Davutoglu: Internationalization of events in Syria will "lead to undesired outcomes"...

Via FLC

avutoglu: Internationalization of events in Syria will "lead to undesired outcomes"...

"Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said efforts should be exerted to prevent international intervention in Syria. Speaking at a TV program, Davutoglu said such an international intervention may lead to undesired outcomes, "Syria is our neighbor and a sovereign country. We give high importance to resolution of the matter within the country itself. There is still a chance for this. This chance should not be missed."

Asked if there would be a military intervention in Syria where clashes escalated recently and asked to comment on policy Turkey would pursue, Davutoglu said, "we should work to prevent such a possibility. International intervention may lead to undesired results particularly in such nonhomogeneous societies in sociological sense."

Posted by G, M, Z, or B at 2:52 PM

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Wikileaks: US DCM Ankara: "In the long run, Assad’s increasing trust of PM Erdogan offers the best hope of luring Syria out of Tehran’s orbit..."

Via FLC

"... An in-depth look at the WikiLeaks cables on Turkish-Syrian-American relations  tells a story of caution, suspicion, tiny hopes and preparedness for a backlash: the American side did not discourage the Turks from trying to get closer to the young Assad, but it always took it with a grain of salt. Overall, there was common ground between Ankara and Washington, D.C., with regard to Syria as both countries believed it was worth a try to pull Syria out of the iron fist of the Assad clan and its corrupt backers, in addition to ending its isolation and endorsing reforms in favor of democracy and the free market. “The Turks, led by PM Erdogan [Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan], FonMin Gul [Foreign Minister Abdullah Gül], and chief foreign policy advisor Davutoglu [Ahmet Davutoğlu], are selling improved relations with Syria as a major foreign policy success. GOT [government of turkey] leaders cast Turkey as a channel of communication for the US and Israel with Syria and as a friend that can support economic reform. At the same time our GOT interlocutors view Assad’s control as too fragile to sustain anything but economic reform. In this context, Erdogan has promoted his Dec. 22-23 visit to Damascus and Aleppo as a huge step forward. Erdogan reportedly raised Iraq and Middle East peace issues, but apparently received nothing new from Assad. MFA contact spun the signing of a free trade agreement as ‘the highlight’ of the visit. We pushed back that this is the wrong approach to take with Syria,” wrote Robert Deutsch, a former charge d’affaires of the US Embassy in Ankara, in a “confidential” cable on Jan. 18, 2005, weeks after Prime Minister Erdoğan’s visit to Syria.
Deutsch wrote in another cable (April 15, 2005) that even (former) Turkish President Ahmet Necdet Sezer “encouraged Assad to ‘continue’ with internal reforms. … With great satisfaction, (Turkish senior) diplomat Celikkol claimed that Sezer’s visit had strengthened the hand of Assad and other reformers against hard-liners who want to maintain the status quo.”

But the American skepticism persisted. The picture becomes quite clear in a cable written in July 22, 2005, by Nancy McEldowney, charge d’affaires of the embassy, when we learn that Turks also raise deep suspicions: “(Syrian Deputy FM) [Walid] al-Muallim met with FM Gul in Ankara July 22 to discuss Iraq, the Israel Palestine peace process and a possible upcoming ‘unofficial’ visit to Turkey by Bashar Assad. One MFA official told us privately that the discussions were difficult and inconclusive; another emphasized the strong message Gul and (undersecretary) Tuygan delivered on Iraq. After the meeting, Gul expressed anger at the way the Syrians are ‘using’ the Turks.”
But the absence of confidence did not halt the Turkish efforts. In the meantime, several cables emphasized that the core or “realism” in Ankara’s policies has a value, and the Turks correctly work hard to end Syria’s isolation, to stop any sectarian violence that may erupt and break the Iran-Syria axis. By October 2009, the American ambivalence seemed in line with the one in Ankara: Turkish policies on Syria encouraged Assad to hold on to his iron grip and resist change, but also seemed to be the only ray of hope to move Damascus away from its axis with Teheran.
In a “secret” cable sent by US Charge d’Affairs Charles Hunter in Damascus, Oct. 28, 2009, the conclusion reflects the persistent dilemma: “Turkey’s methodical deepening of relations with Damascus offers Syria a strategic buffer against international pressure and a ready mediator willing to help Syria mend strained relations with neighbors, such as Iraq, Saudi Arabia and even Lebanon. In the long run, Assad’s increasing trust of PM Erdogan offers the best hope of luring Syria out of Tehran’s orbit.” As of now, Assad has been losing his friends in Ankara...

Posted by G, M, Z, or B at 12:13 PM

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

US warns Turkey against trade with Iran

Posted on May 1, 2011 by rehmat1

David S. Cohen (a Zionist Jew), acting undersecretary for ‘terrorism and financial intelligence’, during his visit to Turkey, on April 24-28, had warned Turkey against conducting financial transactions with the Islamic Republic and asked Ankara to halt the operations of Bank Mellat, an Iranian state-run bank in the country. The Bank which is banned to operate in the US and EU, has three branches in Turkey.
Turkey had reported US$10 billion annual trade with the Islamic Republic in 2010 and Ankara expects it to reach US$30 billion by 2020.
India is also planning to use Turkey for its oil transactions with Iran since Germany stopped its bank Bundesbank from accepting money from India for Iranian oil payments under pressure from Washington and Tel Aviv. India had imported 21.2 million tons of crude oil from Iran in the year ending March 31, 2010, about 13% of its total crude imports.
David Cohen is following in the foot-steps of his Jewish boss, Stuart Levey, who is considered as the ‘father of crippling sanctions’ against the Islamic Republic. Former Iranian Finance Minister, Davoud Danesh Jafari, had described Levey’s strategy, as reported by Ron Kampeas in JTA, July 1, 2010. “They had assigned one of their Zionist deputies to halt the Iranian economy. This person would personally travel to many countries around the world. He would use incentives and encouragement to request cooperation against Iran, and if he failed to get any results he would use threats to pursue his goal“.
Cohen also visited France which has practically lost its market share in Iran after the US placed French firms under extreme financial pressure. Iran used to be France’s primary trade partner till 2004. Germany, on the other hand, in spite of its stated firmness on sanctions – maintained its high level of trade with Iran. With the Iranian market virtually cleared of competitors, now American companies like to cash on easy access to this market.
Despite the noise the EU usually make against Tehran – its members’ trade with Tehran have shown increase each year, reaching 24 billion euro in 2010.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Israeli-American-Mubarak-Suleiman resistance to dealing with Hamas in power & according Israel greater importance than Palestine, prevented a reconciliation earlier

