A conflıct wıth Turkey would mean the suıcıde of Israel (2)

A conflict with Turkey would mean the suicide of Israel (1)

A conflıct wıth Turkey would mean the

suıcıde of Israel (2)


The US’s first evaluations of the crisis in Davos are important for sure. But if we go back in time a little and if we consider the olive branch being extended by US President Barack Obama to the Muslim world, we may make a stronger assertion.

Obama will have to expend an important part of his energy to struggle against the economic crisis in the US. It becomes clearer now that it is not possible to make progress with the anti-American leaning of world public opinion, which is the heritage of the Bush administration. Obama has to struggle as much as possible to minimize anti-American opinion throughout the world as he struggles against the economic crisis.

Obama’s message to the Muslim world cannot be ignored in this light. A real handshaking with the Muslim world would mean a new approach to the Palestine issue, in other words restraining Israel on the Palestine issue, which has nearly turned into a clash of civilizations (which lends credence to Huntington’s thesis). Obama’s hand, which reaches for peace, would hang in vain as long as the US does not restrain Israel and as long as the Palestine issue does not reach a stable and fair resolution.

Another development that would drive Israel into a corner is diplomatic traffic between the United States and Iran. A thaw of the ice between the US and Iran would sound alarm bells for Israel. Even if we assume that the Jewish lobbies in the US would do all they could to prevent the reconciliation process between the US and Iran, (it is being said that Obama has not ruled out the option of a military solution for Iran) the relations of the United States and Iran may be normalized in the long term. Iran will probably not remain unreactive to the US’s calls for the normalization of bilateral ties as it tries to prevent Israel’s domination of the region. We see that Iran has avoided making statements that target the US ever since it became apparent that Obama would be the next president of the US. Iran is a good chess player in the international arena, and it has proven its strength by consolidating its influence in the region, especially since Iran improved its position in the region after the United States invaded Iraq. The normalization of relations between the US and Iran would make the process of withdrawing US troops from Iraq easier in terms of scheduling and would strengthen the position of the US in Iraq. Additionally contact may start between the US and Hamas, and it may be expected that Israel will be urged to negotiate with Hamas in the near future. Thus Israel may have to face choices made by US administrators on behalf of Israel, and such a development may put the Israeli government under internal pressure.

After all we are as far as possible from an ultimate solution. The predictions about Israel do not present a bright perspective for the future. Actually Israel has made significant progress toward it goals regarding the Palestine issue and expanding its land. Today nearly no one discusses what percent Palestinian land has been invaded and seized by Israel since 1948 and what allotment they have left to Palestine. One of the topics that were being discussed before was the issue of Jerusalem. Today even the status of Jerusalem is no longer a matter of discussion. If we look back and evaluate what is being discussed, we see Israel’s policy of depicting Hamas as a terrorist group and slaughtering Palestinians. What we discuss about Palestine is nothing more than ideas to prevent genocide in Palestine. If the Palestine issue is to be evaluated with the aim of achieving stable peace and a fair solution, then we should consider the issue starting from when Israel started its invasion and analyze the matter in a detailed manner again.

[*] Ahmet Turan Ayhan is a political scientist.

06 February 2009, Friday