Tweet
OUTSPOKEN US PROFESSORS SLAM PALMER REPORT, APPROVE TURKEY'S POSITION
Today's Zaman
Sept 14 2011
Turkey
Two distinguished professors from the United States have slammed
the UN "Report of the Secretary-General's Panel of Inquiry on the 31
May 2010 Flotilla Incident" released in September in relation to an
Israeli raid on the Mavi Marmara ship, for its conclusion that the
Gaza blockade of Israel is legal.
"The Palmer-Uribe report is a fundamentally flawed document. It is
simply not possible to make the case that the blockade of Gaza, which
is a clear-cut case of collective punishment, is legal under existing
international law. Furthermore, the four-member committee could not
determine what really happened on the Mavi Marmara because it had no
power to call witnesses and gather evidence," said John Mearsheimer,
professor of political science at the University of Chicago.
Answering our questions, Professor of International Affairs Stephen
Walt from Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government
said: "I believe the Palmer-Uribe report is mistaken about the legality
of the Gaza blockade. It is permissible for Israel to halt the shipment
of weapons into Gaza, but not to block delivery of other items and
not to prevent exports out of Gaza. These actions are punitive,
and should end immediately."
Professors Mearsheimer and Walt are authors of "The Israel Lobby and
US Foreign Policy," which was published in late Aug. 2007 and became
a New York Times Best Seller. Describing the Israel lobby as a "loose
coalition of individuals and organizations who actively work to steer
US foreign policy in a pro-Israel direction," the book focused on
the lobby's influence on US foreign policy and its negative effect
on American interests.
Before writing the book, the professors had been working on a paper
commissioned by the Atlantic Monthly, which was later rejected and
was published elsewhere attracting considerable controversy, both
praise and criticism.
Prepared by former New Zealand Prime Minister Geoffrey Palmer
and former Colombian President Alvaro Uribe and presented to UN
Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Sept. 2, the UN panel's report on the
Mavi Marmara labeled the Israeli raid as "excessive and unreasonable,"
but also claimed that due to Israel's security concerns, its blockade
of Gaza is legal. The UN panel also blamed Turkey and flotilla
organizers for contributing to the deaths.
Palmer and Uribe were authorized to write the report even though
consensus or unanimity was not established by the UN inquiry committee
which consisted of Turkish and Israeli representatives. The report
was published even though Israel and Turkey had not signed it.
The report contradicted an earlier report on the Gaza flotilla incident
that found Israeli forces had violated international law when they
raided the flotilla. That report had been prepared in September by
three human rights experts appointed by the UN's top human rights body.
Turkey expelled Israel's envoy and froze military cooperation with
Jerusalem after the release of the Palmer-Uribe report on the deaths of
nine Turks in the Israeli raid on the Mavi Marmara failed to trigger
an apology.
According to Mearsheimer, Turkey's reaction to the report was correct.
"Indeed, I admire how Turkey has acted toward Israel in recent years.
I think it is about time that someone stood up to Israel and said
loudly and clearly that its behavior toward the Palestinians is
morally reprehensible and must be stopped," he said.
Walt said that hard-line defenders of Israel will "undoubtedly try
to demonize Turkey" and undermine US-Turkish relations.
"But Turkey can protect itself by explaining its position carefully,
maintaining its democratic character, and emphasizing its desire for
good relations with Washington," he added.
Answering our questions, Professor Mearsheimer elaborated on the issue.
What is your assessment of the Palmer-Uribe report that the blockade
on Gaza was characterized as being "both legal and appropriate,"
contradicting the UN Human Rights Council fact-finding mission, which
had said both the attack on the Mavi Marmara and the Gaza blockade
were illegal?
I think the Palmer-Uribe report is a fundamentally flawed document. It
is simply not possible to make the case that the blockade of Gaza,
which is a clear-cut case of collective punishment, is legal under
existing international law. Furthermore, the four-member committee
could not determine what really happened on the Mavi Marmara because
it had no power to call witnesses and gather evidence. It had to
rely instead on reports from the Israeli and Turkish governments,
and everyone knows that Israel has no interest in getting all the
facts about the Mavi Marmara out on the table. So, the findings were
just not credible. Finally, any committee that has as a member, a
serial human rights violator, like Columbian President Uribe cannot
be taken seriously. In sum, the Palmer-Uribe report was worthless.
