Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Diplomacy: The politics of principles

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Diplomacy: The politics of principles

    Diplomacy: The politics of principles
    ------------------------------
    Herb Keinon , THE JERUSALEM POST Aug. 23, 2007
    ------------------------------

    The political work of the mainstream American Jewish Organizations is, for
    the most part, seen in Jerusalem as a valued asset - often as an extra "man"
    on the diplomatic playing field. These groups help open important doors and
    clear high hurdles in Washington.

    In fact, Jerusalem turns to some of these organizations from time to time to
    deal quietly with issues that Israel doesn't formally want to dirty its
    hands with - such as protesting anti-Semitic manifestations in various
    countries, or dealing with Holocaust restitution issues - due to a concern
    about negatively impacting various bilateral relationships.

    But every so often the extra "man on the field" not only doesn't effectively
    run interference, he just gets in the way - from an Israeli diplomatic
    perspective. The flap this week over the Anti-Defamation League's reversal
    of its policy on whether to characterize Turkish actions against the
    Armenians in World War I as genocide is a case in point.

    It's fascinating, actually, how a seemingly local brouhaha in a Boston
    suburb called Watertown could conceivably have an impact on Israel's
    relationship with what is arguably its most important strategic ally after
    the US - Turkey. The incident sheds light on the relationship between the
    Jewish organizations and Israel, and illustrates how their interests
    sometimes collide.

    Watertown, home to a large Armenian population, withdrew last week from the
    ADL's "No Place for Hate" anti-bigotry program because of the organization's
    long-standing refusal to recognize the massacres of the Armenians as
    genocide. The issue snowballed after ADL head Abe Foxman fired the
    organization's regional director, Andrew Tarsy, for saying in a *Boston
    Globe* article that he strongly disagreed with the ADL's position.

    Although unpleasant, this was as yet of no great interest to Israel. But the
    firing created controversy in the Boston Jewish community, with some
    questioning how an organization dedicated to fighting bigotry and
    anti-Semitism could refuse to recognize the massacres of Armenians as
    genocide. ADL board members quit, others threatened to resign, and there
    were calls for Foxman's head. He then issued a statement reversing ADL
    policy.

    "We have never negated but have always described the painful events of
    1915-1918 perpetrated by the Ottoman Empire against the Armenians as
    massacres and atrocities," Foxman said in his statement. "On reflection, we
    have come to share the view of Henry Morgenthau, Sr. [the US ambassador to
    the Ottoman Empire at the time] that the consequences of those actions were
    indeed tantamount to genocide. If the word genocide had existed then, they
    would have called it genocide... Having said that, we continue to firmly
    believe that a congressional resolution on such matters is a
    counterproductive diversion and will not foster reconciliation between Turks
    and Armenians and may put at risk the Turkish Jewish community and the
    important multilateral relationship between Turkey, Israel and the United
    States."

    This is when the matter moved from being an internal ADL issue, or an issue
    between ADL and Watertown, to becoming an issue with ramifications impacting
    heavily on Israel.

    DIPLOMATIC OFFICIALS in Jerusalem contacted Tuesday night to react to
    Foxman's reversal were stunned by the announcement.

    "Unbelievable," one official said, after muttering a curse. Another senior
    Foreign Ministry official, who deals daily and intimately with the
    Turkish-Israeli relationship, wouldn't respond because he couldn't believe
    it, doubting the very veracity of the statement.

    Well, it was true. And the reason for the stunned response to what an
    American Jewish organizational leader had to say about a historical event 90
    years ago is because of its ability to cause problems in the Israel-Turkish
    alliance.

    This is a clear case of principles vs. politics, with the American-Jewish
    community having the luxury of opting for principle, and Israel living very
    much - too much, some would argue - in the world of real politics.

    "I think the ADL should support the congressional bill. As much as I
    understand taking into consideration relations between Israel and Turkey,
    this is something you have to do even though it is politically difficult,"
    Samuel Mendales, director of Hillel Council of New England, was quoted as
    saying this week in the *Jerusalem Post*.

    Mendales was not alone in saying that this was a clear case of principle
    trumping politics. The problem with this, however, is that it is relatively
    easy to say this in Massachusetts, bordered by Connecticut, Rhode Island,
    New Hampshire, Vermont and New York. American Jews can take the high moral
    ground on issues such as these, because there is no real consequence; they
    don't have to pay any tangible cost.

    Not so in Israel, where taking the high moral ground often comes with paying
    a real political price. And in the cost-benefit analysis on this issue,
    Israel's position - and that of the key Jewish organizations active in
    Washington up until this point - has been that the profit of a close
    strategic relationship with Turkey outweighed the benefit of taking what
    some argue is the right and principled stand on the issue.

    This is why the Knesset, like the US Congress, consistently shoots down
    attempts to pass a Congressional resolution on this matter, something that
    is a red flag for the Turks.

