Turkey-Russia Spat: What goes around....

Erdogan said everyone should respect the right of Turkey to defend its borders while Putin demands an apology and compensation from Turkey because  Turkey exercised its right to defend its borders by shooting down a Russian Fighter crossing into or threatening to cross into Turkish territory as Russian support for the Syrian terror regime. Since this was a clear case of violating the borders of a democracy, in this case Turkey's democracy, in support of terrorism -- President Erdogan has put into place a set of morals and protocols to guide Turkey properly.   It is clear, based on Erdogan's own support of terrorism that Turkey must pay for downed fighter Jet and compensate the family of the Russian pilots because that is what Erdogan’s twisted morality and therefore Turkey’s twisted morality demands.

Just five years ago, Turkey in support of Hamas’ terrorism against Israeli civilians sent the Mavi Mamara as part of a fleet of ships with the mission to violate Israeli territorial waters and the legal blockage of Gaza, this ship had IHH terrorists embedded with civilians who planned and committed violence against Israel. While Israel’s handing of the Mavi Mamara was by all accounts a disaster, then Prime Minister Erdogan’s pro-terrorist attitude took a disaster and turned into a sign that NATO would not be able to fight terrorism, a problem if Turkey could not decide terrorism is a bad thing, a problem NATO continues not to face to this day. The government of Turkey supports the violation of borders in support of terrorism, it demands that terror supporters be paid for any injury, thus the government of Turkey should not now do anything less pay Putin his blood money and offer a sincere apology. Russia supports the terrorist regimes of Iran and Syria just as Turkey supports Hamas but Russia unlike Turkey did not endanger civilians in its support of terrorism or pretend they were not involved in their support at a governmental level. In fact, I recommend that Turkey use the compensation that Israel paid to Turkey to pay off Russia. Once day, the Russian can give it to the Chechen rebels. 

Dead ISIS Girls

Samra Kesinovic, 16, and  Sabina Selimovic, 15 were picked up by a whirlwind and deposited in the Islamic State by following a road they may have thought was paved with good intentions.  In war, the primary sacrifice is of one’s body and these two teenagers, as potential breeders, were married off to “fighters” and likely to suicide bombers as those fighter’s personal wife-whores and sometimes as fighters. According to the NY Daily News, “Girls are increasingly being used in the fighting because of a belief that anybody killed by a female would never go to heaven.” According to an unidentified Tunisian women who claims to have lived with both girls, Samra Kesinovic was beaten to death trying to escape ISIS while Sabina was killed in fighting -- which presumes Sabina wasn’t a great breeder.  These girls were manipulated by ISIS propaganda, they were young, to some extent disaffected by Austrian society and did not think enough of themselves to protect themselves from the phalluses and fallacies of evil men.  I can’t help but assign most of the blame to them. Yeats wrote in Easter 1919 of a mourning over an Irish uprising that would presage modern terrorism:

"Transformed utterly:
A terrible beauty is born.”

And such was the transformation of these two girls, there was apparently a Yugoslavian recruiter to blame, the ISIS propaganda machine which they would eventually work for as well but ultimately these two girls chose to join the fight in a terror organization which actively engaged in ethnic cleansing, rape and genocide.  I feel sorry for them but their parents more because I understand how a sixteen or seventeen year old could be misguided, might be interested in G-d approved sexed with the bad boys of war and desire to outdo their parents in their ethnocentrism and religiosity, to take an easy way out to feeling  important -- these can be attractive siren calls  but the girls were no idiots. They planned their escape from Austria to Turkey, made propaganda, directly helped murder people at least in the case of Sabina and ultimately paid the price for their brutal ideals by their lives ending brutally. It’s tragic for kids to die at 17 and 16, a mere year later after running away from their homes but I also think of them as newly minted Nazis from Austria who lived two years too long. How many other children and innocent civilians might live if these girls died on their way to Turkey or before could have left? I would wish some other intervention, something that could rescue their minds from supporting intolerance and genocide but they could choose and they chose, Yeats' words are far darker now than they were a century ago as we now see what terrorism really is,“We know their dream; Enough to know they dreamed and are dead” and their dreams bewilder in their mixture and teen angst and murderousness. I am glad that ISIS eats its own, these cute little girls earned their ignoble and savage deaths but they could have been more, they had every chance to have better dreams and there is tragedy for their loss of potential. 

We can get this Syrian refugee situation right

Gov. Bruce Rauner made a reasonable decision in attempting to temporarily halt Syrian refugees’ entrance. Illinois, in cooperation with the federal government, should review how refugees are selected. Refugees who come to America have been referred by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees before coming here and are far less likely to be terrorists.

What Illinois and the U.S. need to do is review our screening procedures and be able to reasonably increase scrutiny of those refugees we might decide we have concerns about. America is no Europe, where Muslims often live in suburban “ghettos,” but we would be naive to think the extreme radicalization we see in other parts of the world could not happen here. Illinois should do everything in its collective power to avoid xenophobia. Let us make certain we are adequately processing refugees from Iraq and Syria, screening out the likely terrorists and, just as important, taking advantage of any clandestine intelligence opportunities that may arise.

The reason why there are so many refugees is due to the barbarity and evil of our enemies. Let’s make sure we are fighting them and not innocent civilians. President Barack Obama was correct when he said, “slamming the door in their faces would be a betrayal of our values.” Let’s make certain we are neither prejudiced nor too credulous in how we choose which refugees to accept.

Originally published in print on 11/18/2015 Chicago Tribune as "Being Reasonable."

What terrorists mean when they condemn terror

Bashar Assad, Ayatollah Khamenei, Khaled Mashal, Hassan Nasrallah and the dread Dormamu, the leaders of Syria, Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah and Dark Dimension all agree that they should condemn the attack on Paris and there are some very good reasons for this. All of these leaders have cults of personality that can get away with treating their followers as mindless ones who murder innocents on command but that magic requires their hordes of dolts to believe they are exclusively on the side of “good.”  Condemning the obvious but very similar evil of others simply makes it easier for these hoary hordes of haggoth to enjoy the truthiness of their comparative moral superiority through the magical joys and wonders of hypocrisy. These wizards of woe cannot turn lead into gold but they carefully turn cold blooded murder into saintliness all the time. Cynical condemnations such as the the condemnations of the Paris attacks simply provide rhetorical cover. These people just want to kill Jews and politicla opponents, so condemning the deaths of non Jews suggests they have such a sophisticated moral point of view that we ought not to question it. 

Nasrallah, who fires and supplies rockets to be fired on Israeli civilians said, "People of the region of Arab and Islamic countries who are living under the brutality of ISIS, including Lebanon which suffered a few days ago from it, are the most aware and sympathetic of what hit the French nation last night,"

With a flawless Jazz-like performance, President Assad riffed on Netanyahu's statements to CNN when Saddam Hussein was reigning missiles down on Israel and said, "France experienced what Syrians live" which is so ironic since Syria has turned its entire terror arsenal on its civilian population. If the government of France and ISIS simultaneously attacked civilian population, only then would the French know what it is to be Syrian.   Assad then got to his real point, the point that has kept retaliation against Syrian terrorism out of Syria proper, for decades. "The flawed policies pursued by Western countries and especially France as regards what is happening in our region ... contributed to the spread of terrorism..." The world will be worse without the Assad terror regime, you need us to kill civilians in the Middle East so that innocent civilians do not die in Europe.  

Eventually, if it has not already happened the Orb Agamotto tells me  Jews and Israelis will be accused of a false flag operation by these same leaders. Underneath their cynicism and manipulations lies an important and sincere message which should not be overlooked; Please don’t fight all the terrorists, just the other guys! 