What do you think about Turkey's reaction? Some criticized it as
being too strong and harsh against an old ally.
I think Turkey's reaction to the report was correct. Indeed, I
admire how Turkey has acted toward Israel in recent years. I think
it is about time that someone stood up to Israel and said loudly
and clearly that its behavior toward the Palestinians is morally
reprehensible and must be stopped. The Palestinians deserve a state
of their own. Some will say [Prime Minister Recep Tayyip] Erdošan
is anti-Israel. I don't believe this for a second. I think he is
simply criticizing Israeli policy in the Occupied Territories and
is not challenging the legitimacy of Israel in any way. Hopefully,
more countries in the Arab and Islamic world will follow his lead.
Turkey is planning to challenge Israel's blockade of the Gaza Strip
at the International Court of Justice [ICJ]. How do you think the
case would evolve in The Hague, if Turkey took it to the ICJ?
If the case is taken to the ICJ, I think the Israelis fear that the
ICJ would find the blockade illegal, and if I had to bet, I think
the court would do just that.
Do you think following the Palmer-Uribe report conclusions it has
now become legitimate to attack civilian ships in international waters?
I don't think so, for two reasons: First, it is widely recognized
that the Palmer-Uribe report is largely worthless and second, it is
widely recognized that it is not legal to attack civilian ships in
international waters.
One of the nine killed Turkish citizens was also an American citizen
Furkan Došan. Yet there was almost no reaction at all from the
US on the deadly flotilla attack. How can one explain the lack of
any reaction? The Israel lobby, maybe? Prime Minister Erdošan said
recently that he had asked President Barack Obama why the US did not
react to the killing of one its citizens, but he did not get a reply...
It is easy to explain why the United States has shown hardly any
interest in Israel's killing of Furkan Došan, who [was also] an
American citizen. It is because of the power of the Israel lobby,
which makes it almost impossible for any US president to get tough
with Israel, even when it kills Americans. Remember, Israel attacked
the USS Liberty in June 1967 and killed 34 American sailors and
wounded another 170. The Israelis maintain that it was a case of
mistaken identity. Hardly anyone who was on that ship accepts that
explanation. Many other Americans agree with them. Yet there has
never been a meaningful investigation of that horrific incident. Also
remember that an Israeli bulldozer killed Rachel Corrie in the Gaza
Strip in March 2003 when she was peacefully protesting the demolition
of a Palestinian home. The US government has done hardly anything to
seek justice for her and her family.
With the democratic movements sweeping the Middle East -- the Arab
Awakening -- Israel has seen no problem in "losing" Turkey despite
many calls on the Israeli government to apologize. What sort of a
Middle East should Israel brace for in the coming months and years?
Israel is deeply worried about its fractured relationship with Turkey
and with Egypt; those two countries were once solid allies and they
played a key role in allowing Israel to brutalize the Palestinians.
But thankfully those days are gone, and Israel is being isolated in
the Middle East for its behavior toward the Palestinians.
Critics of the Turkish government argue that Ankara will pay dearly
for expelling the Israeli ambassador as the Israel lobby machine has
already started to roll in the US Congress and the administration --
for example, the Armenian "genocide" resolutions may be passed. What
will the repercussions be in the US? How do you think the Israel
lobby will react? How will the Obama administration react?
There is no question that the lobby will cause some problems for
Turkey in the United States, especially with Congress. That is life
in America today. Pro-Israeli forces assail anyone who criticizes
Israeli policy or America's special relationship with Israel. But
in the end, there is not much that the lobby can do to hurt Turkey,
especially since Washington needs Turkey to remain an ally.
Do you see any connection between the departure of the Israeli
ambassador from Egypt and Turkey's expulsion of the Israeli ambassador
after the report? Some argue that Turkey's attitude has created a
chain reaction which will also effect others...