Via FLC

"... The Egyptian government’s constructive and impartial mediating role that brought about Palestinian reconciliation stands in stark contrast with the pro-Fatah and anti-Hamas tilt of the Mubarak regime and its prime purveyor of political and intellectual dishonesty, former intelligence chief General Omar Suleiman. The differences between Fatah and Hamas were all related to political and security matters that had logical solutions, because they emerged from short-term political actions rather than long-term structural differences. Israeli-American-Mubarak-Suleiman resistance to dealing with Hamas in power and the decision to accord Israeli concerns greater importance than Palestinian rights prevented a reconciliation earlier on. The agreement now, so soon after Mubarak-Suleiman have left the scene, is a telltale indicator of where the problems really were. So was the speedy, almost Pavlovian, comment by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu within hours of the reconciliation accord that Fatah could have peace with Hamas or with Israel, but not with both... ... ... 

The reactivation of Egypt’s regional role is also significant because it comes at a time when four other important foreign policy developments are under way in the Middle East. The first is the dynamism among some Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states, three of which (Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates and Qatar) have, unusually, sent troops beyond their borders to engage in martial diplomacy in Bahrain and Libya. The second is the global intervention in Libya through the U.N. Security Council, now aiming to overthrow the Libyan leader, Moammar Gadhafi. The third is the increasingly important counsel and role of Turkey in the region. And the fourth is the increasing regional and global pressure being brought to bear on the Syria-Iran-Hezbollah axis, combined with Damascus’ preoccupation with its domestic condition.

In this context of an ongoing structural reconfiguration of Middle Eastern foreign policy actors and influences, an Egyptian foreign policy refreshingly based on integrity, national self-interest and plain old common sense represents the first significant move toward redressing the most glaring imbalance in the region since Egypt slipped out of the Arab order in the late 1970s. The region’s security architecture since then has been defined by interactions among four non-Arab powers – Israel, Iran, Turkey and the United States – which has left this area as a playground for their scheming and rivalries. A robust Egypt that may coordinate more closely with the GCC states, while Syria is preoccupied at home and the Palestinians present a unified face to Israel and the world, means we should expect important changes ahead in the four overriding regional dynamics that continue to link the Arabs, Israelis, Iranians and major Western powers in mostly uneasy relationships..."

Posted by G, M, Z, or B at 12:15 PM

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

The Syrian Time Bomb

Via MCS

- 28. Apr, 2011

Forget Libya. Washington should pay closer attention to the violent protests imperiling the Assad regime in Damascus. If there’s one country where unrest could truly set the Middle East alight, it’s Syria.

BY PATRICK SEALE / FP

While one war rages in Libya, another rages in Washington as to the necessity of U.S. action there. Indeed, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said as much this weekend, noting that Libya was not a “vital national interest.” But if Washington is looking for an Arab state in the throes of unrest, one that is key to its regional and national interests, planners might want to pay more attention to Syria, which is currently undergoing upheaval not seen since the early 1980s.

Syria lies at the center of a dense network of Middle East relationships, and the crisis in that country — which has now resulted in the deaths of well over 100 civilians, and possibly close to double that number — is likely to have a major impact on the regional structure of power. The need to contain pressure from the United States and Israel, for decades the all-consuming concern of Syria’s leadership, has suddenly been displaced by an explosion of popular protest highlighting urgent and long-neglected domestic issues.

If the regime fails to tame this domestic unrest, Syria’s external influence will inevitably be enfeebled, with dramatic repercussions across the Middle East. As the crisis deepens, Syria’s allies tremble. Meanwhile, its enemies rejoice, as a weakened Syria would remove an obstacle to their ambitions. But nature abhors a vacuum, and what will come will be unpredictable, at best.

The protests started in mid-March in Daraa, in southern Syria, a city that has suffered from drought and neglect by the government in Damascus. The heavy hand of the ruling Baath party was particularly resented. Because it lies on the border with Jordan, and therefore in a security zone, all land sales required the security services’ approval, a slow and often costly business. This is one of the particular grievances that have powered the protest movement, though certainly the ripples of the successful Egyptian and Tunisian uprisings played a hand. The government, to put it bluntly, responded poorly. Troops in Daraa fired live rounds against youthful demonstrators and virtually all communications — Internet and telephone — were shuttered to prevent the seepage of unrest.

To make matters worse, Damascus blamed Israeli provocateurs, rebel forces, and shady foreign agents for the bloodshed — anyone but its own forces. Civilian deaths at the hands of security forces there, and more recently in the coastal city of Latakia, have outraged opinion across the country, setting alight long pent-up anger at the denial of basic freedoms, the monopolistic rule of the Baath party, and the abuses of a privileged elite. To these ills should be added severe youth unemployment, devastation of the countryside by a grave shortage of rainfall over the past four years, and the impoverishment of the middle and lower classes by low wages and high inflation.

In response to the public unrest, the regime has released some political prisoners and pledged to end the state of emergency in force since 1963. A government spokeswoman has hinted that coming reforms will include greater freedom for the press and the right to form political parties. President Bashar al-Assad is due to address the country in the next 48 hours. His speech is eagerly awaited, but it remains to be seen whether it will be enough to defuse the crisis and win time for the regime. If not, demonstrations could gather pace, triggering still more violent repression by the security services — an escalation with unpredictable consequences.