Paris & the ISIS Razzle Dazzle

The latest attacks in Paris took place in a trendy part of town near the offices of Charlie Hebdo where Al Qaeda had attacked and while the “soft targets” were more in the style of ISIS but the multiple attacks and locations suggest the attackers had logistical support of some kind from Al Qaeda. ISIS needs all the help it can get.  This assist might have been simply personal that switched organizations or somehow work for both or higher levels of agreement could have been reached between the increasingly marginalized Al Qaeda organization the increasingly bruised Caliphate -- perhaps they cooperated because they both needed to make a big kill to impress their world. Al Qaeda needs breathing room and it believes attacking the West at home will make us pull out of the Middle East where they can fester freely despite the opposite that terror draws an attack always being true and a more logical expectation. ISIS is chopping off the heads of defectors rather than gaining camaraderie and more importantly the so called caliphate itself is shrinking and slowly being bisected by Kurdish forces and the American air force while also facing a Russian, Iranian and Syrian terror alliance.

The attack on Paris strikes is a desperate play, no matter how much planning went into it. ISIS is losing yards so it tries to kick a field goal. The West has known for decades that we needed to get rid of the Assad regime and anything that replaced it would be worse and we are seeing even worse consequences than we had imagined because we did nothing but wait for the region to become unstable. Additionally, NATO is the wrong alliance to deal with these problems, we need a new series partnerships to take the lead that include regional actors. ISIS attacked France not because it had anything to gain but because it is losing. Despite all of our mess-ups, ISIS is losing the war. They attacked soft targets in France to fool themselves into thinking they could find victory and to con us into being intimidated, into believing they are winning. While ISIS tactics were surprisingly effective, they are in trouble, all that has been accomplished by ISIS is the West is now only more determined to make them lose faster. 

Meditations in States of Emergency like France

Paris has had what will likely be the worst acts of terror on Paris since the occupation. My heart and grief go out to the French people, who do not deserve this. The Middle East is a burning building. Put out the fire of regional turmoil and the smoke of terrorism in Europe and America will slowdown and cease rather than see the fire spread here, as firemen we have to stop treating the present map of the Middle East as though it were a building worth saving. The fire has burned too long, spread too easily and the building was too poorly made to be saved. The West needs to rethink its strategy in the Middle East.

France has long anticipated these kinds of attacks, the Charlie Hebdo massacre was a prologue but terrorism has been coming out of the Middle East since the 1960s. Europe and America has an unfortunate history of not recognizing the evil of terror whether it is Iran, Hezbollah, the PLO, Black September, the PKK, Baathist Iraq, Hamas and Iran and we treat these organizations like they are reasonable. They are not, they seek political profit at the maximal cost of civilian lives which is only reasonable to the David Koreshes and Charlie Mansons of the world. Terror organizations “profit” in their way from being unreasonable.  What happens in Paris will happen in Berlin, in New York, in Washington and in LA and it will happen for the same reasons; the West has been outsmarting itself by seeking a series of political solutions to military and police problems.

US and European foreign policy must recognize there is no point in differentiating between international and domestic security philosophically. We no longer live in a world where we can ignore a genocide or just stand to the side and boo one, we cannot tolerate sustained instability anywhere. What happens in Kabul, Waziristan, and especially Iran and Syria is very relevant to Paris and Washington. France and the EU will have to further increase their security but this is only a costly and temporary solution with diminishing returns. There will always be exploitable gaps in security, this Maginot line cannot be hermetically sealed or made qualitatively better; the West can only try to keep up with the times.  The real ICBMS in the Middle East travel by foot and bear arms, if we do nothing different then real missiles will come later. The civilized world is looking at decades to repair the Middle East but we do not have to be its victim or its colonizer yet we are in a state of war that we did not ask for.

Europe and its allies must stop thinking about security in post second world war terms. Stop trying to solve the riddle of religious extremism and fanatical nationalism as though every crazy problem can be solved with diplomatic therapy and instead work towards resolution – resolutions unlike solutions don’t have to make everyone happy or be reactionary in preserving the status quo. Syria has been a hot bed of terror for decades, a peaceful Syria will have different borders and different rulers. Iran must be contained, Iraq like Syria will likely break up. Yemen may deserve a political solution after the Houthis declare a ceasefire. Gaza is in an unacceptable state not because of the blockade but because Hamas remains in power and it must reform or go. The Arab Spring was about democracy, accountability and personal freedom and most people got Islamism instead and in the case of Egypt this was followed by renewed strongman rule.  That means we may not be popular or a perfect model of how Middle Easterners should self-govern but we are not ideological aliens. The West should support constitutionalism and independent judiciaries and then human rights as training wheels for democracy but in the meantime NATO is not competent to manage American and European interests in the Middle East. For example, NATO member Turkey is a supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas and has been accused of being a supporter of the Islamic State until recently and can be easily be seen as sympathetic to Sunni terror and this compromises a NATO deeply concerned by Islamic radicalism. But NATO wants Turkish Airbases and chooses to ignore the obvious logistical and security problems. Unless the current government completely repudiates supporting terrorism, and follows through with policy changes, we must be careful of working too closely with Ankara which is far from seeing NATO’s security or regional stability as being in its interests. For Erdogan’s Turkey, NATO is just a stepping stone to becoming a greater regional power based on the idea that the Middle East and Turkey will be improved if Turkey is the hegemon. There is no reason for the west to support going backward a century in the Middle East. NATO is also unable to expand membership to other states in the Middle East because a European and American organization of democracies founded on European security is not compatible with the Middle East nations that are not democratic republics.  We need an alliance that can embrace more parties and more kinds of parties in the region and turn out those nations that fail us in way that NATO cannot.  We need a security organization that can choose to have direct ties to a tribe if that is what is needed.

Fortunately, Most of the Gulf and the Levant may be ready to form such an alliance, even with Israel due the tremendous instability caused by Al Qaeda, ISIS and Iran.  Such an alliance with a genuine anti-Islamic terror philosophy which has no tolerance for international terror must be translated into practical policy but may also be easily embraced by religiously conservative nations and people who want to differentiate themselves from odium of Islamic terrorism. We need a new alliance of Middle Eastern Nations, Europe and America composed minimally of France, Germany, Greece, Israel, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and conditionally Iraq, the Kurds and Turkey.  There might even be room for Russia should it abandon Iran. This security organization must be very clear that the PKK and similar organizations must renounce attacks on civilians, Turkey must renounce support for all terror organizations and if it does not than this new organization bases in Greece, Israel and Kurdish and possibly Gulf and Jordanian areas. Provided the Kurds agree to be pro-western, democratic, anti-terror and flexible regarding borders with Turkey. Turkey will need to recognize the right of Kurds to a nation with Turkey and Kurdistan coming to an agreement on borders and rights of ethnic Kurds.   If Turkey fails either to be anti-terror or pro-Kurdish then Turkey is out at least until Turkey elects a responsible, pro-western government. Similarly if the PKK remains a terror organization then Turkey need not recognize any Kurdistan and the alliance’s work with various Kurdish militias may need to be short term and to the exclusion of the PKK.  Developing flexible relationships that do not overly compromise is not only possible but will be far more effective than applying a European security organization outside of Europe.

Egypt must be supported at the expense of the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas and Hezbollah and all must be given the opportunity to renounce terrorism and must agree not to attack our allies and if they fail then they become potential targets of the alliance and their calls for political power and autonomy go unrecognized and seen as illegitimate.  Lebanese inclusion in this treaty will depend on Hezbollah’s status but the treaty must be as anti-Iran as it is anti-ISIS -- even if we need only contain and constrain Iran. I suggest building on history and call this alliance MEATO as it will be more comprehensive than METO was.