I think the two cases are very different and not connected. Turkey
expelled the Israeli ambassador, but Egypt did not. The Israeli
ambassador to Egypt left the country because protestors stormed the
Israeli embassy and he feared for his life. As I said above, I hope
that Turkey's attitude toward Israel creates a chain reaction in the
region and moreover I hope that Israel's growing isolation helps cause
it to change its policies toward the Palestinians. Unfortunately,
I don't think that is going to happen anytime soon. But let's hope
I am wrong.
Professor Walt: Hard-line defenders of Israel will undoubtedly try
to demonize Turkey and undermine US-Turkish relations In this part
of the interview, Professor Walt also answered our questions.
What is your assessment of the Palmer-Uribe report in which the
blockade on Gaza is characterized as "both legal and appropriate,"
contradicting the UN Human Rights Council fact-finding mission
which said both the attack on Mavi Marmara and the Gaza blockade
were illegal?
I believe the Palmer-Uribe report is mistaken about the legality of
the Gaza blockade. It is permissible for Israel to halt the shipment
of weapons into Gaza, but not to block delivery of other items and
not to prevent exports out of Gaza. These actions are punitive,
and should end immediately.
What do you think about Turkey's reaction -- lowering diplomatic
representation, expelling the Israeli ambassador, suspending all
military agreements, helping those to file a suit against Israel,
to take the blockade to the International Court of Justice and not
recognize the blockade? Is this excessive or striking the right
balance?
Turkey's reaction is appropriate, insofar as it as peaceful and
diplomatic response in the context of an ongoing dispute. I do hope
that Turkey and Israel are able to resolve the disagreement, because
a more cooperative relationship would contribute to stability in this
volatile region.
Do you think following the Palmer-Uribe report conclusions it has
now become legitimate to attack civilian ships in international waters?
No. Whether such an attack would be legal or not depends entirely on
the specific context. It would be a grave mistake to interpret the
report as providing broad justification for such attacks.
One of the nine Turkish citizens killed on board was also an American
citizen. Yet there was almost no reaction at all from US on the deadly
flotilla attack. How can one explain the lack of any reaction? The
Israel lobby, maybe?
The weak US response to the incident is another sign of its inability
to act as an effective and even-handed mediator in this conflict,
and this is mostly due to the political power of AIPAC [American
Israel Public Affairs Committee] and other hard line groups in the
Israel lobby.
Many Turks believe US worked behind the scenes for a report that would
strongly support Israeli claims, which actually turned out to be the
case. Do you see any credibility in these claims?
I don't know if this is true or not, but it certainly would not
surprise me.
With the report, Israel has "lost" Turkey. How do you think this will
affect regional politics?
I don't think Israel has "lost" Turkey permanently, especially if the
Netanyahu government reconsiders its position and offers a formal
apology. I hope this occurs, because cooperation between Turkey
and Israel could be very helpful in dealing with other tensions in
the region.
With the democratic movements sweeping the Middle East -- the Arab
Awakening-- Israel has seen no problem in "losing" Turkey despite
many calls on the Israeli government to apologize. What sort of a
Middle East should Israeli brace for in the coming months and years?
If Israel continues the occupation, it will gradually become even
more isolated in the region and the world. On the other hand, if
it ends the occupation and allows the Palestinians to have a state
of their own, then its image will improve and it will have little
difficulty building strong relationships with its neighbors. I hope
that happens, and I hope that the United States, the EU, Turkey and
other major powers work together toward that goal.
Critics of the Turkish government argue that Ankara will pay dearly
for expelling the Israeli ambassador as the Israel lobby machine has
already started to roll in the US Congress and the administration --
for example, the Armenian "genocide" resolutions may pass. What will
the repercussions be in the US? How do you think the Israel lobby
will react? How will the Obama administration react?