The protesters have in fact challenged the fundamentals of Syria’s security state, a harsh system of controls over every aspect of society, put in place by the late Hafez al-Assad, Bashar’s father, who ruled for 30 years from 1970 to his death in 2000. By all accounts, the debate about how to deal with the growing protests has led to increasingly violent confrontations inside the regime between would-be reformers and hard-liners. The outcome of this internal contest remains uncertain.

What is certain, however, is that what happens in Syria is of great concern to the whole region. Together with its two principal allies, the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Lebanese Shiite resistance movement Hezbollah, Syria is viewed with great hostility by Israel and with wary suspicion by the United States.

The Tehran-Damascus-Hezbollah axis — of which Syria is the linchpin — has long been seen by many leaders in the region as the lone bulwark against Israeli and American hegemony. With backing from Washington, Israel has sought to smash Hezbollah (notably through its 2006 invasion of Lebanon) and detach Syria from Iran, a country Israel views as its most dangerous regional rival. Neither objective has so far been realized. But now that Syria has been weakened by internal problems, the viability of the entire axis is in danger — which could encourage dangerous risk-taking behavior by its allies as they seek to counter perceived gains by the United States and Israel.

If the Syrian regime were to be severely weakened by popular dissent, if only for a short while, Iran’s influence in Arab affairs would almost certainly be reduced — in both Lebanon and the Palestinian territories. In Lebanon, it would appear that Hezbollah has already been thrown on the defensive. Although it remains the most powerful single movement, both politically and on account of its armed militia, its local enemies sense a turning of the tide in their favor.

This might explain a violent speech delivered earlier this month by the Sunni Muslim leader and former prime minister Saad Hariri, in which he blatantly played the sectarian card.

Cheered by his jubilant supporters, he charged that Hezbollah’s weapons were not so much a threat to Israel as to Lebanon’s own freedom, independence, and sovereignty — at the hand of a foreign power, namely Iran. The Syrian uprisings may have already deepened the sectarian divide in Lebanon, raising once more the specter of civil war and making more difficult the task of forming a new government, a job President Michel Suleiman has entrusted to the Tripoli notable, Najib Mikati. If Syria were overrun with internal strife, Hezbollah would be deprived of a valuable ally — no doubt to Israel’s great satisfaction.

Meanwhile, Turkey is deeply concerned by the Syrian disturbances: Damascus has been the cornerstone of Ankara’s ambitious Arab policy. Turkey-Syria relations have flourished in recent years as Turkey-Israel relations have grown cold. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and his foreign minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, have actively sought to mediate local conflicts and bring much-needed stability to the region by forging close economic links. One of their bold projects is the creation of an economic bloc comprising Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, and Jordan — already something of a reality by the removal of visa requirements as well as by an injection of Turkish investment and technological know-how. A power struggle in Syria could set back this project; and regime change in Damascus would likely put a serious dent in further Turkish initiatives.

Turkey’s loss, however, may turn out to be Egypt’s gain. Freed from the stagnant rule of former President Hosni Mubarak, Cairo is now expected to play a more active role in Arab affairs. Instead of continuing Mubarak’s policy, conducted in complicity with Israel, of punishing Gaza and isolating its Hamas government, Egypt is reported to be pushing for a reconciliation of the rival Palestinian factions, Hamas and Fatah. If successful, this could help defuse the current dangerous escalation of violence between Israel on the one side and Hamas and still more extreme Gaza-based Palestinian groups on the other. But Syria’s internal troubles might just as easily have a negative effect.

Undoubtedly, the failed peace process has bred extreme frustration among Palestinian militants, some of whom may think that a sharp shock is needed to wrench international attention away from the Arab democratic wave and back to the Palestine problem. They are anxious to alert the United States and Europe to the danger of allowing the peace process to sink into a prolonged coma.

Israeli hard-liners, too, may calculate that a short war could serve their purpose: Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s far-right government may sense weakness and quietly dream of finishing off Hamas once and for all. Syria has been a strong supporter of Hamas and has given a base in Damascus to the head of its political bureau, Khaled Mashal. Turmoil in Damascus could deal Hamas a severe blow.

On all these fronts — Iran, Iraq, Turkey, Lebanon, Palestine, Israel — Syria is a key player. But its internal problems now threaten to reshuffle the cards, adding to the general sense of insecurity and latent violence in the region. And of all the threats facing the Middle East, perhaps the greatest — greater even than of another Arab-Israeli clash — is that of rampant sectarianism, poisoning relationships between and within states, and breeding hate, intolerance, and mistrust.

Several of the modern states of the Middle East — and Syria is no exception — were built on a mosaic of ancient religions, sects, and ethnic groups held uneasily and sometimes uncomfortably together by central government. But governments have themselves been far from neutral, favoring one community over another in cynical power plays. Many Sunni Muslims in Syria and throughout the region feel that Assad’s Syria has unduly favored the Alawites, a sect of Shiite Islam, who constitute some 12 percent of the population but control a vastly greater percentage of the country’s wealth. Open conflict between Sunnis and Alawites in Syria would profoundly disturb the whole region, creating a nightmare scenario for Washington and other Western capitals.

Meanwhile, Washington seems at a loss as to how to respond to the growing unrest in Syria. In tempered language, the administration has condemned the use of violence against civilians and encouraged political reform. But the undertones are evident: Stability in Syria may still preferable to yet another experiment in Arab governance. Assad will need to act quickly and decisively — and one hopes not harshly — to quell the rising current of dissent. Indeed, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton seemed to offer the regime some modest support this weekend, noting that she believed Bashar to be a “reformer.” But reform has never been a primary goal of the Assad clan, which has long favored stability over change.
This edifice may now be crumbling, and the United States would be wise to spend a little less time thinking about Libya and a little more time thinking about a state that truly has implications on U.S. national interests. If things go south in Syria, blood-thirsty sectarian demons risk being unleashed, and the entire region could be consumed in an orgy of violence.