The PLO and PA will be given the opportunity to renounce terror, renounce “the right of return” and renounce claims on Jerusalem, accept Ramallah as their capital and recognize Israeli cities in Judea and Samaria in exchange for a recognized, viable and internationally Palestinian supported state. Should they not agree then Israel should be pressured to declare unilateral borders it can live based on having a hostile neighbor but in consultation with Europe and the UN who will serve as advisors and vote getters for a UN vote of recognition. Then a Palestinian state or two states will be recognized in what is left over.  Either way, a separate organization will be created that is regionally and internationally funded to handle claims of lost property for Jews and Arabs from the Israeli – Arab conflicts and that will end the conflict as we know it.  Obviously this is a big reversal for Europe and Muslims states to embrace but frankly the hour is well past when Europeans at least should have evolved on this issue. If the Palestinians want to be Palestinians and have a state called Palestine there are viable options and if the world can’t make them go that route then it is time their ambitions are routed as the Palestinian cause cannot trump the need for regional security and cooperation. That conflict is far less important than it used to be as the Middle East now faces real regional problems than the mere luxury of Arabs claiming a version of Manifest Destiny in the name of Pan-Arabism at Israel’s expense.

Real challenges are going to be Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, Syria and possibly Egypt. Additionally, Afghanistan and Pakistan may erupt as well as parts of Africa but creating stability in the Middle East will ease a lot of other burdens. Unpacking and Iraq and Syria into political entities with a path for political, cultural and economic stability is the goal of a new alliance. The Middle East needs Europe and America to lend military and diplomatic force while remaining honest brokers towards a series of political solutions that result from liberty created by military intervention against terror organizations that are arrived at in partnership with regional governments when possible and/or tribes and ethno-religious groups. The emergence of cooperation with smaller sub groups will help the Europe and the UN deal with similar problems in South Asia and Central Asia, particularly in the Waziristan province of Pakistan. The difference between this and the Bush invasion of Iraq will be the emphasis on openness, regional cooperation, thoughtful planning and competent leadership.    

The job of this security organization will be to secure the borders of ME states in the organization by stable entities within failed and terror states which will in turn reduce the ability of terror organizations to harm Europe and America. Such a resolution may require redrawing the map for some states in the region who may then join our alliance. In some cases, security and eventual tranquility may require invasions of terrorist strangleholds, or a cold war like containment policy for other places like Iran but the point is Western and Middle Eastern forces will work together to militarily defeat regional terror organizations, create sustainable states, especially of Kurdistan which will help buffer the Gulf and Central Asia against unstable areas but also to create tranquility in places such as Gaza and Yemen. In contrast to the post world war one period, there are now states and groups that can develop realistic solutions to their own problems supported by a world community that respects and find assistance to be in their own best interest.

For too long the world has been too reactionary with the Middle East, wanting all problems to be solved without anything changing.  A few all out Middle Eastern Wars, 9/11, the Madrid Train Bombing, 7/7 (London bombings), Mumbai attacks, Charlie Hebdo and now Paris tell us we must be more invasive at least in the Middle East  before Europe and America face full blown guerilla wars domestically. Conflict at home is the state of emergency that is slowly emerging from successes like the attack on Paris, where we will probably find that ISIS has cooperation in sourcing targets from domestic terror groups or with French citizens who are members of ISIS as the attacks show an intimate knowledge of France, are part of a larger continuity of local insurgency.  So far, Western involvement in the Middle East since the end of the cold war has been accidental, reactionary and often working against our own security. It is past time to revise our strategy and to accept the work before us. 

Turkey, ya can’t rig an election ya didn’t win!

I’m proudly from Chicago, a one party government disguised as a democracy and I am proud to see that Turkey joined our club. I congratulate President Erdogan on his stunning victory, people may decide there were voting irregularities, rigging, fake votes and all of that is as true as it is unimportant; Chicago knows a deeper truth, ‘ya can’t rig an election ya didn’t win.’ Supposedly the AKP gained 5 million votes in five months by not allowing a coalition government to form, cracking down on journalism, two major terrorist bombings amid rumors of false flag operations, dragging Turkey into what will become a civil war while the economy is declining and only not collapsing based on US interest rates remaining flat. Every poll in Turkey from June through October showed the AKP in steady decline losing between 8 and 9 points just before the election with all other parties gaining a couple of points. Anyone can see Turkey won those votes, they just not win them from actual voters there’s no reason to complain. The more important truth is the AKP did not lose a lot of votes in consideration of its behavior, they won enough to be a majority party but the margins were adjusted to keep Turkish a one party state. There was not enough opposition to make ridiculous AKP manipulations of the election. 

With deep pride, I  will explain to my new political brothers how pseudo democracy works, there’s a lot of bribing involved but corruption will be regulated because only pro AKP people will be allowed to give and accept bribes while everyone else risks jail. Newbies at “machine politics” as we call it in the windy city, may ask, why have elections at all, or just have really fake elections like they did in the Soviet Union or like they do in Iran and North Korea? The answer is in a Chicago Style pseudo democracy, the corruption of one partly rule only forms a tall and thick crust around the people but people can change the balance of ingredients on top of that pie, which is then sauced in reform political slogans, then local political aspirations are then cooked in the fat of the political cheese underneath. Pseudo democracy will not tolerate an anti-corruption campaign against the AK party but low voter turnout or an increase in the opposition could force the AKP to form a commission that will crack down on other parties while demanding of themselves lower bribes, delicious!  So the people form an advisory role in a pseudo democracy where the party best determines what it can get away with, kicking out and arresting the most egregious political hacks in the anti-corruption campaign du jour and thereby forcing political corruption into a constant state of evolutionary improvement.  The most important and divisive problems that affect that status quo become points the ruling party can pretend to do something about. The biggest issue in Chicago for the last seventy years and longer has been race relations and progress began here by many leaders claiming they were going to do something about race relations. This was a tremendous change from “there ain’t no problem,” the government listened to the people which translated into tiny evolutionary changes at a super slow pace. Now Chicago is the most segregated major city in America but Chicago also defines how bad the bottom is and it is better than it used to be – not in comparison to the rest of country, every major Northern and Southern City and Johannesburg has made more progress than Chicago in terms of race relations but in comparison to yesterday we are a little better than we were. Turkey can have that too, making tiny incremental progress on issues that it is too embarrassed to do nothing about and unlike Chicago which sometimes had to answer to courts, state and national government, Turkish Pseudo democracy is completely free!  Chicago has enjoyed single party rule since 1931 and we’re still going strong. Davatoglu and Erdogan said Turkey wanted “stability,” and nothing is as stable as removing Justice and sound political development from government, so welcome to our club!    

Russia’s Pyrrhic Diplomacy

Sometimes a “police action” is a war in disguise such as America in Vietnam and Russia in the Ukraine to make the odium of war more palatable and other times “war” is a police action such as the war in Grenada or the Falkand islands but are called war to bolster nationalism. Russia has split the difference between the two versions with its military projection in Syria.  If war is merely “the continuation of diplomacy by other means” as Carl von Clausewitz described war, Russia has gained far less than the bombast or bomb blast of Russia projecting force into the Middle East would appear to give.

Russia is looking for a Russian Grenada moment, a “we’re back” moment that the Reagan administration was able to leverage to bolster nationalism after the Iran hostage crisis. For a good 72 hours, Russia enjoyed this internationally but Russia has probably failed to save the Assad regime, failed to find a way to fight ISIS well, failed to demonstrate the Russian War machine is a machine anyone but Russia needs except for the occasional bargain and Russia seems incapable of implementing a long term strategy that would either lead to stability or a higher profile for the Russian federation. Russia has been further exposed as being in an alliance with Iran and Hezbollah which will harm both nations over the long term as they will be increasing seen as an adversary worth marginalizing. The only bigger loser in Syria is the Obama administration that seems to forget when Washington does nothing, someone will do something terrible.

Russia’s message to the world was supposed to be, “if you don’t negotiate with us diplomatically then you’ll have to negotiate with our military” but the real message has become don’t worry if Russia fights some mass murdering Sunni terrorists but supports Shia terrorism because Russia handles both poorly. Russia believes it has brought the din of war to Syria, Russia is printing “Support Assad” t-shirts like a third world country facing inflation prints currency but Syria involvement could be the “dim” of war leads to and ultimately ends Putin’s Russia as thoroughly as Word War I ended Czarist Russia.  