Hard-line defenders of Israel will undoubtedly try to demonize Turkey
and undermine US-Turkish relations, but Turkey can protect itself
by explaining its position carefully, maintaining its democratic
character, and emphasizing its desire for good relations with
Washington.
http://www.todayszaman.com/news-256792-outspoken-us-professors-slam-palmer-report-approve-turkeys-position.html
Today's Zaman
Sept 14 2011
Turkey
Two distinguished professors from the United States have slammed
the UN "Report of the Secretary-General's Panel of Inquiry on the 31
May 2010 Flotilla Incident" released in September in relation to an
Israeli raid on the Mavi Marmara ship, for its conclusion that the
Gaza blockade of Israel is legal.
"The Palmer-Uribe report is a fundamentally flawed document. It is
simply not possible to make the case that the blockade of Gaza, which
is a clear-cut case of collective punishment, is legal under existing
international law. Furthermore, the four-member committee could not
determine what really happened on the Mavi Marmara because it had no
power to call witnesses and gather evidence," said John Mearsheimer,
professor of political science at the University of Chicago.
Answering our questions, Professor of International Affairs Stephen
Walt from Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government
said: "I believe the Palmer-Uribe report is mistaken about the legality
of the Gaza blockade. It is permissible for Israel to halt the shipment
of weapons into Gaza, but not to block delivery of other items and
not to prevent exports out of Gaza. These actions are punitive,
and should end immediately."
Professors Mearsheimer and Walt are authors of "The Israel Lobby and
US Foreign Policy," which was published in late Aug. 2007 and became
a New York Times Best Seller. Describing the Israel lobby as a "loose
coalition of individuals and organizations who actively work to steer
US foreign policy in a pro-Israel direction," the book focused on
the lobby's influence on US foreign policy and its negative effect
on American interests.
Before writing the book, the professors had been working on a paper
commissioned by the Atlantic Monthly, which was later rejected and
was published elsewhere attracting considerable controversy, both
praise and criticism.
Prepared by former New Zealand Prime Minister Geoffrey Palmer
and former Colombian President Alvaro Uribe and presented to UN
Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Sept. 2, the UN panel's report on the
Mavi Marmara labeled the Israeli raid as "excessive and unreasonable,"
but also claimed that due to Israel's security concerns, its blockade
of Gaza is legal. The UN panel also blamed Turkey and flotilla
organizers for contributing to the deaths.
Palmer and Uribe were authorized to write the report even though
consensus or unanimity was not established by the UN inquiry committee
which consisted of Turkish and Israeli representatives. The report
was published even though Israel and Turkey had not signed it.
The report contradicted an earlier report on the Gaza flotilla incident
that found Israeli forces had violated international law when they
raided the flotilla. That report had been prepared in September by
three human rights experts appointed by the UN's top human rights body.
Turkey expelled Israel's envoy and froze military cooperation with
Jerusalem after the release of the Palmer-Uribe report on the deaths of
nine Turks in the Israeli raid on the Mavi Marmara failed to trigger
an apology.
According to Mearsheimer, Turkey's reaction to the report was correct.
"Indeed, I admire how Turkey has acted toward Israel in recent years.
I think it is about time that someone stood up to Israel and said
loudly and clearly that its behavior toward the Palestinians is
morally reprehensible and must be stopped," he said.
Walt said that hard-line defenders of Israel will "undoubtedly try
to demonize Turkey" and undermine US-Turkish relations.
"But Turkey can protect itself by explaining its position carefully,
maintaining its democratic character, and emphasizing its desire for
good relations with Washington," he added.
Answering our questions, Professor Mearsheimer elaborated on the issue.
What is your assessment of the Palmer-Uribe report that the blockade
on Gaza was characterized as being "both legal and appropriate,"
contradicting the UN Human Rights Council fact-finding mission, which
had said both the attack on the Mavi Marmara and the Gaza blockade
were illegal?
I think the Palmer-Uribe report is a fundamentally flawed document. It
is simply not possible to make the case that the blockade of Gaza,
which is a clear-cut case of collective punishment, is legal under
existing international law. Furthermore, the four-member committee
could not determine what really happened on the Mavi Marmara because
it had no power to call witnesses and gather evidence. It had to
rely instead on reports from the Israeli and Turkish governments,
and everyone knows that Israel has no interest in getting all the
facts about the Mavi Marmara out on the table. So, the findings were
just not credible. Finally, any committee that has as a member, a
serial human rights violator, like Columbian President Uribe cannot
be taken seriously. In sum, the Palmer-Uribe report was worthless.
