Georgians from going to seek the sun in Sharm el-Sheikh. After all, the riots have not spread beyond Cairo by the looks of it.

ADDENDUM: An excellent article by Max Boot in the Wall Street Journal pours cold water on all those who tell us that President Mubarak is the West's greatest ally and those who are whooping with joy at his imminent departure

Thus while Egypt's security services cracked down hard on Islamist terrorism in the 1990s when it was threatening the lucrative tourist trade, Mr. Mubarak has allowed the Muslim Brotherhood—the mother of all Islamist organizations—to become the main opposition party. This has made him, as he well knows, the indispensable man to the West—the only thing supposedly standing in the way of an Islamist power grab.

Then again:

Mr. Mubarak's downfall could well be a good thing in the long run if it opens up Egypt's closed political and economic systems to greater dynamism and debate, so that in the future frustrated young Egyptians can find peaceful expression rather than strapping on a suicide vest. Yet we should be realistic about the short-term costs of a new regime in a country that has been subjected to decades of anti-Western and anti-Israeli propaganda by Mr. Mubarak—and where many blame us (with some justification) for inflicting Mr. Mubarak on them. A government that better reflects the will of the people will be less willing to cut deals with the U.S. or Israel.

Mohammed ElBaradei, the former U.N. atomic agency head who has emerged as the leader of the opposition, made clear his anti-Israel sentiments in an interview last summer with the German magazine Der Spiegel. He called the Gaza Strip "the world's largest prison" and declared that it was imperative to "open the borders, end the blockade."

Mr. ElBaradei also spoke glowingly of Turkey's prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who has assailed Israel in harsh terms and voted against United Nations sanctions on Iran. Mr. ElBaradei said: "Turkey is a member of NATO and partner of the West and Israel. And yet Prime Minister Erdogan has no qualms about supporting an aid flotilla for Gaza that was supposed to breach Israel's sea blockade. The people of the Arab world are celebrating him. Erdogan's photo can be seen everywhere."

That is probably what we can expect from a post-Mubarak Egypt. It is doubtful that Mr. ElBaradei would terminate Egypt's peace treaty with Israel—a move that would cost Egypt more than a billion dollars annually in American aid. But it is probable that, like Mr. Erdogan's Turkey, Mr. ElBaradei's Egypt would be less cooperative with Israel and more friendly to its enemies. In the Muslim world, this is actually a moderate position compared to the jihadism of the Islamists. But from the standpoint of the U.S. or Israel it is obviously far from ideal.

The moral of the story is that supporting two-faced dictators never ends well.

A slightly different show

Here is a short film from Al-Jazeera, as transmitted through MEMRI of those "peaceful" activists on board of the flotilla that was trying to reach Gaza.