Satan breaks 9 year Hajj losing streak

King Salmon, Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, is going to need a big mop this year. During the part of the Hajj where “Satan” is stoned by the Muslim faithful, stones and curses are thrown at a stone walls meant to represent Satan and usually he loses and most people would expect without arms or legs he could never win. Any Satanic victory in Mecca must be very embarrassing. The stampeding that has so far killed over 700 pilgrims is the worst in 25 years according to AP and the worst disaster since the 2006 loss of just under 350 people. So, how is it that the worse angel prevails? The Saudi Kingdom has been knocking down and paving over anything that is UNESCO worthy to build shopping malls and five star hotels, perhaps in the hopes of renaming the place Mecca Disney but it seems they may be lacking in crowd control. Perhaps, the Saudis should consider building more hospitals. There’s no reason why Islam’s holiest place has to seem more like an oversized European football/soccer stadium. There is only one good way to reduce the problems during the Hajj and that is to reduce the number of people. There are only three ways to reduce the number of people, either charge more and make everything more expensive, decide on a manageable number and limit visits to that number or let people trample each other to death. Option three is getting ugly.  I wish my Jewish readers l’shana tova and my Muslim readers an easy, reflective fast – Eid mubarak.

Abbas Stubs His Toe With Jerusalem "Dirty Feet" Comment

Quick, what’s the second holiest site in Islam? The malls outside of Mecca, after that it’s Medina. What’s the third holiest site in Islam, if you thought the answer is Jerusalem, you’d be wrong. There are several reasons why, "And thereafter We said to the Children of Israel: ‘Dwell securely in the Promised Land.' And when the last warning will come to pass, We will gather you together in a mingled crowd." (Qur'an, Sura 17:104, "The Night Journey")   This is significant, because Islam’s prophet not only said that Israel belongs to the Jews, he did so as part of his “Night Journey” where he dreamed his soul had come to Jerusalem. While Jerusalem should be and is a sight that Muslims find holy, it is not an Islamic holy place as the rise of Islam did not confer holiness on this sight but recognized what predated the Muslim religion and the holiness of the people who had built and lost two temples there. Such a statement may seem extreme and against Islam but considering the controversy at the holy site there is no equitable solution while ignoring inequity. To simply be kind to a narrative supported by people who defy the Qur'an makes no sense. Later, the Ottoman’s in a fit of war against the Crusaders built the Dome of the Rock and the Al Aqsa Mosque complex in ironic defiance of the Qur'an.  There’s no need to see the Ottomans as any better or worse than the European crusaders who would likely build a Church over the ruins of the Temple and whom the Ottoman’s were competing with, but to Jews they were ultimately a pair of nest stealers. So fast-forward several hundred years of Ottoman, British, and Jordanian occupation of Jerusalem and there’s quite a mess. For hundreds of years Muslims have prevented the free access of Jews to Jerusalem and Israel. Allowing the Waqf to administer the holy site has continued much of that failure. The Waqf could be replaced or reformed but Jews need to exercise their rights, right now.   

For Muslims, there is nothing to fear from Jewish prayers, if there were any justice in the world, all the nations and religions of the world that bless themselves by Abraham would be allowed to pray there. Jews, Muslims, Sikhs, Baha’i, Christians, Mormons and anyone else who has a hankering to commune with God in a historic setting. No one but Muslims are allowed in Mecca, this is a pure “we’re right” zone and there is something to be said for all the prayer and ritual that goes on and creates a sense of inter-Muslim brotherhood.  I don’t think anyone else is quite so exclusive but I doubt there are too many Muslims and Jews in Vatican City or attending Church in Salt Lake City but Jerusalem should be an opportunity for Muslims and all Abrahamic faiths to find a similar brotherhood with each other. Wouldn’t that be great for everyone, including Muslims? Instead,Mahmoud Abbas, determined to show himself the least amongst God’s children and pharaonic in his certitude, said of Jews: “They have no right to desecrate [Al Aqsa & Church of the Holy Sepulchre] them with their filthy feet.” Meanwhile, Palestinians wait outside the complex with piles of rocks at the ready to prey on any Jews who might want to pray at their holy sight. Prime Minister Netanyahu is ready to answer violence with violence and with the Arab violence proving to be unrelenting, following the death of Alexander Levlovitz events could get grim. Since there has been nearly a year since the shooting of Yehuda Glick by religious terrorists, the Prime Minister has been too slow to act and now must act midway in a avalanche of violence. While there are a lot of competing territorial claims on Israel’s capital and holy sights, a long Muslim tradition at Israel’s holiest sight that must be taken into consideration, yet what right can Muslims possibly claim to any part of Jerusalem if they don’t believe God is for everybody?  Palestinians cannot be instigators of religious violence and claim Jerusalem at the same time, they’ll have to choose or notice that they have already chosen.  The Palestinians have been so inhospitable and violent, I doubt God wants to hang out there anymore but many people still do. Instead of having that traditional Middle Eastern contest of who can do the most damage, the Palestinians and Israelis should have that other traditional contest Middle Easterners are known for -- who can be most welcoming host. Racism, sectarianism, these are the isms that have come to define the Waqf’s administration of the Holy Sites. Time has come for people who want to just pray to take over for the “religious people.” There is no reason, except for mundane, petty, Earthly ones, why Muslims, Jews, Christians and anyone else who wants to join in can’t pray side-by-side anywhere in Jerusalem.

CENTCOM's Manipulated Intelligence

50 intelligence analysts for Centcom have formally complained that reports on Al Qaeda’s branch in Syria and ISIS have been “altered” to show the UN winning the war. In context of the last two administrations, this is huge problem. We now have two administrations from two different parties with very different views on how to deal with the Middle East pressing intelligence into supporting policy initiatives with favorable intelligence. The Obama administration is cultivating yes men like the previous Bush administration did and there will be consequences. If the US public is surprised by a sudden display of strength of either ISIS or Al Qaeda (Nursa Front) then the US public will be reminded of Vietnam which will deeply complicate US security and regional stability going forward. More importantly, US intelligence now has a bipartisan and therefore systemic problem. The office of the President can now be seen as untrustworthy with intelligence, therefore some new form of congressional oversight will be necessary.  The Eric Snowden story centered on leaking state secrets, suggesting the government was withholding information from the world, the CENTCOM issue is that of a government lying to itself and the public. In addition, Congress is reviewing the nuclear agreement with Iran which at its core relies on US expertise and US intelligence to make certain the treaty will prevent Iran from having a nuclear bomb and now the public will have to wonder if that too is the product of senior level yes men. While there will always be a certain amount of spin and pandering in public reports based on intelligence by the party in power, government must have a way to get the most objective facts possible and the public cannot tolerate institutionalized self-deception in the executive branch, especially when that intelligence can affect US forces under fire. 

King Salmon’s “Honeymoon” in Washington

Hopefully King Salmon packed a decent after shave and some breath mints as he jetted off to Washington. Salman Aldosary knows a man on a honey moon when he sees one, “By choosing the United States to be the destination of his first visit since acceding to the Saudi throne, the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Salman Bin Abdulaziz has dismissed speculation that the honeymoon between Washington and Riyadh was coming to an end.” This sounds like the official Saudi line, perhaps to keep that old flame Iran at bay in article “King Salman in Washington” appearing in Asharq Al-Awsat. A message of stability is important when the parents are fighting and considering the changes and disruption caused by Iran in the Persian Gulf there’s a lot of fighting. Yemen has become a Saudi war right in their own backdoor, Iran is about to become an even greater force for destabilization as the sanctions peel off with no replacement policy to keep Iran at bay. Meanwhile, the Saudis have a plan to starve Iran, Russian and those fracking US frackers of money by keeping the price of oil low. Meanwhile, Tom Friedman reminds the world of Saudi Arabia’s radical underbelly but the truth is that Saudi Arabia may be in a bit of midlife crisis, women can’t drive but they can no vote. What you vote for in an absolute monarchy is unclear to me but at least Women are on equal footing the men on this problem and I do mean equal footing.