Patrick Seale is a British writer who specializes in Middle East affairs. His latest book is The Struggle for Arab Independence: Riad el-Solh and the Makers of the Modern Middle East. http:

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Gul: ‘The Arab Revolution is aimed at Israel’

Posted on April 27, 2011 by rehmat1

Turkish President Abdullah Gul had a free advice for both Barack Obama and Benji Netanyahu in a Op-Ed he wrote for The New York times, published on April 20, 2011. He told Benji is plain words: “Whether these (Arab) uprisings lead to democracy and peace or to tyranny and conflict will depend on forging a lasting Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement and a broader Israeli-Arab peace”.

“The plight of the Palestinians has been a root cause of unrest and conflict in the region and is being used as a pretext for extremism in other corners of the world. Israel, more than any other country, will need to adapt to the new political climate in the region. But it need not fear; the emergence of a democratic neighborhood around Israel is the ultimate assurance of the country’s security.

In these times of turmoil, two forces will shape the future: the people’s yearning for democracy and the region’s changing demographics. Sooner or later, the Middle East will become democratic, and by definition a democratic government should reflect the true wishes of its people. Such a government cannot afford to pursue foreign policies that are perceived as unjust, undignified and humiliating by the public. For years, most governments in the region did not consider the wishes of their people when conducting foreign policy. History has repeatedly shown that a true, fair and lasting peace can only be made between peoples, not ruling elites,” Abdullah Gul wrote.

Turkey has been an ally of both the US and Israel since 1950s. Abdullah Gul, Muslim President of Israel’s largest non-Arab Muslim neighbor (99.7%) and the only Muslim NATO member is warning both the US and the Zionist regime to change their attitude toward the 1.7 billion-strong Muslim world and face the emerging realities before it’s too late for American interests in the Muslim world.

Turkey along with Iran and Syria have emerged the new regional powers despite Washington and Tel Aviv’s behind the scene efforts to bring regime changes in the three countries. Though Syrian regime is currently passing through its second ‘Cedar Revolution’, Turkey and Iran have survived similar US-Israel anti-government color revolutions.

After living under the western protected tyrants, the Arab world is looking toward its Islamic roots as Iranian did 32 years ago. The majority of them are not looking for an Iranian model for their future governments – but freedom from western-Israeli imperialism. A recent PEW poll show that 54% of Egyptians are against their country’s ‘peace treaty’ with Israel.

President Abdullah Gul is naive to think that Washington can play the role of an ’honest broker’ between Israel and its future democratic Arab neighbors. If Gul had read America’s political history from an objective source, he would have learned that no US politician can enter the White House without the support from the Zionist Lobby. Former Jewish Congressman, Abner Mikvaner, had declared in 2008 that if Senator Barack Obama got elected, he will be the first Jewish President of United States.

As the Presidential Election 2012 is approaching, Israelis have started reminding Barack Obama who controls the White House. More than half of Senate and a third of the House has agreed to  attend the coming Israel Lobby’s (AIPAC) Policy Conference in Washington next month. While attending the AIPAC conference, Benji Netanyahu will also address a joint meeting of US Congress on the invitation of  Israel-Firster Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio), the Speaker of the US of Representatives. On top of all that, last week, Israel’s Chief Rabbi, Yona Metzger, told Barack Obama to release Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard if he wants to get re-elected in 2012.

Wayne Madsen, an American investigating journalist, has reported that Congressional leaders are discussing the presidential line-of-succession. The focus is on the Senate President pro-tem position. The Presidential Succession Act of 1947 – places the Senate President Senator Daniel Inouye of Hawaii third in line of succession to the President (Obama) after the Vice-President (Joe Biden) and Speaker of the House Representatives (John Boehner).

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Turkish FM warns Israel against repeating flotilla attack

[ 26/04/2011 - 04:08 PM ]

ISTANBUL, (PIC)-- Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu warned Israel against repeating the same mistake with the Gaza-bound flotilla scheduled to set sail next month, the Israeli daily Yediot Ahronot has reported.

 In an interview with the Sydney Morning Herald, Davutoglu added that it is Israel's responsibility not to implement the Gaza blockade. He added that a UN fact-finding mission has declared that the blockade is illegal.

The Turkish foreign minister further said: “'In the flotilla last year, people were killed 72 miles from the coast, so this was in international waters. The Mediterranean does not belong to any nation.”

Bulent Yildirim, who chairs the Turkish humanitarian relief fund (IHH) has confirmed that the Mavi Marmara, which was attacked in the first flotilla, will return to Gaza with a sequel international aid flotilla running under the same name set to sail late this May.

The move has caused Israel to ask the US and EU states to thwart the flotilla by discouraging their respective people from participation. Israel has also asked Turkey to stop it before some of the flotilla's ships leave its ports.

The Turkish FM said in the interview: ”Turkey will not stop the ships from setting sail from its ports, but it would continue to warn activists on board of the dangers they face.”

The Freedom Flotilla 2 coalition has announced the opening of registration to the siege-busting Gaza flotilla for Brits who desire to take part. The coalition said registration actually began two days ago on the group's website.

The Palestinian Forum in Britain has also added a feature on its website designed to inform about special arrangements made for the flotilla. The site also includes details how to sign up.

Preparations for the convoy are in full swing in participating ports in Europe, North America, North Africa, Asia, South America and Australia. About 15 ships loaded with humanitarian aid are expected to set sail simulateously by the end of May.

The convoy will carry more than a thousand passengers including reporters, human rights workers, technicians and activists.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

One Israeli Killed, Two Injured in WB

Local Editor
At least one Israeli has been killed and two others injured in a shooting attack at a shrine in the West Bank city of Nablus.

"The body of one person who was killed and two others wounded were brought to an army base (outside Nablus)," a military spokesman said.

The Israeli army claimed the attack occurred at a site known as 'Joseph's Tomb' and that the assault was likely carried out by Palestinian fighters. A spokesperson, however, added the military was "investigating other options" as well.