    But just as the American Jews don't see things through Israel's realpolitik
    prism, Israelis might not fully understand the position of American Jews,
    for whom taking the high moral ground is key to their sense of identity - a
    deeply ingrained sense that because of Jewish history, they have a
    responsibility to take ethical stands on these types of issues.

    Someone looking on from the outside could reasonably ask, "Who cares what
    Jewish organizations say about this? Why does it matter?"

    Which brings us back to the idea of Jewish organizations as an additional
    player on Israel's diplomatic field. It matters because, in the
    constellation of Israel's diplomatic relations with Turkey - as well as in
    its relations with some other countries, such as India - the mythical power
    of the "Jewish lobby" in Washington is central. This perceived power is not
    only fodder for Israel-bashers and anti-Semites, but also an asset in
    dealing with foreign governments.

    Since the 1990s, Turkey has turned into a key strategic ally. What Israel
    gets from Turkey is clear: a friendly Muslim face in a sea of hostility; a
    geographical asset; a huge market for military wares and other products; a
    nice place to vacation. We are a country that longs for acceptance by our
    neighbors, and have found it in Turkey.

    And what do the Turks get? Firstly, they benefit from our geography, just as
    we do from theirs. Both countries box in Syria for the other, and
    Syrian-Turkish relations, put mildly, have known their ups and downs.

    Secondly, they buy our arms. Because of Turkey's conflict with Greece, and
    its image in the West as a tentative democracy with the military lurching
    menacingly in the background, Ankara has not always been able to find
    vendors for state-of-the-art military equipment. While US arms sales to its
    NATO ally has often been bogged down in congressional riders and amendments,
    Israel could provide the goods with fewer hurdles. Over the last few years
    Turkey has undergone an enormous military modernization program, with
    Israeli arms playing a substantial role.

    Another component of the military relationship is intelligence cooperation.
    It is widely believed, for instance, that Israeli intelligence helped lead
    to the capture in 1999 of Abdullah Ocalan, head of the Kurdistan Workers'
    Party, who led a terror campaign against Turkey in the 1980s and '90s And
    the final thing the Turks "get" from Israel is access to the Jewish lobby in
    Washington. Talk candidly to Turkish academics, politicians and journalists
    and they will say that one of the reasons Israel is valuable to Turkey is
    because of the ADL, the American Jewish Congress, B'nai Brith and similar
    organizations. Without a strong lobby of its own in Washington, Turkey looks
    to these organizations to put in a good word in Congress or with the
    administration when issues of importance to Ankara - such as issues
    regarding the Armenians or Cyprus - make their way to those bodies.

    The relationship has even grown in importance recently, since Turkish-US
    relations have become strained as a result of the war in Iraq.

    In addition, the issue is playing itself out at a less than fortuitous time
    from Israel's point of view. The ADL reversal, which played prominently in
    the Turkish press, comes as Israel's best friends in Turkey - the army and
    the secular foreign policy bureaucracy - are largely in retreat.

    The Islamic-based AKP party is very much on the rise, and its foreign
    minister, Abdullah Gul, whose wife wears the traditional Islamic headscarf,
    is poised to become Turkey's president next week - something of huge
    symbolic importance in a country that has zealously guarded public trappings
    of secularism. An impression that the Jews have reversed course on the
    Armenian issue could give ammunition to those voices in Turkey already
    calling for a reassessment of ties with Jerusalem, even as Israel's
    staunchest friends there are losing some of their clout.

    WHICH EXPLAINS why there is concern in Israel following Foxman's statement.
    Granted, the Jewish groups are just one of the pillars supporting strong
    Israeli-Turkish ties, but even when one pillar of a building weakens, action
    is taken to strengthen it. In the coming days and weeks, therefore, the aim
    will be to reinforce this pillar.

    Turkey's ambassador to Israel, Namik Tan, rushed back here on Thursday,
    cutting his vacation short by two weeks, to deal with the matter. He will
    speak to Foreign Ministry officials and seek clarifications, and - most
    likely - also seek Israel's help in ensuring that Foxman's statement remains
    just that: a statement, and not one that is used by other Jewish
    organizations to change their opposition to a US congressional resolution on
    the matter.

    Foxman himself said that the ADL would continue to oppose as
    "counterproductive" efforts to bring this to Congress. The diplomatic moves
    in the coming weeks will likely be aimed at enshrining that as the policy of
    all the main US Jewish organizations.

    For the Turks, however, this commitment is little consolation. Ilnur Cevik,
    a columnist for the English-language *New Anatolian* newspaper, wrote, "The
    fact that the ADL said it will continue to oppose the congressional bill
    accepting the 'Armenian genocide' is little comfort. Because the ADL said it
    took the decision to reverse its former position because it consulted
    historians and experts and came to the conclusion that what happened was
    actually genocide. Now many people in the US Congress who had doubts will
    start thinking in a different manner. This is bad news for Turkey."

    Israel's efforts in the coming days will be to ensure that what is "bad
    news" for Turkey is not necessarily deleterious to the Israeli-Turkish
    relationship.

    Source: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1187779 145994&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
Working...
X