Tweet
Ha'aretz , Israel
Jan 17 2010
Israel is engaging in gangster diplomacy
By Zvi Bar'el
Now we have also shown the Turks who we are, because when it comes to
the Jewish, Zionist honor of a nation that endured the Holocaust and
the Goldstone report, no one will make a movie about us - certainly
not the Turks - portraying us as war criminals. If Turkish Prime
Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan thinks he can reprimand us without a
reaction, we'll show him and all the other countries of the world.
There's no choice because they only understand force. Britain wants to
boycott Israeli goods? We'll summon the British ambassador and have
him sit on a bed of nails. The United States handles the settlements
unfairly? We'll point an unloaded gun at the American ambassador's
head and pull the trigger, just to scare him. We're not murderers.
We're just trying to frighten, which, as is well known, creates
respect. Just ask the Godfather.
But if we're going to put on a performance like this, it's important
to do it in style because it gets ridiculous when directors sit on
high, uncomfortable chairs with their feet barely touching the ground
just to achieve a superior level. Instead of arranging a professional
humiliation room and ordering a low chair facing a real master with
elevator shoes or barstools, and maintaining a supply of ripped
national flags for each country (because who knows if tomorrow we'll
have to humiliate the Swedish or Irish ambassador?), they threw
everything together at the last minute last week. Proper lighting is
an essential element of gangster diplomacy and not a job for amateurs.
Our deputy foreign minister merely gave us second-rate humiliation.
Advertisement
The other aspect of the affair is a matter of honor and morals. The
polished statement from the Foreign Ministry spokesman said that "the
statement by Prime Minister Erdogan comes in addition to the
anti-Turkish television program .... The State of Israel reserves its
full right to defend its citizens from missile and terrorist attacks
by Hamas and Hezbollah, and Turkey is the last one that can preach
morals to the State of Israel and the Israel Defense Forces." This
indictment featured three accusations: that Erdogan is cooperating
with Turkish television, that he is undermining Israel's security, and
especially that he is jumping to the head of the line in preaching
morals instead of taking his place behind Europe and the United
States.
No one bothered to say that the Turkish television series, in which
actually the United States was attacked in the first episode, was
produced back in 2003 and made into a film in 2006. They only decided
to produce further episodes because of the project's huge commercial
success. This time there was a mix of Mafia, Mossad, kidnapping of
children and Turkish heroism. The series was distributed by Star TV,
which is owned by Erdogan's bitter rival, Aydin Dogan. So Erdogan is
innocent of the first accusation against him.
The two other accusations are much more serious. Turkey actually
supports Israel's security. It buys unmanned aircraft from Israel to
fight terrorism perpetrated by the PKK, the Kurdistan Workers' Party,
both in Turkey and Iraq. By using Israeli technology, Turkey knows
where to direct its bombing against the PKK, in which civilians are
also killed. Turkey is doing in Iraq what Israel does in Gaza. The
major question is who is more moral? The seller of the weapon who
knows whom it will be used against or the one who uses it?
If Israel had wanted to behave morally, it would have demanded, as the
United States has, that its technology not be used in a war against
civilians. Maybe it would have lost a $200 million deal, but it would
have won the right to say that Turkey is the last country that has the
right to accuse others. Does anyone really think Defense Minister Ehud
Barak will make a similar demand on the use of Israeli technology
during his visit to Turkey today?
If Israel had wanted to behave morally, it would have recognized the
Armenian genocide despite Turkish opposition, but it is afraid that
taking a moral stance on that issue would cost it dearly. If Israel
had wanted to behave morally, it would have lifted the siege on 1.5
million civilians in Gaza long ago - not for Erdogan, but for Israel
itself.