Meanwhile, a Tel Aviv security officer told the Israeli public radio that the casualties mostly included a group of ultra-Orthodox Hassidic Jews.

"They went into Joseph's Tomb to pray for just a few seconds," he said.

Ultra-Orthodox Jews frequently defy a military ban on entering the shrine that is in Palestinian-controlled territory.

The incident came in the wake of Israeli forces' Friday attack on a group of Palestinian and international activists protesting Tel Aviv's separation barriers built on Palestinian land in the occupied West Bank.

At least 13 demonstrators were injured on Friday when Israeli soldiers clashed with protesters in the town of Bil'in, near the West Bank city of Ramallah.

Elsewhere, three Palestinians were wounded in separate incidents after Israeli troops attacked the blockaded Gaza Strip on the same day, according to medical sources.

Turkish ambassador to the UN - Ertugrul ApakanTurkey

Turkey
In politics, the Turkish ambassador to the UN, Ertugrul ApakanTurkey has expressed support for the unilateral Palestinian declaration of independence and has urged the international community to help Palestinians "live in peace and with dignity."

Turkey joined the list of countries backing the Palestinian Authority's quest to gain UN recognition for an independent state, Today's Zaman reported in an article published on Saturday.

“Through their state building efforts, the Palestinian Authority has proven to all the skeptics that they deserve to attain their decades-long target of internationally recognized statehood, even though they continue to suffer under occupation,” Turkey's UN ambassador, Ertugrul Apakan, said on Thursday.

If Palestinians prove objectively ready to move from the current observer status at the UN into full statehood, the international community “must not turn a blind eye to their just and legitimate appeal,” the English-language daily quoted Apakan as saying at a Security Council session on the Middle East.

“The time has come to show solidarity with the Palestinians and help them to live in peace and dignity,” the Turkish diplomat stated.

Apakan also insisted that the needs of those who live in the Israeli-blockaded Gaza Strip must be urgently addressed.

Al-Quds
Tens of thousands of Christian pilgrims from around the world annually flood the “Old City” of al-Quds during Holy Week (the week preceding Easter,) to pray at the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, an ancient structure built over the spot Christians believe to be the tomb of Jesus Christ and one of the most sacred spots in Christendom.

This year, however, a heavy Israeli police presence has prevented the vast majority of Christian pilgrims, including West Bank-based Palestinian Christians, from reaching the church to pray and attend the ceremonies within.

Christian pilgrims anxious to reach the Church of the Holy Sepulcher were met instead by a phalanx of Israeli police check points -- both at the gates of the Old City, and inside.

The Israeli checkpoints, manned by at least a thousand Israeli policemen, imposed even more restrictions than usual on the crowds of worshippers, preventing many of them from attending the ceremonies.

Israel has denied free access to holy places of worship to both Christians and Muslims, on several important religious occasions.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Turkish President Tells Bibi: Time for You to Adapt to a New Political Climate

- 25. Apr, 2011

By James Wall / Wall Writings

Turkey’s President Abdullah Gul (left) has stern words of advice for Bibi Netanyahu. He told Israel’s Prime Minister that the Arab revolution in the Middle East is aimed directly at the state of Israel.

The advice came in a New York Times column by President Gul:

The wave of uprisings in the Middle East and North Africa is of historic significance equal to that of the revolutions of 1848 and 1989 in Europe. The peoples of the region, without exception, revolted not only in the name of universal values but also to regain their long-suppressed national pride and dignity.


But whether these uprisings lead to democracy and peace or to tyranny and conflict will depend on forging a lasting Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement and a broader Israeli-Arab peace.


The plight of the Palestinians has been a root cause of unrest and conflict in the region and is being used as a pretext for extremism in other corners of the world. Israel, more than any other country, will need to adapt to the new political climate in the region.


But it need not fear; the emergence of a democratic neighborhood around Israel is the ultimate assurance of the country’s security.

A Muslim president of a predominantly Muslim nation, Gul also has advice for the President of the United States:

Moreover, it is my firm conviction that the United States has a long-overdue responsibility to side with international law and fairness when it comes to the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. The international community wants the United States to act as an impartial and effective mediator between Israel and the Palestinians, just as it did a decade ago. Securing a lasting peace in the Middle East is the greatest favor Washington can do for Israel.

Since Israel’s Occupation is the “root cause” of unrest in the region, Turkey wants Israel to act now to reach a peace agreement with the Palestinians.  And he expects the US to be a helpful partner in dealing with that “root cause” of unrest.
No historical parallel is ever exact. But parallels from history are very much in Gul’s thinking.
The 1848 revolution in Europe, which began with the French Revolution, spread across Europe, taking different forms and moving at different speeds. In 1989, the uprisings in Europe began with the fall of the Berlin Wall.
The current Arab uprising began in Tunisia and Egypt.  Now it has erupted in Libya, Syria, Bahrain and Yemen. As was the case in both 1848 and 1989, the 2011 uprising is having, and will continue to have, mixed results and follow different paths.
The Syrian military, for example, was reported on Saturday to have killed more than 120 protestors, bringing harsh criticism from the US amid increased suppression by Syian authorities. In contrast, the president of Yemen agreed, under certain conditions, to step down following weeks of street protests.  A New York Times story from Cairo reported:

Yemen’s president, Ali Abdullah Saleh, agreed on Saturday to leave power after 32 years of autocratic rule, according to a top Yemeni official, but only if the opposition agrees to a list of conditions, including that he and his family be granted immunity.

Opposition leaders said they were prepared to accept most of the terms of the deal, which both they and a Yemeni official said would establish a coalition government with members of the opposition and ruling party. The president would turn over authority to the vice president.

Bruce Riedel, a former longtime CIA officer and now a senior fellow in the Saban Center at the Brookings Institution, wrote an analysis on the end of the police state in the Middle East, for The Daily Beast:

The revolutions that are sweeping across the Arab world this spring have many different causes and each will have its own outcome, but they all have one thing in common: Arabs are demanding the end of the police-state system that has misruled them for over a half century. They want freedom and accountability.