What do you think about Turkey's reaction? Some criticized it as
being too strong and harsh against an old ally.
I think Turkey's reaction to the report was correct. Indeed, I
admire how Turkey has acted toward Israel in recent years. I think
it is about time that someone stood up to Israel and said loudly
and clearly that its behavior toward the Palestinians is morally
reprehensible and must be stopped. The Palestinians deserve a state
of their own. Some will say [Prime Minister Recep Tayyip] Erdošan
is anti-Israel. I don't believe this for a second. I think he is
simply criticizing Israeli policy in the Occupied Territories and
is not challenging the legitimacy of Israel in any way. Hopefully,
more countries in the Arab and Islamic world will follow his lead.
Turkey is planning to challenge Israel's blockade of the Gaza Strip
at the International Court of Justice [ICJ]. How do you think the
case would evolve in The Hague, if Turkey took it to the ICJ?
If the case is taken to the ICJ, I think the Israelis fear that the
ICJ would find the blockade illegal, and if I had to bet, I think
the court would do just that.
Do you think following the Palmer-Uribe report conclusions it has
now become legitimate to attack civilian ships in international waters?
I don't think so, for two reasons: First, it is widely recognized
that the Palmer-Uribe report is largely worthless and second, it is
widely recognized that it is not legal to attack civilian ships in
international waters.
One of the nine killed Turkish citizens was also an American citizen
Furkan Došan. Yet there was almost no reaction at all from the
US on the deadly flotilla attack. How can one explain the lack of
any reaction? The Israel lobby, maybe? Prime Minister Erdošan said
recently that he had asked President Barack Obama why the US did not
react to the killing of one its citizens, but he did not get a reply...
It is easy to explain why the United States has shown hardly any
interest in Israel's killing of Furkan Došan, who [was also] an
American citizen. It is because of the power of the Israel lobby,
which makes it almost impossible for any US president to get tough
with Israel, even when it kills Americans. Remember, Israel attacked
the USS Liberty in June 1967 and killed 34 American sailors and
wounded another 170. The Israelis maintain that it was a case of
mistaken identity. Hardly anyone who was on that ship accepts that
explanation. Many other Americans agree with them. Yet there has
never been a meaningful investigation of that horrific incident. Also
remember that an Israeli bulldozer killed Rachel Corrie in the Gaza
Strip in March 2003 when she was peacefully protesting the demolition
of a Palestinian home. The US government has done hardly anything to
seek justice for her and her family.
With the democratic movements sweeping the Middle East -- the Arab
Awakening -- Israel has seen no problem in "losing" Turkey despite
many calls on the Israeli government to apologize. What sort of a
Middle East should Israel brace for in the coming months and years?
Israel is deeply worried about its fractured relationship with Turkey
and with Egypt; those two countries were once solid allies and they
played a key role in allowing Israel to brutalize the Palestinians.
But thankfully those days are gone, and Israel is being isolated in
the Middle East for its behavior toward the Palestinians.
Critics of the Turkish government argue that Ankara will pay dearly
for expelling the Israeli ambassador as the Israel lobby machine has
already started to roll in the US Congress and the administration --
for example, the Armenian "genocide" resolutions may be passed. What
will the repercussions be in the US? How do you think the Israel
lobby will react? How will the Obama administration react?
There is no question that the lobby will cause some problems for
Turkey in the United States, especially with Congress. That is life
in America today. Pro-Israeli forces assail anyone who criticizes
Israeli policy or America's special relationship with Israel. But
in the end, there is not much that the lobby can do to hurt Turkey,
especially since Washington needs Turkey to remain an ally.
Do you see any connection between the departure of the Israeli
ambassador from Egypt and Turkey's expulsion of the Israeli ambassador
after the report? Some argue that Turkey's attitude has created a
chain reaction which will also effect others...