So morals are not the issue, but rather Turkey's place in line among
those preaching morals. But because this is a case of two friendly
countries, and neither is so righteous, why should Turkey be the one
to be pushed to the end of the line in the contest over
self-righteousness?
http://www.haaretz.com/h asen/spages/1143060.html
Jan 17 2010
Israel is engaging in gangster diplomacy
By Zvi Bar'el
Now we have also shown the Turks who we are, because when it comes to
the Jewish, Zionist honor of a nation that endured the Holocaust and
the Goldstone report, no one will make a movie about us - certainly
not the Turks - portraying us as war criminals. If Turkish Prime
Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan thinks he can reprimand us without a
reaction, we'll show him and all the other countries of the world.
There's no choice because they only understand force. Britain wants to
boycott Israeli goods? We'll summon the British ambassador and have
him sit on a bed of nails. The United States handles the settlements
unfairly? We'll point an unloaded gun at the American ambassador's
head and pull the trigger, just to scare him. We're not murderers.
We're just trying to frighten, which, as is well known, creates
respect. Just ask the Godfather.
But if we're going to put on a performance like this, it's important
to do it in style because it gets ridiculous when directors sit on
high, uncomfortable chairs with their feet barely touching the ground
just to achieve a superior level. Instead of arranging a professional
humiliation room and ordering a low chair facing a real master with
elevator shoes or barstools, and maintaining a supply of ripped
national flags for each country (because who knows if tomorrow we'll
have to humiliate the Swedish or Irish ambassador?), they threw
everything together at the last minute last week. Proper lighting is
an essential element of gangster diplomacy and not a job for amateurs.
Our deputy foreign minister merely gave us second-rate humiliation.
Advertisement
The other aspect of the affair is a matter of honor and morals. The
polished statement from the Foreign Ministry spokesman said that "the
statement by Prime Minister Erdogan comes in addition to the
anti-Turkish television program .... The State of Israel reserves its
full right to defend its citizens from missile and terrorist attacks
by Hamas and Hezbollah, and Turkey is the last one that can preach
morals to the State of Israel and the Israel Defense Forces." This
indictment featured three accusations: that Erdogan is cooperating
with Turkish television, that he is undermining Israel's security, and
especially that he is jumping to the head of the line in preaching
morals instead of taking his place behind Europe and the United
States.
No one bothered to say that the Turkish television series, in which
actually the United States was attacked in the first episode, was
produced back in 2003 and made into a film in 2006. They only decided
to produce further episodes because of the project's huge commercial
success. This time there was a mix of Mafia, Mossad, kidnapping of
children and Turkish heroism. The series was distributed by Star TV,
which is owned by Erdogan's bitter rival, Aydin Dogan. So Erdogan is
innocent of the first accusation against him.
The two other accusations are much more serious. Turkey actually
supports Israel's security. It buys unmanned aircraft from Israel to
fight terrorism perpetrated by the PKK, the Kurdistan Workers' Party,
both in Turkey and Iraq. By using Israeli technology, Turkey knows
where to direct its bombing against the PKK, in which civilians are
also killed. Turkey is doing in Iraq what Israel does in Gaza. The
major question is who is more moral? The seller of the weapon who
knows whom it will be used against or the one who uses it?
If Israel had wanted to behave morally, it would have demanded, as the
United States has, that its technology not be used in a war against
civilians. Maybe it would have lost a $200 million deal, but it would
have won the right to say that Turkey is the last country that has the
right to accuse others. Does anyone really think Defense Minister Ehud
Barak will make a similar demand on the use of Israeli technology
during his visit to Turkey today?
If Israel had wanted to behave morally, it would have recognized the
Armenian genocide despite Turkish opposition, but it is afraid that
taking a moral stance on that issue would cost it dearly. If Israel
had wanted to behave morally, it would have lifted the siege on 1.5
million civilians in Gaza long ago - not for Erdogan, but for Israel
itself.
So morals are not the issue, but rather Turkey's place in line among
those preaching morals. But because this is a case of two friendly
countries, and neither is so righteous, why should Turkey be the one
to be pushed to the end of the line in the contest over
self-righteousness?
http://www.haaretz.com/h asen/spages/1143060.html