The U.S. was a big stakeholder in the police-state system, known in Arabia as the mukhabarat states (the Arabic word for secret police), but it now needs to help build legitimate accountable governments.

The Palestinian Authority has chosen its own method by which to revolt against the Israeli mukhabarat. The PA administers a people, but not as a state. The method it has chosen is to create a state governmental structure in anticipation of future statehood.

Support for a Palestinian state has swept through the member states in the United Nations General Assembly, the world body which will vote in September on whether to admit Palestine into the UN.

The Obama White House appears to be divided on how the US should proceed to cope with the impending UN vote. The New York Times Helene Cooper describes the internal US divide as “bizarre”.  For three months, she writes, White House officials have discussed the important question: Who should go first with a peace proposal: Bibi or Barack?

Apparently, according to Cooper, the President and his Secretary of State Hillary Clinton believe it “the time has come for Mr. Obama to make a major address on the region’s turmoil, including the upheaval in the Arab world.”  Obama and Clinton appear to favor an Obama speech that would “propose a new plan for peace between Israelis and Palestinians”.

That option is “opposed by Dennis B. Ross, the president’s senior adviser on the Middle East.” Ross is known to be close to AIPAC (The Israel Lobby), and is also close to Bibi Netanyahu, who continues to favor “negotiations” to resolve the future status of a Palestinian state.

Republicans in the US Congress have invited Prime Minister Netanyahu to speak to the combined House and Senate membership during the week of May 22, when the Prime Minister will be in Washington to address the annual gathering of AIPAC.  He has accepted, which has caused consternation in the White House.
In speaking before friendly audiences in both the AIPAC Policy Conference and the US Congress, Netanyahu is expected to adopt a reconciling tone. At the same time, he will no doubt stick to the Israeli hard line position that the only acceptable track to Israel is the one which would resolve Israel’s differences with the Palestinians through “negotiations” between the two parties.

The trouble with the “negotiation” track is that the Palestinians have long known that “to negotiate” with Israel, is futile. The warden does not negotiate with his prisoners, except, possibly, to improve their cuisine.

Ross is supported in endorsing the “negotiations” track by former White House official Aaron David Miller. Now out of the White House and nestled inside the warmth of a Washington NGO, where he can speak more candidly, Miller wrote in the Washington Post:

In almost two decades of working on Arab-Israeli negotiations as a State Department adviser and negotiator, I’ve come up with more than my fair share of dumb ideas. But the notion Palestinians are cooking up, for U.N. action on Palestinian statehood this fall, takes dumb to a new level.


Yet another resolution won’t deliver Palestinians a state or even bring them closer to one. The result will be the opposite of what the Palestinians want: forcing the United States to oppose Palestinians’ efforts, energizing Congress to restrict much-needed assistance to Palestinian institution-building, and probably prompting Israel to do very real (and dumb) things on the ground.

The “who speaks first” debate will be an interesting one to follow. Ross and Miller are staff level operatives but they carry Bibi’s water for him, which means that they also speak for AIPAC.

Meanwhile, while the debate rages over how best to deal with the US favored ally in the Middle East, President Obama announced that he would be sending drones into Libya.

What is a drone? The picture at right is that of a MQ-1B Predator unmanned aircraft system, called “a drone” for short. The MQ-18 is shown taking off for a training mission at Creech Air Force Base, Nevada.

Drones are sent to targeted areas halfway around the world. They receive their flying instructions from Air Force personnel sitting at computers at Creech.

On Holy Thursday, April 9, 2009, Catholic priest, peace activist, lecturer and author John Dear, and 12 of his colleagues, were arrested for trespassing while praying, on the grounds of Creech Air Force Base in a protest action against the use of drones.

Kathy Kelly, who is from Chicago, is well known as an anti-war protestor for her many years of activism in war zones. She was among the Creech 13.  For more on the work of Father John Dear, click here.

Two years later, on Holy Thursday, April 21, 2011, the 13 were found guilty of trespassing. In a posting he wrote for Truthout,  Dear explains what inspired the group to go to the Nevada base.

My friends and I have tried every legal means possible to stop our government from its terrorist, drone bombing attacks on civilians in Afghanistan, and so we journeyed to the drone headquarters at Creech AFB near Las Vegas on Holy Thursday to kneel in prayer and beg for an end to the bombings. This nonviolent intervention is determined to be criminal – not the regular drone bombing attacks on children in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The guilty verdict was handed down as President Obama was authorizing the US Air Force to expand drone attacks into Libya.

How sensitive to civilian casualties has drone warfare been in Pakistan? The New York Times reported on Good Friday:

An American drone attack killed 23 people in North Waziristan on Friday, Pakistani military officials said, a strike against militants that appeared to signify unyielding pressure by the United States on Pakistan’s military amid increasing public and private opposition to such strikes. (emphasis added).

Further down in the story, the Times adds that among those 23 people were women and children.

Why is Obama using drones in Libya “amid increasing public and private opposition to such strikes”?

When President Obama organized the NATO air strikes to help the Libyan rebels, he cited “humanitarian grounds”. He had support from the “humanitarians” in his administration, and in the progressive media, most notably, the highly respected, Middle Eastern scholar Juan Cole.

Nevertheless, the fact remains that in any military action, the goal is to kill “the enemy”. The use of drones guarantees that many of those deaths will be civilians.
Many Americans do not like the fact that the US is now engaged in three armed conflicts against Arab states. The protestors who were arrested at Creech AFB are part of what should become a growing tide of resentment against President Obama for his failure to take action to alleviate, in President Gul’s words, “the plight of the Palestinians”, which is the “root cause of unrest and conflict in the region”.