I think the two cases are very different and not connected. Turkey
expelled the Israeli ambassador, but Egypt did not. The Israeli
ambassador to Egypt left the country because protestors stormed the
Israeli embassy and he feared for his life. As I said above, I hope
that Turkey's attitude toward Israel creates a chain reaction in the
region and moreover I hope that Israel's growing isolation helps cause
it to change its policies toward the Palestinians. Unfortunately,
I don't think that is going to happen anytime soon. But let's hope
I am wrong.
Professor Walt: Hard-line defenders of Israel will undoubtedly try
to demonize Turkey and undermine US-Turkish relations In this part
of the interview, Professor Walt also answered our questions.
What is your assessment of the Palmer-Uribe report in which the
blockade on Gaza is characterized as "both legal and appropriate,"
contradicting the UN Human Rights Council fact-finding mission
which said both the attack on Mavi Marmara and the Gaza blockade
were illegal?
I believe the Palmer-Uribe report is mistaken about the legality of
the Gaza blockade. It is permissible for Israel to halt the shipment
of weapons into Gaza, but not to block delivery of other items and
not to prevent exports out of Gaza. These actions are punitive,
and should end immediately.
What do you think about Turkey's reaction -- lowering diplomatic
representation, expelling the Israeli ambassador, suspending all
military agreements, helping those to file a suit against Israel,
to take the blockade to the International Court of Justice and not
recognize the blockade? Is this excessive or striking the right
balance?
Turkey's reaction is appropriate, insofar as it as peaceful and
diplomatic response in the context of an ongoing dispute. I do hope
that Turkey and Israel are able to resolve the disagreement, because
a more cooperative relationship would contribute to stability in this
volatile region.
Do you think following the Palmer-Uribe report conclusions it has
now become legitimate to attack civilian ships in international waters?
No. Whether such an attack would be legal or not depends entirely on
the specific context. It would be a grave mistake to interpret the
report as providing broad justification for such attacks.
One of the nine Turkish citizens killed on board was also an American
citizen. Yet there was almost no reaction at all from US on the deadly
flotilla attack. How can one explain the lack of any reaction? The
Israel lobby, maybe?
The weak US response to the incident is another sign of its inability
to act as an effective and even-handed mediator in this conflict,
and this is mostly due to the political power of AIPAC [American
Israel Public Affairs Committee] and other hard line groups in the
Israel lobby.
Many Turks believe US worked behind the scenes for a report that would
strongly support Israeli claims, which actually turned out to be the
case. Do you see any credibility in these claims?
I don't know if this is true or not, but it certainly would not
surprise me.
With the report, Israel has "lost" Turkey. How do you think this will
affect regional politics?
I don't think Israel has "lost" Turkey permanently, especially if the
Netanyahu government reconsiders its position and offers a formal
apology. I hope this occurs, because cooperation between Turkey
and Israel could be very helpful in dealing with other tensions in
the region.
With the democratic movements sweeping the Middle East -- the Arab
Awakening-- Israel has seen no problem in "losing" Turkey despite
many calls on the Israeli government to apologize. What sort of a
Middle East should Israeli brace for in the coming months and years?
If Israel continues the occupation, it will gradually become even
more isolated in the region and the world. On the other hand, if
it ends the occupation and allows the Palestinians to have a state
of their own, then its image will improve and it will have little
difficulty building strong relationships with its neighbors. I hope
that happens, and I hope that the United States, the EU, Turkey and
other major powers work together toward that goal.
Critics of the Turkish government argue that Ankara will pay dearly
for expelling the Israeli ambassador as the Israel lobby machine has
already started to roll in the US Congress and the administration --
for example, the Armenian "genocide" resolutions may pass. What will
the repercussions be in the US? How do you think the Israel lobby
will react? How will the Obama administration react?
Hard-line defenders of Israel will undoubtedly try to demonize Turkey
and undermine US-Turkish relations, but Turkey can protect itself
by explaining its position carefully, maintaining its democratic
character, and emphasizing its desire for good relations with
Washington.
http://www.todayszaman.com/news-256792-outspoken-us-professors-slam-palmer-report-approve-turkeys-position.html