The US under President Obama has pretty much nailed the coffin shut in Riyadh’s interests, Iraq has become more or less an Iranian client state, the US did not support moderates in Syria so it looks like the civil war will only produce radicalism, and now Iran is set to be a bigger and more aggressive problem for the entire Middle East. On the other hand, the US should be relatively pleased with Saudi Arabia, the oil over supply really helped the US with both Iran and Russia, the Saudi’s increasing acceptance of Israel may help make peace more likely and the possible Saudi interest in a Kurdish state could really help stabilize the region in the long run. But like in any honeymoon in Saudi Arabia, we don’t really know what kind of man Salmon is yet, he may prove inconsistent and he reason to be upset but like any such honeymoon, it is not that uncommon for it to get rough towards the end. All we really know is that two world leaders feel the need to pose together and that does say something about the health of the alliance. Salmon’s message will inevitably be, even the happiest of marriages face considerable stress and need absolute cooperation when the house is on fire and the Saudi Arabia isn’t seeing much cooperation from us but like a good bride our president says just be patient. I think the world not just King Salmon needs to know how the US will deal with Iran going forward.  

Palestinian Headline News, literally

Photo from Ma'an's article  

Five American students, mistaken for settlers were attacked in Hebron with a petrol bomb and rocks. A Palestinian man provided shelter until police arrived. The two young men were given first aid for light wounds. The vehicle was torched. I would have loved to know if the man who provided shelter also thought the two young men were settlers. According to Ma’an it was five students and the person who assisted was Fayez Abu Hamdiyeh and that he understood they were settlers. Bravo Abu Hamdiyeh, you are a hero. The headlines tell the real story of the Middle East, Agence France Presse was responsible for the article in The Daily Star of Lebanon, “Palestinians attack US tourists mistaken as settlers” and Ma’an’s headline is “Palestinian local rescues, shelters US tourists attacked in Hebron.”  The Palestinians have always wanted to paint the settlers as aggressors and Palestinians as just minding their own business in Judea and Samaria but the fact is there are good and bad actors on both sides. Also overlooked in this story is that the students were attacked for looking Jewish, the presumption is they were mistaken for being settlers because they are Jewish but the attackers may simply have wanted to pressure Jews of any type from visiting the Tomb of the Patriarchs and their status as settlers may have been irrelevant despire Abu Hamdiyeh mistaking them for settlers. Abu Hamdiyeh  has probably risked his life or at least his safety by helping these tourists and so far all he has to show for it is a cheap headline from Ma’an so they can avoid mentioning the attack by Palestinians in the headline. 

Nuclear Ayatollah is Shy a Backbone

Wide reports of the world’s second most unsupreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is pushing the deal to a parliament that is a big rubber stamp outside the President’s jurisdiction. To put this in a venn diagram, imagine parliament facing away from the President and Rouhani facing away from Parliament and then imagine they are both helpless in the groping embrace of  Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and you’ve got a perfect picture of how Iranian “democracy” works. Yet, the Supreme leader is a big believer in representative democracy but not a fan as his actions demonstrate.

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is carefully following our politics, which to be fair is a American “reality television” and it’s not coincidental that the IRGC hints that it is going along as mentioned in my tweet, the IRGC is saying nuclear weapons are unnecessary for Iran’s defense, a true statement that suggests they can only be aggressive weapons for the terror state. While the Ayatollah has fallen short of endorsing the deal, he’s also fallen short of being critical but has allowed rumors to come out stating both positions. Apparently a holy leader cannot stand for anything before he knows what America is going to do. Benjamin Netanyahu, frequently accused having no more backbone than the polls allow is fearless of US policy choices and American voters, rather he ultimately trusts democracy even when it errors but not our Supreme Leader in Iran. He’s too fragile a creature to suffer the humiliation of a vote contradicting his desires. There's no reason for Iran to keep Rouhani and Mohammad Javad Zarif out prison if the holy despot didn't like the deal. Even an ordinary despot could milk a US no vote against the Iran deal into a year’s supply but not supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Iran is a far more fragile than the supporters and critics of the Iran Nuclear Deal are giving credit for. Just look at the tiptoeing this supreme autocratic does for something he wants. 

Iran vs Israel: Nuclear Beauty Contest III

Israel seemingly doesn’t want nations to know for certain whether it has nuclear weapons so that it is not pressured to join the NPT, this called nuclear ambiguity perhaps it should be called nuclear flirtation. Israel still faces the possibility of being wiped out by the combined conventional forces of all of its neighbors, diminished by 1979 peace accord with Egypt and the 1994 accord with Jordan is not eliminated. While Israel is gaining some integration into the larger Middle East as necessitated by Iran and ISIS, the pendulum could swing the other way if local populations do not learn to embrace their Jewish neighbor in the Levant. NATO faced a similar problem in Europe against the numerically superior Soviets. Nuclear deterrence, perhaps the greatest of Asymmetric warfare tactics was first established by Western Allies against the Soviets, only later by the Israelis against Arab States.  Despite the similarities with deterrence, nuclear ambiguity harms the idea of nuclear deterrent policy as lampooned in Dr. Stangelove, “Of course, the whole point of a Doomsday Machine is lost, if you keep it a secret! Why didn't you tell the world, EH?”  This ersatz deterrence policy has its origins in the Nixon administration and may have been suggested by Henry Kissinger to the Israelis for preventing US embarrassment and keeping the NPT out of the picture. The advantage of ambiguity is that it implies two things, nuclear weapons will be used against overwhelming force in a first strike and their purpose is ultimately defensive because Israel can’t threaten with something they don’t claim to have.  We only really know this because Israel has never launched a nuclear missile and because the existential problem of needing to deter an entire region as ebbed but not disappeared. Israel could be perceived as a mad dog willing to use a WMD for its own glory but experience has dispelled what even at the time was an unrealistic possibility the need to deter the region from all out war remains palpable. Talk of a nuclear arms race by Middle Eastern nations is a direct result of Iran’s recent nuclear project, not Israel’s mature one. 

Iran could be said to have fashioned its own ambiguity, Ayatollah Khamenei allegedly issued a fatwa against nuclear weapons stating such weapons were against Islam. The Washington Post, Nov 27^th, 2013 “Did Iran’s supreme leader issue a fatwa against the development of nuclear weapons” suggested that Iran had no problem with producing chemical weapons but was unable to find any written text of the alleged fatwa. More importantly a Fatwa, especially as posed by a Supreme Leader is arbitrary. Having and using nuclear weapons is against Islam only for as long as the Ayatollah says it is. Iran’s recent Reaganesque statements that it will achieve peace through power while unveiling a new Fateh 313 ballistic missile that represents progress on being able to deliver a nuke, President Rouhani stated, "If a country does not have power and independence, it cannot seek real peace."  The problem is Iran does have real power in its ability to project force into Syria, Gaza, the Golan, Iraq and Yemen nor is Iran in any danger of not surviving a conflict with any nation or nations. Iraq was unable to conquer Iran when Iran was in a very weak post-revolutionary position and Iraq was at the apex of its military power. Like China and Russia, The US and its allies have not attempted to invade Iran and topple the government and has no plans to do, nor would such an invasion likely to be successful as supply lines would be very strained and Iran would have a large, highly motivated population to strike a relatively exposed US with. 

Israel has threatened many times to attack Iran because of its nuclear weapons program and has been presumed to be behind a series of assassinations of nuclear scientists, deploying malware against centrifuge productions but Israel has been circumspect in only wanting to attack the nuclear program. Iran is a general threat against the Jewish State and the region yet Israeli rhetoric does not pay Iran back in kind. Israel in conventional warfare has limited itself to the proxies of Iran and Syria rather than engage directly the source of terrorism. The Iranian nuclear program threatens Israel, obviously Israel's actions and rhetoric are highly antagonistic even if the antagonism is justifiable and outweighed by Iranian threats. 

One reason for the antagonism, beyond the infiltration of Israeli territories with Iranian sponsored terror groups Islamic Jihad and for some time, Hamas in addition to their proxy Hezbollah in Syria, is Iran continuously threatens to “wipe Israel off the map.”  More ominously, Iran claimed that Israel could be destroyed in 9 minutes with missiles as translated by MEMRI and reported in by Dudi Cohen for ynetnews but the implication would have to be such devastating missile strikes would need to be nuclear. 

Worse still, Iran has a considerable track records for endangering civilians and policies for killing civilians through its proxies. Both Hezbollah and Hamas have Iranian sponsored doctrines which make targets of enemy civilian populations as well domestic civilian populations by embedding military operatives in civilian areas. There is little room to doubt that Iran would have no doctrine to prevent using nuclear weapons to win a war, even one it chooses to start. Iran has also continues to support Syria militarily which uses chemical weapons against its civilians. 

Iran has WMD, chemical weapons, during the Iran-Iraq, described by Global Security although those chemical weapons could be considered a counter to Iraq’s use of such weapons there was no doctrine on Iran’s part against using them.  In Iran’s defense, it was catching up to an enemy using chemical weapons on the battlefield but there is no indication that these weapons turned the tide of the war for Iran, in fact the Iraqi use of superior conventional weapons and having a better trained military proved to very inadequate for invading Iran. While Iran gets called a paper tiger for failing to resupply Yemen, the real strength of the Iranian military is dug in defenses at home.

The inability to project military force well while having designs on extending Iranian influence in the region has committed Iran to a strategy of exporting revolution supported by asymmetric warfare.  “Asymmetric warfare” can refer to guerrilla warfare and insurgency tactics but it has also become a fig leaf term for terrorism. A human bomb in a grocery store is an asymmetric tactic. While Iran is gaining some possibility of confidence and credibility for its Hezbollah and Iranian military forces in Syria, Iran has historically relied on terrorist tactics as both a means to inflict damage on an enemy as well as the gain the political benefit of making civilian feel endangered.  The Buenos Aires bombing against the AMIA because it is Jewish by a suicide bomber proves Iran has no compunctions about killing innocent civilians for perceived gain. There is nothing in Iranian military doctrine that credibility denies using any weapon against an enemy or its civilian population. If Iran could get its hands on something better than nuclear it would and it would have no reason to use it. A terrible beauty wants to slouch its way toward Bethlehem. 

Originally published in the Jerusalem Post in the Middle East by Midwest blog.

The blockage is internal, Dr. Ibish

In his August 29th column, “The Road to statehood is blocked in all directions” which appeared in the Abu Dhabi paper the National, Dr. Ibish manages to ignore nearly all the paths that are and have been open to the Palestinian Authority for statehood.  He starts with a screed against Danny Danon, claiming Danon’s appointment as Israel’s ambassador to the UN means the sky is falling on a two state solution. While Danon is no advocate for a two state solution, he's less against giving up land to an Arab State than Menachem Begin was.  An article that starts with flogging Danon is not going dig up the PA intransigence for the last 10 plus years of Abbas fruit on the bottom rule. I find it hard to imagine that Danon would have a job in government if Abbas negotiated with the Israelis or was willing to make the compromises necessary for peace. Instead, Abbas has led the PA away from the Oslo accords to seek recognition unilaterally leaving Dr. Ibish to complain the Israelis are somehow not two state enough after all these years of zero progress.

Dr. Ibish writes, “Israel’s government has dropped all pretenses” but pretenses are all that’s left of the peace process barring the possibility of new Palestinian leadership.  He then claims, “It is no longer to possible to argue honestly with Israel’s government is open to, let along supportive of, peace with the Palestinians.”  I think it is possible to argue that Israel is no longer optimistic on a peace deal with the Palestinian Authority but Abbas has kept the PA off a war footing and Israel has done the same. Peace is possible, “Palestine” could become an semi autonomous part of Israel, something I think will be very difficult considering the amount of corruption in the PA and its lack of democracy but such a peace is possible. It is also possible that the Palestinians and Israelis will both hold their noses and come to an agreement that creates a mostly Arab state within Judea and Samaria.

“Palestinian leaders themselves appear to be further burying, rather than rescuing, their own cause” is a solid point and Dr. Ibish goes on to list Abbas’ attempts to purge rivals, increase control over the PLO and angering European financial supporters. However, Dr. Ibish then creates a false dichotomy of a PA state increasingly finding international acceptance instead of doing the work on the ground to create a Palestinian state.  I’ve always called Abbas, ‘yesterday’s man doing yesterday’s work’ but a lot of progress along with a lot of corruption has happened on his watch. The PA is much futher along on its project toward a state since the time of the Grand Mufti and then Arafat. Palestinians still need the man the world hoped Abbas was but not being up to all the tasks is not the same as making no progress. While Ibish is correct that Abbas is making himself available to the "highest international bidder," I believe pitting Iran against Saudi Arabia the problem is the highest bid remains a peace settlement with the Israelis and yet Israel is not allowed a bid.

“However, events on the ground, and the attitudes and conduct of both the Israeli and Palestinian leaderships, point to a very different and extremely dangerous future. Viewed from that perspective, the cause of Palestine appears to be a rapidly vanishing aspiration,” Dr. Ibish is being understandably myopic here. The big picture is that regional acceptance of Israel is increasing which means region is likely to be more supportive of the compromises necessary to make peace, governments that are tired of the Israeli-Arab conflict are more likely to pressure Abbas to make and agree to some of those compromises and the silver lining to the tragic disruption in Syria is that Palestinians may one day eventually gain some rights and citizenship in the places they reside without prejudice to their claims against Israel.   The most important item that Dr. Ibish ignores is that were an Abbas willing to negotiate with Israel and a peace deal was struck, no Israeli government could resist the popular desire for peace with Israelis nor the pressure of the international community because Israel is a democracy. If all his accusations against the Israelis were correct, Dr. Ibish would still be incorrect because he wants to blame the failure of the peace process on the Israelis even when he describes Abbas as “recently sprung into uncharacteristically vigorous action…hasn’t been behaving like a national leader,” he still claims “Israel has dismissed Palestinian statehood.” While Ibish makes a great case for dismissing Palestinian Statehood in his description of Abbas, Israel has not done so but Israel appears to share Dr. Ibish’s skepticism regarding Abbas and has leadership acting like “national leaders.” The PA has long since been saddled with a pair of ruby slippers but wizards like Dr. Ibish keep giving bad advice by on how to get home by casting Israel as a wicked witch when the PA has had the power all along to become a state. All that ails Palestine is ultimately internal.

Adherence to Anti-Israeli narrative is a sure sign of confusion

W. Robert Pearson, wrote in the August 26^th article, “Erdogan and Turkey's Tipping Point” for Middle East Institute about Erdogan’s ambition displacing Turkey’s “dream” of a united society and cites the example of Ataturk’s revolt against the allied powers after World War I. Pearson moves quickly into a small list of things that went wrong for Erdogan such as the failure of Greek Cyprus to agree to a UN sponsored settlement and then described the Turkish inability to mediate between Syria and Israel which ended with the Gaza War in 2008 where Pearson wrote:  

Then the deepest cut came with Israel. After he visited Israel in 2005 and led Israeli-Turkish relations to new heights despite personal misgivings, his efforts to mediate between Israel and Syria were scuppered by the Israeli Gaza operations in 2008, which convinced him that the Israelis were duplicitous.

Deepest cut? Et tu Israel? This biased description misses some key elements.  Erdogan’s interest in interceding between Israel and Syria was to show Turkey as a diplomatic power at the expense of US prestige and Israeli security.  Syria was sponsoring with Iran proxy operations against Israel in the form of rocket launches against civilians and Israel’s response was limited to Hamas. A justifiable attack on Syria during negotiations might have been bad form and Israel showed self-restraint.  If fingers need to be pointed, why didn’t Erdogan blame the Syrians for the attacks or at least demand the Syrians sponsor a Hamas ceasefire? It the Turkish government that cancelled Israel’s participation in the Anatolian Eagle military exercises with the US and Turkey. If Erdogan wanted to be effective by being fair, why didn’t have complain about the actual problem of violence against Israeli civilians? There was no reason to break of the security relationship with Israel beyond Erdogan’s doctrine of support of Sunni terrorism and his animus against Israel. Pearson described Erdogan as having misgiving about Israel but Erdogan is a classic anti-Semite, during a protest in which Erdogan was being called a murderer and thief, he followed Taner Kuruca into a store and punched him but he also called a local of Soma “Israeli Sperm” although Jews and Israel had nothing to do with this protest. This led, opposition deputy chairman at the time, Haluk Koc to say, "Erdoğan's hate speech knows no limits and hehas gone so far as to resort to violence against a citizen." The previous, Islamist Prime Minister, Necmettin Erbakan also tried to derail what had been at that point a very strong and friendly alliance with Turkey but he failed where Erdogan succeeded because the Kemalist Military, the Mustafa Kemal Ataturk military doctrine for whom W. Robert Pearson believes Araturk used to unite Turkey kept that relationship very strong throughout Erbakan’s short term and beyond until military leaders were tried and convicted on false charges of planning a coup. There had been many coupes in the past, so there were many reasons to attack the military which opposed Erdogan’s Islamism but when the smoke cleared, Erdogan had a free hand to demolish the Israeli-Turkish relationship. Something both Islamist governments wanted.

Pearson claims Erdogan misunderstood Obama and somehow it was this misunderstanding that led Erdogan misuse Obama’s “offer of friendship”

Erdogan’s response was to use the partnership to aggrandize his influence domestically and to try to use the U.S. tie as a personal endorsement of himself as a regional and global leader. He was even sharply critical of the United States when it served his own domestic purposes.

This is an excuse, Erdogan doesn’t appear to care that much for democracy which has become very clear to almost everyone as he abuses the constitutional restrictions on his current ceremonial office of President and he took advantage of President Obama but he also took advantage Abdullah Gul and then sidelined him, he took advantage of Fethullah Gulen and now wants to arrest him, he took advantage of the Kurdish HDP party to grain a majority and when the party gained votes at his expense he ended peace talks to fight Kurds. Even now he is allowing Americans to use the Incilik air base so Turkey can have some cover in fighting the Kurds. The pattern here is of a politician who takes advantage of anything in his reach. He misunderstands little, our President misunderstood Erdogan.

The world expects scholars to be accurate with recent history but the inherent anti-Semitic narrative against Israel has infected this analysis, Israel did not harm the Turkish-Israeli relationship in 2009. Erdogan as is his habit took on a conflict he did not have the credibility or temperment to negotiate and he did so to prove Turkey is a regional power worth paying attention to but he also has a clear distaste for Israelis and Jews and that has affected his foreign policy. Even now the contradictions are very stark, he supports Hamas but keeps the Kurdish Arafat, Abdullah Ocalan, in jail and wants to sideline a Turkish-Kurdish leader who is demanding the PKK disarm. Treating similar things as though they were different is the definition of prejudice and W. Robert Pearson would understand President Erdogan a lot better if he could recognize such attitudes and learned to question popular narratives about Israeli-Turkish relations.  

Pearson further demonstrates he doesn’t understand Erdogan with the following:

Erdogan has always had the ability to take the path that will realize the Turkish dream—a true democracy at peace and in harmony with itself, its national and religious past, and the world beyond its borders. Not too many years ago, he represented that hope. Whether he will step forward to provide that principled guidance depends on him— and the voters of Turkey—in a rapidly approaching moment of decision.

Erdogan has no interest in having an inclusive society where conservative Muslims enjoy only the same freedoms as their secular counterparts as he only cares about those secularists that might vote for him and he only said things like that to avoid a coup when the AK party first took power. Other AKP leaders may have that “dream” but not Erdogan.  He is a classic machine politician right down to the bribes and public works and infrastructure projects. Pearson thinks public pressure will make Erdogan change his mind and embrace the “Turkish dream” but Erdogan never had that dream.  Nonetheless, Pearson writes, “The next phase of that dream—a truly democratic Turkey—is waiting to be made reality.” That dream does exist, Pearson is right about that but really the more conservative of the conservative Muslims want secularists to be more like them and secular people really don’t trust religious conservatives whom they see as backward and waiting to create a tyranny. People do have friends and families across the divide who trust each other and the question is what political system will allow mutual political trust. So I agree with Pearson there is “a dream” in Turkey of greater unity but it is alongside a fear of socially pressured indoctrination and tyranny on both sides. Turkey does need a Muslim but pro secularist party that wants to protect religious rights rather than impose religion and stand for Muslim values, a real Muslim-Democratic party but Erdogan’s attempt at a cult of personality with the AKP party is not the way. What Turkey needs is for the AKP to split and give people a real choice between freedom for religion in the context of secularism in politics and an Islamism that shows little pretense for secularism. Perhaps Bulent Arinc or Abdullah Gul could create a credible alternative to the AKP. If this happens, Turkey will be far better represented with a healthy political spectrum but problems will remain. In a country that is 90% Muslim, secularism is necessarily anti-clerical and Turkey has not yet found a way to strike a balance between religion and secularism. Erodgan is not the man to figure this out, nor is the he the man to create a situation where other leaders can figure out how to maximize religious freedom for everyone.

There’s a problem with academia when it can only see what it believes, Pearson buys into the Israel at fault canard for Turkish Israeli relations and he can’t see that the current President of Turkey has more in common with Richard J. Daley and Nursultan Nazarbayev then Martin Luther King. 

Polling shows Erdogan's attack on the Kurds is failing

Erdogan is not failing to kill Kurds, the fighting is going just fine with enough dead bodies produced by both sides to make Erdogan and PKK delighted about their prospects and impress their diehards.  Turkey’s national Kurdish HDP party remains demanding the PKK to disarm as was reported on July 15^th in the Hurriyet Daily News and other papers.  Mahmoud Abbas and Jerry Adams could take lessons Selahattin Demirtas but he is clearly expressing collective exhaustion by the fighting over the years and that kind of fatigue is what is required to make peace with terrorists. Success within the political spear is also necessary, the HDP had an unprecedented success in the last election, taking support away from Erdogan’s AKP which has ironically sparked this latest round of fighting. In a government that is only capable of the most Byzantine political alliances, a government which only makes cynical political moves, the sudden betrayal of the Kurds and ending the peace talks after the election didn’t produce votes for the AKP but the behavior stood out as pretty cynical even for them. Like the HDP to the PKK, the Turkish population doesn’t appear to be going along with this war.  A Gezici poll in Turkey shows a slight drop in votes for AKP to 38% which is only 1% drop but shows that the AKP is not recovering votes lost in the last election.

Erdogan’s contract with the public has failed.  Turks cannot ignore the all the building that happened during its administration or its political improvement as a player on the world stage but everything it was supposed to stand for has been rolled back.  The AKP was supposed to secure civil rights for religiously conservative Turks without eroding anyone else’s rights but through government pressure and forcing laws through the legislature many secular freedoms have been rolled back, frequently minor ones such as limits on alcohol sales but were noticed by the secular majority. Also, having journalists outside of jail has become a luxury rather than a standard, the crack down on by the police on the Gezi protesters is still an open wound for many.  Erdogan is urging people to vote of stability because the constitution requires he not directly endorse the AKP but a police state at war with a third of the population while bullying the majority is not the stability people are looking for and the economy is faltering.

Economically, Turkey has slid backward. While the AKP did not break the inflation spiral over a decade ago, it managed the economy well with relatively good monetary policies, very smooth transitioning of the Turkish Lira to denominations that made non-inflationary sense. The Turkish Lira was always the weakest of the BRICS currency in terms of debt and foreign currency reserves yet most of the building debt is financed in dollars and building has been the core constituency for Erdogan’s AK party. Drawing support from conservative Muslims in the black sea region of Turkey, economic opportunity and public works projects brought the AKP many voters who always felt on the outside looking in on the republic. With the Lira severely down against the dollar after a decade of Erdogan directly interfering with interest rates, the whole building sector is now operating at a loss. Meanwhile, every foreign policy initiative has failed, Turkey is not trusted by any Middle Eastern nation except Qatar, the US President with whom he was always able to get a photo opportunity now avoids direct contact -- even Erdogan has admitted the relationship has gone cold. AK means white as in pure but the AK Partisi as they like to be called is anything but pure, Erdogan has had to disrupt police and Judicial institutions to avoid investigation of his friends and family for corruption. The AKP has admitted the arrest and conviction of many military people for a fictional coup were based on falsified evidence but is now in waging lawfare against the Gulenist movement who were the co-conspirators against the Military and previously close allies of the AKP.

Renewing war with the Kurds is Erdogan’s attempt to “wag the dog” with Turkish voters but it is not working, AKP continues to slip in the poles which means the last election was not an abnormality and the snap elections engineered by Erdogan may only be detrimental for him. The President pushed hard for snap elections with the unprecedented move in denying the number two CHP a chance to form a government. Erdogan has exceeded his powers as president, the public seems very much aware the man they voted into a ceremonial office wants to the Government to be more like Putin’s Russia rather than a Western Democracy. Unfortunately for President Erdogan, Russia isn’t doing so well either. 

Lebanon: Garbage out has always been the problem

“You stink” really should be refrain of the Lebanese public for the last several decades but all the garbage on the streets has at least prepared wealthy Lebanese to emigrate to the American East coast.  This is country where the son of an assassinated leader works with the organization that killed his father in the same government. How could dysfunction rule! Whether failing to rid themselves of the PLO in the seventies and eighties, failing to fight Hezbollah and more recently the failure to disarm Syria and Iran's proxy or the failure to toss our sectarianism and create a boarder sense of identity in the nineties and into the millennium; the Lebanese have always had trouble ridding themselves of their garbage.

Tammam Salam’s government has been bedridden since the elections, the problems Lebanon faces are daunting.  Former hegemon, Syria has broken down into civil war creating a refugee and demographic crisis for the always teetering on civil war public. Hezbollah has taken on yet another way since joining the government by taking the sides of Lebanon’s oppressor, Assad’s Syria and it is possible this will eventually put Lebanese regular forces in danger.

Hezbollah and Michael Aoun’s Christian “Free Patriotic Movement,”  a capital on Lebanon’s fifth column, have walked out of a cabinet meeting because….they have not said yet but the absolute stink of their choices is unavoidable.  In the meantime, the police are getting heavy handed with protesters.

Hezbollah has now sided with the protesters and are demanding the government resign, at a moment when Hezbollah is over stretched militarily and potentially very unpopular for supporting tyrant-in-chief Bashar Assad, Hezbollah  sees the opportunity to pull the life support on an already weak government to strengthen its own hand. At a time when Iran may become a resurgent power, Lebanon may only be further ensnared by Iran proxy force. Something just doesn’t stink in Lebanon, something is rotten.

Originally published in the Jerusalem Post in the Middle East by Midwest blog.

All Palestine occupied by Palestinians

President Rivlin while hosting leader of Judean and Samarian communities claims Israel’s rights to its land, including Judea and Samaria, as a basic fact in spite of claims of “occupation” coming from Ramallah, Gaza City and many other places. What an egotistical, impetuous, bullheaded philistine this Israeli President is! Without any restraint he carried on, "We must not give anyone the sense that we are in any doubt about our right to our land.” Every time I hear or read the phrase “the occupied territories” I wonder if the person making the statement knows by whom they are occupied. The word “Palestine” is derived from is the Latin “Palestina” which was the Roman name for occupied Judea after the destruction of the Second Temple. This Latin word is based on Philistine but there were no Philistines at the time, so while those words are kissing cousins they mean different things.  Parts of Judea and Samaria frequently referred to by its Jordanian occupational name “The West Bank” are occupied by somebody other than Jews but the word “Palestinian” came to refer to Jews living in Eretz Israel also known as “Palestine.” Eretz Israel, Palestine, was run like a colony by the Syrians within the Ottoman Empire. The more modern usage of the word comes from the Mandate of Palestine. Arabs of Palestine, considering themselves Syrians rejected the term until the early seventies but it’s important to understand this rejection when considering the actions and strategies of Haj Amin al-Husayni, Grand Anti-Semite, scion of a lineage of anti-Semites and oppressors, free Nazi war criminal, Mufti of Jerusalem and leader of Arab Higher [National] committee and his decision to reject his Palestinianess as being too Jewey led him to create a Nakba for himself and those who willing followed him into disaster.

When Britain ruled Mandate Palestine, it did not just rule the Jews aka “the Palestinians” although Palestine had been entrusted by Jews and world government to Britain to help form a viable Jewish State. They also ruled the Arabs as though they were Palestinians and sometimes Britain did so in preference of Arabs and to the detriment of the Jews living there. We could call the Arabs living in Eretz Israel during the mandate period “Palestinians” just as we must call the Jews living there Palestinians even though most Arabs of they would treated the designation as an anathema.

So who rules the Eretz Mandate Palestine today? Mandate Palestinians do, every inch is ruled by a Palestinian. These Palestinians rule from their seats of government in Amman, Ramallah, Gaza City and Jerusalem. King Abdullah might not be a mandate Palestinian as he is of foreign, Hashemite stock but his wife and children are as Palestinian as any Arab who bought into Yasser Arafat’s Egyptian sponsored sense of national identity: close enough where crowns are concerned.

It’s almost a shame the Palestinians changed the name of their country from Palestine to Israel because I would love to see the Mandate Palestinian Arabs that did not become Israelis still calling themselves Syrians and referring to Jerusalem as occupied Syria.  Imagine the people who talk out of their rears -- BDS (Bowel Discourse Syndrome) having to mindlessly proclaim Arabs living autonomously in Judea and Samaria (and Gaza) as occupied Syrians. A barrel bomb of laughs! How long could Syrians then countenance living in Syrian, Lebanese and Jordanian refugee camps when the only thing separating these peoples historically is nothing? The world would have to consider the Palestinians are all over the lands of Mandate Palestine and their status as a local problem.

 I’m not saying the Mandate Palestinians living in parts of Judea and Samaria can’t make a viable nation for themselves within those lands. Considering themselves adrift, finding Jewish Nationalism and Jewish rights to be a trigger for a xenophobic reaction like the Mufti and Israelis frequently only seeing Palestinians a hostile demographic bomb.  Everyone needs to move on.

Those Palestinians who formed the Emirate of Trans-Jordan were able to carve out a state and Palestinian Jews were able to carve state out of what was left of Mandate Palestine so why can’t Mandate Palestinians and their government in Ramallah do the same? The Palestinians as they are known today have been rejected by Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and Egypt, they reject Jews and Israel and now Israelis reject them and that is enough to go it alone, provided the Palestinians choose to make peace with their sovereign.  President Rivlin understands a basic truth, Israel is the legitimate sovereign of its lands and therefore the way to peace starts with that understanding. The loudest supporters of “Palestine” fail at understanding the conflict itself much less its resolution. Without the assertion of Jewish rights as the point of negotiation the Palestinians and who ever aids them are only building sandcastles for themselves.  Because supporters of Palestine ignore the historical, political and legal reality of the land and of the State of Israel, they box themselves of nonstarter rhetoric. Demands to stop building homes and demands to let Palestinians build a capital in the Israeli capital are typical. An autonomous Arab state within parts of Judea and Samaria would just be another in the group of Mandate Palestinians with states, it could live in peace and it could flourish with Ramallah as its capital.  With such a state negotiated, perhaps Abbas can finally give up his occupation and return the PA to democratic government.