Before Prime Minister Netanyahu comes to Washington in May to be cheered by his friends and supporters in AIPAC and in the US Congress, President Obama should say to his Israeli counterpart, “You are running a democratic government. It is time for you to lead that government to recognize the wisdom in President Gul’s call for you to forge ‘a lasting Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement and a broader Israeli-Arab peace’.”

He should also tell Netanyahu that Israel’s present treatment of the Palestinian people is harmful not only to the Palestinians, but also to Israel and to the US.
Obama should also remind Netanyahu of the closing words of encouragement, warning and admonition, that President Gul delivered to Israel:

It will be almost impossible for Israel to deal with the emerging democratic and demographic currents in the absence of a peace agreement with the Palestinians and the rest of the Arab world. Turkey, conscious of its own responsibility, stands ready to help.

[The picture at top is of Turkey’s President Abdullah Gul. It is from Getty Images. The picture of Yemen’s president, Ali Abdullah Saleh, is from the web site, Top News In Law. The picture of the drone is by Senior Airman Larry E. Reid Jr., US Air Force.]

JAMES WALL is currently a Contributing Editor of The Christian Century magazine, based in Chicago, Illinois.  From 1972 through 1999, he was editor and publisher of the Christian Century magazine.  He has made more than 20 trips to that region as a journalist, during which he covered such events as Anwar Sadat’s 1977 trip to Jerusalem, and the 2006 Palestinian legislative election. He has interviewed, and written about, journalists, religious leaders, political leaders and private citizens in the region.  Jim served for two years on active duty in the US Air Force, and three additional years in the USAF (inactive) reserve. Jim launched his new personal blog Wallwritings, on April 24, 2008. He can be reached at:  jameswall8@gmail.com

Read more by James Wall

• Netanyahu Invited To Speak to His DC Friends at a Joint Session of Congress

• JAMES WALL : Free Congressional Trips to Israel: Learning to Embrace Your Narrative

• “Miral” Asks Questions The Israel Lobby Does Not Want You to Hear

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Middle East and North Africa: Revolution and Counter-Revolution

by Johan Galtung

April 19, 2011

Transcend Media Service — Chandra Muzaffar, in his superb JUST Commentary for March 2011, argues for Gaddafi to step down, and adds that if he does, he may be remembered “for some of his outstanding accomplishments in the first decades of his rule – accomplishments such as the closure of the huge American air base in Libya in 1970; his nationalization of oil; the pivotal role he played in the reorganization of OPEC that enabled it to emerge as a powerful cartel challenging Western dominance over the oil industry; his massive man-made river project to irrigate desert land; his housing schemes for the low-income segment of society; and other infra-structure programmes.” All are absent from mainstream media today.

Add to the above Gaddafi’s role in shaping the Arab League, thwarted by the US-backed international military venture code-named Operation “Odysseus Dawn” (March 19–31, 2011) to enforce United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973; thereafter, it became Operation “Unified Protector” under NATO command. Add also Gaddafi’s role in the African Union, which he chaired from 2009 to 2010. He turned his attention south rather than east (Egypt, Saudi Arabia etc). And you have an answer to why the West, not only the USA, hated him from the very beginning. But then he became a victim of his own success – a dictator seeing himself as indispensable.

The recent pan-Arab revolt, described as the Arab Spring, has five characteristics. It is anti-autocratic, anti-kleptocratic (against greedy, corrupt governments), anti-imperialist, for youth and for women. Gaddafi’s profile is mixed, but not like Mubarak of Egypt or Ben-Ali of Tunisia, the two recently fallen rulers. Nor like for the Saudi Royal House and the Bahraini and Yemeni leaderships. Macro history (characterizing big, long-term historical trends) moves slowly. Nasser and Gaddafi set the course, but few would expect them to succeed immediately. They will both be remembered when the present Western dwarfs are forgotten.

The counter-revolution was planned a long time ago. The CIA set up the “National Front for the Salvation of Libya” (NFSL) way back in 1981, followed by the “Libyan National Army” (LNA), now known as the Benghazi rebels. On November 2, 2010, the Anglo-French agreement to attack Libya no later than January 30, 2011 was signed – for the first time since the attack on Egypt in October 1956. In all likelihood, the attack on Libya is equally ill-fated. We sense already that Obama is distancing himself from the French-led attack, transferring some of the imperial role on a France that exacted a high price for rejoining NATO as a full member (French demands included America’s acceptance of an independent European defense and a leading French role in NATO’s command structure). Is Sarkozy, le petit Napoléon, hoping to take over as the USA gets increasingly bankrupt, already servicing debt with 41 cents of every federal dollar spent? Well, we shall soon find out, but NATO is still under US command and the EU is still unable to formulate a joint independent policy.

The West sacrificed dispensable figures like Ben-Ali and Mubarak, and then used Libya to create a humanitarian emergency of their own making. Who kills more civilians with cluster bombs or depleted uranium? But in cities re-conquered by Gaddafi, no massacre has taken place so far, as Stephen M. Walt points out in Foreign Policy (See “Is America Addicted to War? The Top 5 Reasons Why We Keep Getting Into Foolish Fights,” April 4, 2011).

The alliance mobilized by the deeply Christian-Zionist Hillary Clinton to fight Gaddafi got “Yes” from 10 out of 15 UN Security Council members, while half of humanity (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and Germany) abstained. These member-states are neither against saving civilians nor for selective humanitarianism. In the Arab League, only 11 of 22 members voted – 9 in favor and Syria and Algeria against (Syria may be the next US target). Only Qatar and the United Arab Emirates participate militarily in the operation against Gaddafi. Qatar is displaying its usual ambiguity, and the UAE is totally unambiguous – pro-US.

This is NATO’s first African invasion (it has to be called as such) after several in Asia.

There was no attack on a NATO member-state. No common enemy, no real discussion, no vote, and no consensus within the Western alliance. Germany and Turkey are opposed and refuse any combat role. Turkey is involved in complex mediation, with Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan focusing his efforts on Gaddafi, and Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu on the rebel-held Benghazi. Other factors in the background:Gaddafi seems to have wanted to switch from Western oil companies to Russian, Indian and Chinese companies, just as Saddam Hussein of Iraq had moved from dollars to euros; anti-Gaddafi forces in Benghazi say that when they have won, oil contracts will be awarded to those who helped them.



 President Nasser speeking at Al-Azhar
 mosque  during the tripartite aggression
11/09/1956



The key to this whole exercise is control of Africa, which in 1956 was still mainly owned by Britain and France.

Libya had become an Italian colony way back in 1911. Now, Africa’s union is posing a threat. African nations are asserting their independence, and developing ties with China. NATO wants to control Africa through the United States African Command (AFRICOM) and European Command (EUCOM) – all synonyms for the Pentagon. This is where Libya enters, in rejecting AFRICOM, with Sudan, Eritrea, Zimbabwe and the Ivory Coast. These countries are to be subdued for not allowing US bases.

The Libyan action may put Africa on fire. Watch Turkey and Africans mediating, Libya eventually democratizing and Gaddafi stepping down to an honorary position, but staying in the country. Of course, Benghazi has rejected this, as has the NATO secretary general, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, who wants Gaddafi in the International Criminal Court.

 Johan Galtung is a distinguished scholar, founder of the discipline of peace and conflict studies and of TRANSCEND International (www.transcend.org), a conflict resolution network. Read more articles by Johan Galtung.

http://www.transcend.org

Syria after Ministry says rallies must be licensed

Demonstration at University

(DP-News - agencies)
 

SYRIA- “The new government in Syria has taken action to meet the demands of the Syrian people,” Nidal Kabalan, Syrian Ambassador to Turkey, said on Wednesday, commenting on the latest developments in the protest-hit Middle Eastern country.

The ambassador said the lifting of emergency rule in the country, as well as a transition to a multiparty system and a law on media, was among those demands.

A new era of reforms has begun for Syria and all segments of the society are excited about the process, Kabalan said, adding that the violence should be stopped in order to ensure the effective implementation of reforms.

Regarding the role Turkey may play in the ongoing process in Syria, Kabalan said his country was thankful for its neighbor’s support on the matter and “eager to benefit from Turkey’s experiences concerning the multiparty parliamentary system.”
 
The Globe and Mail said that 4,000 university students from Daraa and surrounding areas protested near the city's al-Omari Mosque.

The news website added “Activists also said dozens of students protested Wednesday at Aleppo University in the country's north, adding there were confrontations on campus between pro and anti-government students.”

AP reported “Syrian Authorities has coupled its crackdown with a series of concessions, including an end to the state of emergency, which gives authorities almost boundless powers of surveillance and arrest.”

“Homs has been tense since clashes between protesters and security forces killed at least 12 people Sunday. On Tuesday, security forces there opened fire with live ammunition and tear gas on hundreds of anti-government demonstrators during a pre-dawn raid that killed several people.”

On Wednesday too, human rights activists said Syrian authorities arrested an opposition figure at his home during an overnight raid, hours after the government announced an end to emergency rule.

Syrian Human Rights League chief, Abdul-Karim Rihawi, said security agents picked up Mahmoud Issa from his home in the central city of Homs after an interview he gave to Al-Jazeera satellite TV late Tuesday.

Rights activist Mazen Darwish said the interview Issa gave to Al-Jazeera angered relatives of a Syrian brigadier general who was killed along with his two sons and a nephew Sunday in Homs.

The government says they were gunned down by “armed gangs” that authorities blame for the violence during anti-government protests of the past month.

Darwish said Issa, in the interview, said he didn't know who was behind the killing and called for an investigation, enraging bereaved relatives who reportedly threatened Issa before alerting the police.

Issa, who spent years in prison for his pro-democracy views, was picked up from his home shortly afterward.

Britain's Foreign Office on Wednesday said U.K. nationals should consider leaving Syria on commercial flights, after it upgraded warnings about unrest there. In a statement, the ministry said it had changed its advice “in light of the deterioration in the security situation in Syria.”

British diplomats had warned that violent clashes are anticipated between local security forces and demonstrators.

The U.S. response to the recent events in Syria reveals that the Arab revolts have not completely shaken President Obama’s faith in a misguided policy of engagement with anti-American authoritarian regimes. To date, over two hundred pro-democracy protestors have been slaughtered in a government crackdown in Syria. The U.S. response offers little to be proud of in terms of promoting American interests and ideals. Instead, it compromises both.

There have been two major moments in the U.S. approach to Syria over the course of the past several weeks. First, there were Secretary of State Clinton’s remarks which cited comments characterizing Syrian President Bashar al-Assad as a reformer. “Many of the members of Congress of both parties who have gone to Syria in recent months have said they believe he’s a reformer,” said Clinton on March 27th. Next was President Obama’s condemnation of violence on April 8th in response to the killing of approximately 20 Syrian protestors in one day.

The Obama administration needs to get a grip on two key points.

One, Assad is not a reformer. His March 30th speech confirmed as much. To be sure, Assad has made a few concessions as a result of the protests. He issued a decree granting citizenship to Kurds, lifted the government ban on teachers wearing face veils, and closed a casino. More recently, he formed a new cabinet. But the continued violence in Syria suggests his actions are not necessarily evidence of reform so much as they are attempts to placate unrest. Syrian activists are justified in continuing to push for freedom and democracy.

Two, the U.S. has little interest in Assad retaining his grip on power in Syria. President Obama’s efforts to distance Syria from its ties to Iran and Hezbollah have failed. Besides, if the ultimate goal of that policy was to weaken Iran and Hezbollah, the current situation presents a fresh opportunity to do just that.

• Grand Mufti Refutes Allegations of Satellite Channels, Regrets their Loss of Credibility
• Syrian Army Martyrs
• Syria: Protesters & “Armed Insurrection”
• Interior Ministry: Armed Mutiny Led by Salafi Armed Groups cause chaos
• One policeman martyred, 11 injured near Homs

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian