Israel Matzav

When is occupation 'occupation'?

On Wednesday the CEO of the French telecom firm Orange announced that he sought to “drop” his business in Israel, done through an Israeli subsidiary. Speaking at a meeting in Cairo, he emphasized that this was action was mostly to win the “trust” of Arab countries. But there was also a suggestion that this is because the Israeli affiliate has some cellular antennae across the Green Line.

The French Ambassador to the U.S., (and formerly Israel), defended the Orange CEO’s statement on Twitter:‘

“4th Geneva convention : settlement policy in occupied territories is illegal. It is illegal to contribute to it in any way.”

That statement is entirely baseless. Even if settlements are illegal, there is no ban on business in the territories, or with settlers. Certainly there is no tertiary obligation to not do business with businesses that have some tangential business in such territory. All this is demonstrated extensively in my new paper, some of which I tried to share with Amb. Araud.

...

The Orange incident, and the Ambassador’s legal claim, are also bad news for a number of French companies, like the oil giant Total, which is active in Moroccan-occupied Western Sahara against the vociferous protests of the indigenous Sawahari people. (There are many other examples, like Michelin in Turkish-occupied Cyprus.) The French government has never criticized any of these controversial activities in any way. But if the Ambassador’s legal claim is right, he has provided the basis for war crimes prosecutions of France’s leading executives.

Amb. Araud responded to my question by revealing that he had no idea one of his country’s largest companies was engaged in an major project that, by his account, is a war crime.

The Ambassador, after blocking me, revealed that his international law claims are not really about international law:

I speak of one occupied territory. I am answered on other territories. I conclude that everybody agrees on what I say on the former.

In other words, no fairs to cite precedents and practice. But of course, if you are talking about international law, “other territories” are entirely relevant. First, for something to be law, it has to be a rule that applies to similar situations. And for it to be international, well, those situations will involve different countries.

Labels: anti-Semitism, French anti-Semitism, Morocco, Natan Sharansky, occupation, Orange, Turkish occupation of Cyprus, Western Sahara

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 2:36 PM 0 comments

Turkey and Cyprus to go to war?

On Friday, October 3, a day after US Vice President Joe Biden pontificated about Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s “desire” to have “no Turkish soldiers” remain in Cyprus, Turkey sent Turkish-Greece-Cyprus tensions soaring by issuing a Navigational Telex, or NAVTEX, according to which Turkey was sending a seismographic vessel to explore areas in the Cypriot Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) in Cyprus's southern waters.

...

According to the Cyprus Mail and other Cypriot news sources, the NAVTEX notifies mariners and countries that Turkey, as a sovereign, is reserving areas south of Cyprus for seismic surveys from October 20 to December 20 of this year. Turkey has basically issued a stark warning Cyprus, America and Israel that Turkish exploratory vessels were under Turkish sovereign protection, and were not to be disturbed even though they were exploring in areas south of Cyprus, an action that Turkey had never taken before.

Prior to this NAVTEX, the Eastern Mediterranean was already tense due to the fact that the Turkish armed forces had deployed the Turkish warship TCG Gelibolu to the south of Cyprus, and had further announced that the warship would continue to monitor the activities of Italian firm ENI’s drillship in block 9 in the waters south of Cyprus.

The TCG Gelibolu is participating in an ongoing Turkish Naval operation, dubbed “Mediterranean Shield.” Under Operation Mediterranean Shield, Turkish ships are ostensibly “conducting maritime security operations to provide for the safe and secure movement of vessels at sea and to deter terrorism.”

In fact, the TCG Gelibolu could be setting the stage for actual armed hostilities.

...

Making matters worse, the Turkish NAVTEX designated and reserved coordinates that would trespass into Cyprus’ Southern water EEZ Blocks 1, 2, 3, 8 and 9. These are the blocks roughly between Cyprus and Israel. Inside sources told the Cyprus Mail that “essentially Turkey has bisected the region between Cyprus’ southern coast and Egypt, as if Cyprus does not exist.”

A government spokesman in Nicosia said President Anastasiades' decision was the result of Turkey's "provocative" and "aggressive" actions to start seismic tests off the island's southern coast later this month and that the plan was a "serious breach" of its sovereign rights as well as the rights of its own drilling consortium, consisting of Italy's Eni and South Korea's Kogas in the EEZ Block 9.

"The least I can say is that negotiations, in order to produce results, cannot be conducted under such conditions of provocation," said Ioannis Kasoulides, the Cypriot foreign minister, on Monday.

The looming danger is Turkish Frigate Gelibolu is currently deployed in the same areas that the Turkish NAVTEX has cordoned off for the Turkish gas exploration ship, which is set to enter the Cyprus EEZ blocks on October 20. If these two Turkish ships should act in tandem, this could be the tinder which could set the area aflame.

Labels: Barack Hussein Obama, Cyprus, Greece, oil and gas exploration, Turkey, Turkish occupation of Cyprus

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 11:21 PM 4 comments

Europeans cruise to occupied territory

Apparently Europeans do no take their governments’ warnings about doing business in occupied territories too seriously. A German-owned, Portuguese-flagged, Greek-based cruise ship, the Ocean Majesty, paid a port call to Yalta this week, in Russian-occupied Crimea. The 500 mostly German tourists had a nice day of sightseeing, to the outrage of Ukraine, which has passed a law banning such activities.

(The incident seems to be part of a pattern of German businesses being visibly active in Crimea.)

But as I show in my new paper, Economic Dealings With Occupied Territories (currently making the rounds among law review), international law does not ban economic activity with illegally annexed or administered territories. European government suggestions that “economic activities (including services like tourism) entail [international] legal and economic risks” are not backed by actual law, and the German cruise operators know it. Alternately, they may know that if it is thought to be illegal, it is only in one specific context.

Labels: Crimea, European anti-Semitism, European obsession with Israel, Germany, occupation, Turkish occupation of Cyprus, Ukraine

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 12:26 AM 0 comments

Mah Nishtana... Why is this 'occupation' different from all the other occupations?

The EU maintains that Israel’s presence in the West Bank and East Jerusalem is unique, legally speaking, but consistently refuses to explain exactly how it differs from, say, Turkey’s occupation of Northern Cyprus or that Moroccan presence in Western Sahara; while Rabat asserts ownership of the territory, not a single other country recognizes the claim.

In their letter to Ashton, the legal scholars posited that the EU-Morocco Fisheries Partnership Agreement, approved earlier this month by the European Parliament, appears “to directly contradict what the EU has called obligations of international law in its dealing with Israel.”

“In fact, the EU has been negotiating this agreement with Morocco even as it imposes on Israel unprecedented funding guidelines and rules of origin requirements that say the exact opposite,” Kontorovich and Baker wrote, referring to much-discussed guidelines that, from January 1, ban any European funding from going to Israeli entities beyond the Green Line or those with any connections beyond the Green Line. Jerusalem’s fierce opposition to those guidelines famously jeopardized Israel’s participation in Horizon 2020, a highly lucrative scientific cooperation program; the Horizon partnership was ultimately saved.

The EU’s response, authored on Ashton’s behalf by the managing director of the union’s external action service’s Middle East and Southern Neighborhood department, Hugues Mingarelli, read: “With regards to the allegation of using double standards for Israel and Morocco, our analysis is that the two cases are different and cannot be compared.” No further explanation was given.

“Whatever they have identified in their ‘analysis,’ they’re obviously not very proud of it. Had it been substantial, they would have surely not hesitated to provide more detail,” Kontorovich told The Times of Israel this week.

“The terseness of Ashton’s statement reflects the general moral superiority of EU officials toward Israel that I’ve encountered in my attempts to discuss these issues with them,” he added. “The attitude is that they are the judges, we are the suspect. How dare we accuse or judge them? As one senior EU official said when I brought these matters up with him, ‘We’re here to talk about you [Israel], not us.’ That is why they do not need to give their reasons: They do not have to explain themselves. We do.”

The EU delegation in Israel declined to formally comment on the matter for this article. Privately, local EU sources told The Times of Israel that, according to the United Nations, Western Sahara is a “disputed non-self-governing territory under de-facto Moroccan administration. This differs from the legal situation applying to the West Bank and Gaza Strip.”

Labels: European anti-Semitism, European Union, Judea and Samaria, occupation, Turkish occupation of Cyprus, Western Sahara

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 7:18 PM 1 comments

How the EU funds settlements in occupied territory

Yet it turns out that despite the guidelines, the EU still knowingly and purposefully provides substantial direct financial assistance to settlements in occupied territory – in Turkish-occupied Northern Cyprus, that is. So the EU funds the occupation of an EU member state. Turkey’s invasion and occupation of Cyprus in 1974 was condemned the UN Security Council, and the EU’s official policy is that the Turkish occupation is illegitimate, and Turkey must completely withdraw. The EU does not recognize the Turkish government in Northern Cyprus.

Nonetheless, the EU maintains an entire separate program to direct funds to Northern Cyprus.

They even put out a nice, colorful brochure last year.

The grants are pursuant to a 2006 regulation adopted by the EU to “end the isolation of the Turkish Cypriot community,” and allocated 259 million euros over five years, and now operates on an annual 28 million euro allocation (a sum that amounts to roughly 0.8 percent of Northern Cyprus[‘s GDP).

Projects include study abroad scholarships for students at the numerous Northern Cyprus universities (imagine such funding for students at Ariel University!); developing and diversifying the private sector through grants to small and medium- sized businesses; various kinds of infrastructure improvements (telecom upgrades, traffic safety, waste disposal); community development grants, funding to upgrade “cultural heritage” sites, and so forth. They even put on a concert.

The program basically gives grants to the Turkish business and private entities, and builds the infrastructure of the occupying government. The EU is doing exactly what its claims, in the settlement guidelines, international law prohibits.

The relevant EU resolutions and reports make no mention of any international legal question about such funding.

Labels: European anti-Semitism, Judea and Samaria, settlement funding, Turkish occupation of Cyprus

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 1:14 AM 0 comments

If the Europeans really wanted to solve the 'occupation' problem

The report was compiled in the European Commission's Middle East department headed by Christian Berger, an Austrian diplomat who for the past few years was the EU envoy in the Palestinian territories. That is also, presumably, where he learned to be objective.

Berger does not understand how grand old Europe is unable to cast influence on the most important conflict in the world. He is surely wondering how the EU, which gives so much money to the region, does not receive anything in return. "We want to influence, not just spend," he is probably saying to himself. He is forgetting, however, that Israel does not only receive, but also pays partner fees for research and development projects. It is the other side which only receives money.  

...

On Monday, the EU's foreign ministers are expected to meet again. The Czech Republic, Holland, Germany, Bulgaria and Romania are likely to question whether this was a smart move considering Kerry's current push in the region. In contrast, countries like Sweden, Belgium, Ireland, Austria and Spain are expected to welcome the policy.

Christian Berger decided to solve "the occupation problem." We can suggest to him that on Monday he also take a swing at solving Turkish-occupied northern Cyprus; Moroccan-occupied Western Sahara; the Nagorno-Karabakh region in Azerbaijan that is occupied by Armenia; Russia, which is occupying South Ossetia and Abkhazia in Georgia; the Japanese-occupied Coral Islands; not to mention the significant Russian settlement between Poland and Latvia, known as Kaliningrad.

We also have not forgotten Russia's military occupation in portions of the Finnish Karelia province. And China occupies Tibet and Indonesia occupies West Papua, and Pakistan refuses to accept Indian sovereignty in Kashmir.

We have yet to mention the issues that the EU does find interesting: The Falkland Islands (British) dispute with Argentina; the problems in New Caledonia (France); British control of Gibraltar on Spanish soil; the residents of Greenland, who seek independence from Denmark; and also Morocco's frustration at Spain, which controls two cities on Moroccan soil, Ceuta and Melia, as if Morocco was still part of Spain.

Labels: BDS, European anti-Semitism, European Union, Nazis, occupation, Turkish occupation of Cyprus

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 7:06 PM 1 comments

Turkey may drop EU bid

“It is not the Apocalypse if they do not let us in the E.U.,” Mr. Erdogan told reporters during a visit to Budapest on Wednesday, as he launched his latest broadside against the Union’s alleged delaying tactics to keep his country out.

His remarks followed a news conference earlier this week in Prague, where Mr. Erdogan described the delay in granting membership to Turkey as “unforgivable.”

These and similar expressions of frustration have come as Turkey approaches the 50th anniversary of an agreement with what was then the European Economic Community, which was to have led to eventual full membership in the bloc.

Mr. Erdogan set the tone in a television interview last month in which he accused the E.U. of dragging its feet because Turkey was an Islamic nation.

As my colleague Andrew Finkel wrote from Istanbul, the prime minister also “threw the diplomatic equivalent of a cream pie” into the debate by suggesting Turkey join the Shanghai Cooperation Organization instead.

Membership of the S.C.O., which groups Russia, China and central Asian states, is not widely viewed as a viable alternative to joining Europe. Andrew wrote that Mr. Erdogan’s proposal prompted Turkish columnists to ask whether he might be bluffing in an attempt to put pressure on the Europeans.

...

Washington has suggested that Turkish membership in the S.C.O., a security organization viewed as an anti-American bulwark in Central Asia, might be problematic in view of the Turkish role in N.A.T.O.

“Obviously it would be interesting, given the fact that Turkey is also a N.A.T.O. member,” Victoria Nuland, the State Department spokeswoman, said last week.

Hugh Pope, the International Crisis Group’s project director in Turkey, suggested that Mr. Erdogan was courting popularity by bashing the Union.

Turks are frustrated not only by delays in the membership process, he told Rendezvous, but also by the draconian visa regulations they face when traveling to Europe. Potshots aimed at Turkey by European critics were also deeply offensive to Turks, he said.

“But joining the E.U. is not rocket science,” he added, emphasizing that Turkey had to meet the requirements of the club if it wanted to join. This would include making domestic reforms and changing its policy on Cyprus, an E.U. state that it refuses to recognize.

Labels: European Union, Germany, NATO, Turkey, Turkish occupation of Cyprus

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 9:43 AM 2 comments

Soccer Dad's Middle East Media Sampler

1) Israel's right turn?

It was a throwaway line in a New York Times editorial last week:

There are many threats to a two-state solution, including an Israeli government that could become even more hard-line after the Jan. 22 election.

No doubt we will continue to see "analyses" (or more accurately, cliches) like this over the next week and coming months.

David Weinberg argues in Israel: Wary not bullheaded that not as much has changed in Israel as the editors of the New York Times (and like-minded people) think.

In fact I would argue that Israelis are pretty much where they have been since the early Oslo days when it comes to acceptance of Palestinian statehood, except that the world has never quite understood what we mean by Palestinian statehood.
The Palestinian state that Israelis can support in Judea ,Samaria and Gaza cannot threaten Israel’s security – meaning that it must be truly demilitarized, cannot form hostile foreign alliances, will bring Hamas to heel, renounce terror, agree to Israeli or American monitors on its borders, and accept a permanent Israeli presence in the Jordan Valley. The Palestinian state that Israelis can support in Judea, Samaria and Gaza must be a reasonable neighbor and willing to compromise – meaning that will not contain any large Israeli settlement blocs, will not have sovereignty over Jerusalem, and must share its airspace and natural resources with Israel. The Palestinian state that Israelis can support in Judea, Samaria and Gaza agrees to a permanent end to all conflict and claims on Israel – meaning that it renounces the right of return, stops all incitement, and recognizes Israel as the nation state of the Jewish People.
Unfortunately, the world community has not bothered to relate to these outlines for a realistic peace agreement. Instead, the Europeans and other Western leaders (along with Iran, Syria and now Egypt) have helped ratchet-up Palestinian expectations to unrealistic, maximalist levels and have encouraged Palestinian extremism. After all, the world community is prepared to “recognize” Palestinian statehood on the 1949 lines even in the absence of any Palestinian concessions to reality; even though Palestinian leadership is unwilling to negotiate directly with Israel, never mind compromise with it!  

In The Israeli Elections and Political Reality Rick Richman summarizes what's convinced Israelis to be wary over the past 19 years:

The “dramatic imminent shift” is not a shift, but a realization; not imminent, but rather what happened over many years; and not dramatic, but rather the slow accumulation of many events: (1) the barbaric terror war against Israeli civilians, commenced after the first Israeli offer of a state; (2) the Palestinian rejection of the Clinton Parameters, after Israel formally accepted them; (3) the Palestinian failure to carry out even Phase I of the three-phase Roadmap; (4) the transformation of Gaza into Hamastan after Israel withdrew every settler and soldier; (5) the election of Hamas in 2006 and the Hamas coup in 2007; (6) two rocket wars from Judenrein Gaza, and the continuing prospect of more; (7) the year-long negotiation in the Annapolis Process that produced still another offer of a state, from which Abbas walked away; (8) Abbas’s announcement in 2009 that he would do nothing without a construction freeze, followed by his doing nothing after he got one; (9) the continual “reconciliation” attempts by Abbas with the terrorist group he promised to dismantle; (10) his failure to give a Bir Zeit speech to match Netanyahu’s Bar-Ilan one; (11) the inability of the Palestinians to hold an election, much less build the institutions of a peaceful democratic state; (12) the violation of their express Oslo commitments with repeated end-runs at the UN; (13) a Palestinian society, media and educational system steeped in anti-Semitism; (14) et cetera.

But regardless of why Israel's next government is relatively more "right wing" or "hard line" than the current one, would it really that "right wing" in absolute terms?

Two years ago Elder of Ziyon linked to one of PM Yitzchak Rabin's final speeches to the Knesset. Elder of Ziyon's observations about some of PM Rabin's ideas are worth recalling:

The hawk that gave this speech was none other than Yitzchak Rabin, weeks before he was assassinated in 1995. Yes, the sainted, Nobel-peace prize winning Rabin was far more hawkish in his positions than Binyamin Netanyahu is today.
Something to think about as people continuously attack Netanyahu for being so intransigent and "hawkish." And while you are thinking about it, think about how the PLO's policies have changed between 1995 and today in regards to what they are willing to do for peace. The answer is, of course, nothing.

2) The false premises of Middle East peace

Two of the most common premises about the Arab/Israeli conflict are that it is central to solving conflict in the Middle East and that settlements are the primary obstacle to peace. Following from these premises is the conclusion that Israel must end settlements and offer enough to convince the Palestinians to give up their grievances.

A number of recent, disparate stories demonstrate how wrong these perceptions are.

 Recently, This Ongoing War asked Can salad vegetables tell us something about the Arab/Israeli conflict? It was discovered that peppers being sold in a Lebanese grocery chain may have been packaged in Israel. This led to a major investigation as to how these vegetables got there. The blogger comments:

It would be nice to laugh, or even just to smile knowingly, about the gravity hinted at in this news item. But let's dwell briefly, before getting too amused, about how the presence of these packaged peppers required the forensic interventions of (a) the Lebanese army, (b) its military intelligence, (b) the Lebanese national police and (d) the military judiciary. ... Anyone who shops in European supermarkets knows that quality peppers increasingly means Israeli peppers. An angry "boycott Israeli goods" website which we will not quote here (why give them the attention or the traffic?) resentfully sings the praises of Israeli peppers and their success in penetrating discerning markets. Such is life. Israeli agriculture does a really good job of producing winning fruits and vegetables. But before checking for leaks in the border fence, it would not be surprising to learn that the peppers that infiltrated Spinneys originated with a European wholesaler. But more seriously, think about what this tells us about Lebanon and the Arab world, and about the ongoing conflict. How good are the chances for a better understanding on both sides of the dispute when the presence of one word on a printed label, whether accurately placed there or not, triggers the big-time involvement of the military, the police and the judiciary? And that's just on the day of the "discovery". What might be coming next? Is the Lebanese government going to fall? Will a minister resign? Will Lebanon retaliate and if so, what form will that take? And why is this not already in front of the UN Security Council or the World Health Organization?

If the word "Israel" printed on a package possibly is a treasonous act, how can it be that settlements are the cause of conflict? Hating Israel isn't due to resentment of settlements, which would be - at worst - a political issue, it is something that must be much deeper seated.

To the degree that occupation is the source of conflict, Dore Gold recently observed that Turkey's settlements in Cyprus don't cause much consternation in Europe (h/t Eugene Kontorovich).

Anyone flipping through cable television channels with his or her remote control has undoubtedly come across programs about British and other retirees from Northern Europe seeking to escape the harsh climate where they live by venturing to one of the well-known vacation spots along the Mediterranean coast. The difficult problem that these buyers face is the soaring prices of properties over the last decade in places like Marbella, Spain, the French Riviera, or Italy's Amalfi Coast, which leads many to look for more economical alternatives. As a result, many European buyers after 2002 have been flocking to Northern Cyprus, where a villa with a swimming pool can be bought at discount prices. The main legal question that is not addressed with this new European property boom is the legal status of the area where these new homes are being built. It should be recalled that in 1974 the Turkish army invaded Cyprus, which had been an independent state since 1960 and took over 37 percent of the island. Tens of thousands of Greek Cypriots were expelled in this period in what they viewed was a deliberate policy of ethnic cleansing by the Turkish army. In the aftermath of the invasion, the U.N. Security Council adopted Resolution 353 which demanded "an immediate end to foreign military intervention" and called for "the withdrawal without delay from the Republic of Cyprus of foreign military personnel." The Turkish Cypriots declared their independence in 1983 by forming the "Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus," an act that the U.N. condemned as "null and void." Over the years, an estimated 160,000 "settlers" who came from Turkey moved into Northern Cyprus. In many cases, properties that had been left behind by Greek Cypriot refugees were given by the Northern Cyprus administration to Turkish Cypriots and to the Turkish settlers, who sold them to European buyers. To date, some 5,000 British citizens have purchased homes in Northern Cyprus despite it being a clear-cut case of an "occupied territory." According to a BBC report, as many as 10,000 foreigners have bought up former Greek Cypriot properties in Northern Cyprus.

But is the  Israeli/Palestinian conflict really the main source of instability in the Middle East? David Weinberg writes in Counting the dead in Syria:

The figure of 60,000 dead is also a historic marker. Because 60,000 dead is double the estimated casualty count of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict over the past 45 years. Add them all up over all the years of the “occupation”: combatants, civilians, and indirect casualties of conflict – on both sides of the Palestinian-Israeli divide. Add in all Palestinians killed by intra-Palestinian violence and/or executed by Hamas and Fatah as “collaborators.” Add in Israeli victims of Palestinian terror. Add them all up. And still, the total casualty count in Israeli-Palestinian conflict doesn’t hit half the number of Syrians slaughtered by other Syrians over the past two years!

Only by inflating the importance of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict does it become necessary to pressure Israel for ever more unreciprocated concessions.

Finally, Elder of Ziyon noted a recent comment by Mahmoud Abbas the overextended President of the Palestinian Authority:

Following a meeting with Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi, Abbas said that he had appealed to the UN to intercede on behalf of Palestinian refugees living in Syria and demand that Israel allow them to enter the West Bank and Gaza. Abbas said Ban was told Israel “agreed to the return of those refugees to Gaza and the West Bank, but on condition that each refugee ... sign a statement that he doesn’t have the right of return (to Israel).” “So we rejected that and said it’s better they die in Syria than give up their right of return,” Abbas told the group. 

Contrast the bluster of the Palestinian leader with what some Israelis troops recently did. (h/t Meryl Yourish)

Soldiers of the IDF's haredi battalion Netzah Yehuda managed to rescue three Palestinian men before the fierce currents washed over them. Ynet obtained a documentation of the rescue. The IDF troops were called to an area near the Nablus River, where, they were told, cars were stranded with their drivers trapped in a constantly intensifying current. The storm was too severe for helicopters to arrive at the scene, and the battalion commander resorted to utilizing a Palestinian's tractor that was passing by.

By paying too much attention to Israeli settlements and hyping the importance of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict would be do-gooders the world over likely make peace less likely For one thing, they ignore the role of antisemitism in the fueling the conflict.  It also leads them to ignore what Israel actually does and the apathy  Arabs actually show to the Palestinians. Most importantly it means that they allow Palestinian grievances veto power over any possibly peaceful solution.

Labels: Knesset elections 2013, Middle East Media Sampler, Middle East peace process, occupation, right of return, Soccer Dad, Syrian uprising, Turkish occupation of Cyprus

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 8:21 PM 0 comments

Soccer Dad's Middle East Media Sampler

1) Friends don't let friends drive Chuck

What's driving the nomination of Senator Chuck Hagel to be Secretary of Defense? According to Roger Cohen of the New York Times, it shows Israel's True Friends? (Are the people in the accompanying picture an example of Israel's True Friends according to Cohen?) The article is mostly incoherent ignorance. For an example of Cohen's argument there's this paragraph:

Five years on, that needed dialogue has scarcely advanced. Self-styled “true friends” of Israel now lining up against the Hagel nomination are in fact true friends only of the Israeli right that pays no more than lip service to a two-state peace (when it even does that); scoffs at Palestinian national aspirations and culture; dismisses the significant West Bank reforms that have prepared Palestine for statehood; continues with settlement construction on the very shrinking land where a Palestinian state is envisaged (and was granted nonmember observer status at the United Nations last November by 138 votes to 9 with 41 abstentions, including Germany); cannot find a valid Palestinian interlocutor on the face of the earth despite the moderate reformist leadership of Abbas and Prime Minister Salam Fayyad; ignores the grave implications for Israel of its unsustainable, corrosive dominion over another people and the question of how Israel can remain Jewish and democratic without a two-state solution (it cannot); bays for war with Iran despite the contrary opinions of many of Israel’s intelligence and military leaders; and propels Israel into repetitive miniwars of dubious strategic value.

Cohen writes of "reforms that have prepared Palestine for statehood," but this week Fayyad complained that Arab countries are not meeting their pledges to the Palestinian Authority. An entity prepared for statehood wouldn't require donations to function. Abbas, as anyone familiar with the Middle East knows, is no reformer, but an out-of-touch autocrat mostly interested in perpetuating his own rule. Since Israel withdrew from most of the West Bank in 1995 and all of Gaza ten years later Again, anyone paying attention also understands that no Israeli politician is "baying" for war with Iran, but rather pleading for tough sanctions that will prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear threat. As far as the "miniwars" that Cohen decries, they have little to do with Israel's supporters, but are the result of terrorist organizations using Israeli concessions to threaten Israeli citizens. Israel's supporters defend Israel's right to defend itself; a right that Cohen apparently feels is "dubious."

It's amazing how much ignorance Cohen packed into a single paragraph.

A New York Times editorial, Nominations for Defense and the C.I.A. assesses the Hagel nominations:

While a member of the Senate from Nebraska in 1998, Mr. Hagel criticized the nomination of James Hormel to be ambassador to Luxembourg because he was “openly, aggressively gay.” That was a repugnant reason to oppose anyone for public office. Last month, Mr. Hagel issued a statement in which he described his comments 14 years ago as “insensitive,” apologized to Mr. Hormel and insisted he was “fully supportive of ‘open service’ and committed to L.G.B.T. military families.” Some leading foreign policy professionals who are gay, including Mr. Hormel, have since said they could support Mr. Hagel’s candidacy. Still, it will be important to hear Mr. Hagel explain at his confirmation hearing how his views have changed and how he plans to make sure that all service members are treated equally and receive the same benefits regardless of sexual orientation. It would also help if he acknowledged that his past comments were not just insensitive but abhorrent. ... Mr. Hagel’s independence and willingness to challenge Republican orthodoxy on Iraq, sanctions on Iran and other issues — both in the Senate and later as an administration adviser — have so alarmed neocons, hard-line pro-Israel interest groups and some Republican senators that they unleashed a dishonest campaign to pre-emptively bury the nomination. It failed, but the confirmation process could be bruising. The opponents are worried that Mr. Hagel will not be sufficiently in lock step with the current Israeli government and cannot be counted on to go to war against Iran over its nuclear program if it comes to that.

Note what the priority of the New York Times is. That Hagel of the correct view of alternative lifestyles. But because Hagel has apologized, he's okay now. What about his more numerous noxious comments about Israel? That doesn't bother the editorial writers at the Times as they excuse him for not being in "lockstep" with the current Israeli government. Whew! At least he'll be American official not an Israeli one. Hagel's comments about Israel aren't offensive to the editors of the New York Times because they agree with them!

Alana Goodman does a good job of summarizing Hagel's (in)actions that were anti-Israel. (Since these actions also were in regard to anti-American elements, they also could be construed as anti-American.) Of course, Goodman didn't summarize the actions; she was just copying a statement from the NJDC, which now supports Hagel! My father pointed out that she missed a significant point of the NJDC's hypocrisy. The NJDC statement from 2007 ended with:

And here's what the anti-Israel group, CAIR wrote in praise of Hagel:

"Potential presidential candidates for 2008, like Hillary Clinton, John McCain, Joe Biden and Newt Gingrich, were falling all over themselves to express their support for Israel. The only exception to that rule was Senator Chuck Hagel …” [Council on American-Islamic Relations, 8/28/06]

CAIR is anti-Israel and it praised Hagel for that exact quality! How again is it that Hagel is a "true friend" of Israel?

2) "Occupation" is a relative term

Dore Gold writes in European settlements and double standards:

Yet in the case of Northern Cyprus, the U.N. did not qualify its demand for a Turkish withdrawal by allowing, for example, the Turkish military to remain in even part of the island. Looking at these different considerations, it appeared that the international community should have judged the dispute over Northern Cyprus far more severely than the way it viewed the dispute over the West Bank, where Israel had multiple rights that it could exercise if it decided to do so. However, in practice, that was not the case. As usual, on Dec. 10, the European Union declared yet again that it was "deeply dismayed by and strongly opposes Israeli plans to expand settlements in the West Bank, including in east Jerusalem." Its statement made wild charges that Israeli construction in E1 "could also entail forced transfer of civilian population." It finally added that "the European Union reiterates that settlements are illegal under international law and constitute an obstacle to peace." Ironically, while the EU releases harsh statements of this sort against Israel for any construction activity in West Bank settlements, it has nothing to say about tens of thousands of Turkish settlers that have moved into Northern Cyprus.

Eugene Kontorovich argues that there could be a practical benefit for Israel stemming from this hypocrisy:

Discussions of a potential ICC referral often focus on potential liability by Palestinians as a factor that would dissuade them (or the Court) from proceeding. But Israel’s best bet for heading off such a suit would be to advertise the implications for other non-member states that would clearly be on the settlement hook: Turkey and Russia. For the record, I think it quite unlikely that the ICC will indict Israeli leaders over settlements, but I’d bet the farm it wouldn’t indict Israel and Turkish leaders in this decade. Indeed, if I were the Israeli government, I’d spend less time preparing an ICC defense that working up a Cypriot case against Turkey, as a favor to its new bestie. By the way, the Europeans who are “settling” N. Cyprus do not themselves violate the Geneva Conventions, because i) only the “occupying power” can violate it, and ii) it only prohibits “transfer” of “nationals of the occupying power.” Assuming the Europeans are not Turkish citizens, they can’t be settlers. Similarly, American Jews who move to, say East Jerusalem as American citizens cannot be said to be “settlers,” though popular usage may vary.

This is just one more example of how ignorance and misinformation color the way many look at the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Labels: Barack Hussein Obama, Chuck Hagel, Middle East Media Sampler, Soccer Dad, Turkish occupation of Cyprus

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 4:38 PM 0 comments

Why Abu Mazen's attack on 'settlements' was really rich

Cyprus was a state with clear borders when Turkey invaded in 1974, and is a charter member of the ICC. If anyone should be loosing sleep over settlements suits in the ICC, it would be Turkey. Interestingly, no one has suggested in the past decade that Cyprus’s ICC membership would scare the Turks out of N. Cyprus, or get the Turks to agree to a peace deal). But a referral by Cyprus would not face the various thorny temporality and territoriality issues of a Palestinian complaint. Moreover, Cyprus is a particularly gross case of changing the demographics of occupied territory through settlement, with settlers now outnumbering protected persons n the territory.

Apart from the manifest hypocrisy, what should be disappointing for believers in international humanitarian law is the failure of anyone to call Abbas (or Erdogan) on it. I am not aware of any news, NGO, or governmental response pointing out the unseemliness of Abbas invoking the ICC from Ankara.

But it turns out that Europeans have for the past decade taken a different kind of interest in the Turkish occupation, as Dore Gold reports. Priced out of the French Riviera and Amalfi coast, Europeans wanting to buy a Mediterranean vacation property increasingly flock to Turkish-occupied Cyprus.

...

Discussions of a potential ICC referral often focus on potential liability by Palestinians as a factor that would dissuade them (or the Court) from proceeding. But Israel’s best bet for heading off such a suit would be to advertise the implications for other non-member states that would clearly be on the settlement hook: Turkey and Russia.

Labels: Abu Mazen, International Criminal Court, settlements, Turkish occupation of Cyprus

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 8:53 AM 0 comments

Turkey conducts unauthorized naval maneuvers off Cyprus

Cypriot media reports claimed that Israel and Great Britain asked and received permission from Cyprus to hold their maneuvers but that the Turkish navy did not, and as a result Nicosia was considering submitted an official complaint to the United Nations.

...

IDF sources could not confirm the reports but the navy announced earlier this week that it was increasing its patrols in the Eastern Mediterranean to protect gas fields that Israel is planning to begin extracting from within the coming year.

In addition, the navy is looking to secure an NIS 3 billion budget to purchase new surface vessels it claims to need to effectively patrol and protect the new economic waters.

Greek Foreign Ministry Spokesman Gregory Delavekouras said Thursday that Turkey’s naval maneuvers were a violation of Cypriot sovereignty.

"The constant efforts of Turkey to question the sovereignty of the Republic of Cyprus as well as to offend European institutions, such as the EU Presidency, need to be put to an end. It is a wrong perception that leads nowhere,” Delavekouras said at a briefing in Athens.

Coincidentally, Greece’s navy commander Vice Admiral Kosmas Christidis wrapped up a four day visit to Israel on Thursday during which he met with OC Navy Vice Admiral Ram Rothberg and sailed on a Sa’ar 5-class missile ship.

Labels: Britain, Cyprus, Israel, oil and gas exploration, Turkey, Turkish occupation of Cyprus

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 12:29 AM 0 comments

Turkish-Israeli dogfight over occupied northern Cyprus

An Israeli plane violated Turkish Cyprus airspace five times on May 14, Turkish army reported on its website.

The airspace violations reportedly occured between 11:05 a.m. and 12:49 p. m., and lasted a total of eigth minutes.

Turkish air forces blocked the Israeli plane as soon as it was spotted.

The incident was reported to the Foreign Affairs Ministry, according to Turkish army's website.

Labels: Cyprus, IAF, Turkey, Turkish occupation of Cyprus

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 12:19 AM 0 comments

Israel is NATO's first line of defense for Greece and Cyprus

Israel is NATO’s, and the West’s first, and only line of defense, against the Westward advance of the Iranian Caliphate or a Turkish resurrection of its Ottoman Empire. Turkey is trying to steal billions of dollars of Greek Cypriot and Israeli Eastern Mediterranean gas resources to fund billions of further Islamic Mediterranean military build-up.

...Without Israel’s Order of Battle protecting Cyprus’Southeastern Flank and Battle Space, with Turkish frigates and subs infesting the Southern Cyprus waters and cutting off any military reinforcements and with Haifa as Iran’s New Eastern Mediterranean Naval Base, Cyprus, Crete, Rhodes and even Greece will be lost to Turkey and the Iranian Shiite Caliphate. Iranian now-existing Shahib medium range
missiles (1000 miles) will range and cover southern Europe from their new bases in Yafo, Greater Iran. Greece will become indefensible. Iran and/or Turkey will be on Europe's doorstep.

Langfan also noted that Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan issued a direct threat on NATO when he warned on September 27, 2011, "I recommend the international community take the necessary lessons from the Battle of Preveza.”

The Battle of Preveza was a 1538 decisive Turkish/Ottoman naval battle against a Papal “Holy League” Pan-Christian Alliance.

Adding that, “NATO and the entire EU now has an absolute vested interest against the establishment of an autonomous Palestinian state in the "West Bank". It has become abundantly clear that if such a state was in existence Hamas would smuggle in thousands of katyusha rockets with chemical warheads that have the power to wipe out the entire Tel Aviv coastal plain that holds 5 million Jews - in one evening."

Labels: Cyprus, Greece, NATO, Turkey, Turkish occupation of Cyprus

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 11:57 AM 2 comments

Israel stepping up protection for gas drilling platforms

Missile boats have stepped up missions around the Tamar and Leviathan platforms over the past year, as well as coordination with private security firms contracted by the US-Israeli exploration consortium, the official said.

"We have replicated the arrangements already in place at Yam Tethys," the official said, referring to another Israeli gas field 40 km (25 miles) off southern Ashkelon port, near the waters of Gaza.

Tamar and Leviathan, in which Israel sees a potential pipeline to energy independence, are around twice and three times as far out to sea, respectively. That challenges Israel's small navy, which is more accustomed to close coastal patrols.

The Israeli military's newspaper Bamahane said the navy was undergoing expansion including the appointment of a commodore to handle the induction of two more German-made submarines and address "the new need to protect the drilling rigs".

Bamahane did not elaborate, but experts have long voiced concern that Tamar and Leviathan could be targeted by Lebanese Hezbollah guerrillas given Beirut's complaints at what it deems Israel's unilateral exploration in the absence of an agreed maritime border. The two countries are technically at war.

"One danger is a proximity attack, by frogmen, by boats, by terrorists in some fashion," Giora Eiland, a former Israeli national security adviser, told the Globes business journal in May.

"Another, bigger challenge is how to face the threat of missiles, because today you can launch missiles from tens of kilometres away," he said.

Israel and Cyprus, which is doing its own drilling for eastern Mediterranean gas in consortium with Texas-based Noble Energy, are also mindful of Turkey's naval assertiveness in the area.

Labels: Cyprus, Hezbullah, Leviathon well, oil and gas exploration, Tamar natural gas well, Turkish obsession with Israel, Turkish occupation of Cyprus

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 12:13 AM 1 comments

Sending a message to Turkey

Israel is expected to conduct military exercises in Cyprus the next few days, a move considered as a message to Turkey.

The Cypriot daily “Fileleftheros” reveals that the Israeli Air Force will conduct an exercise that will include air refueling of aircraft in the Nicosia FIR in coordination with the Cypriot government.

...

Furthermore, Israeli helicopters will approach Cypriot airports and specifically the Cypriot airbase in Paphos, performing some touch and goes.

A special Israeli aircraft has lately collected data for the airports in Cyprus, regarding the routes, altitudes and in general safety procedures for approaching helicopters, and has determined the potential landing points for any type of aircraft.

Labels: Cyprus, Israeli-Cypriot military cooperation, Turkish obsession with Israel, Turkish occupation of Cyprus

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 10:23 PM 0 comments

'It is possible that [Erdogan] is crazy'

As for the Turkish economy, a closer analysis of its financial data indicates that Turkey's expansive growth is the result of a credit bubble that is about to burst. According to a Citicorp analyst quoted in The Wall Street Journal, domestic demand accounts for all of Turkey's economic growth.

This domestic demand in turn owes to essentially free loans the government showered on the public in the lead-up to the June elections. The loans are financed by government borrowing abroad.

Turkey's current accounts deficit stands at nearly 9 percent of GDP. Greece is engulfed in a debt crisis with a current accounts deficit of 10 percent.

Analysts project that Turkey's deficit will eclipse Greece's within the year. And whereas the EU may end up bailing Greece out of its debt crisis, Turkey has no one to bail it out of its own debt crisis. Consequently, Turkey's entire economic house of cards is likely to come crashing down very rapidly.

It is hard to understand why Erdogan is acting as he is given the poor hand he is holding. It is possible that he is crazy.

It is possible that he is so insulated from criticism that he is unaware of Turkey's economic realities or of the consequences of his aggressive behavior.

It is possible that he is hoping to combine a foreign policy crisis with Turkey's oncoming economic crisis in order to blame the latter on the former.

And it is possible that he believes that US backing gives him immunity to the consequences of his actions.

No matter what stands behind Turkey's actions, it is clear Ankara has overplayed its hand. Its threats against Israel and Cyprus are hollow. Its hopes to be a regional power are faltering.

Labels: Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Turkish economy, Turkish obsession with Israel, Turkish occupation of Cyprus

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 12:41 PM 1 comments

Cyprus stands up to Turkey on oil and gas exploration

Cyprus’ President Dimitris Christofias says Saturday exploratory drilling for offshore oil and gas deposits will continue despite Turkey’s strong opposition.

Christofias says the divided island’s right to search for potential mineral deposits inside its exclusive economic zone is non-negotiable and that any foreign meddling is unacceptable.

...

Turkey says the south’s gas search disregards Turkish Cypriot rights and has sent a warship-escorted research vessel to also look for gas off Cyprus.

Christofias repeated on Saturday that the island’s natural resources belong to all Cypriots.

Labels: Cyprus, IAF, Predator drones, SuperCobra helicopters, Turkish occupation of Cyprus

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 4:47 AM 1 comments

Turkey begins exploring for gas in Cypriot territory

A Turkish ship began exploring for gas off the coast of Cyprus on Monday, the Turkish Cypriot government said, an announcement that escalates a confrontation between Cyprus, Israel and Turkey over huge Mediterranean gas reserves.

The Greek Cypriot government said last week it had started drilling for gas at a site south of the island, infuriating Turkey which supports a separate Turkish Cypriot government on the north of the island.

...

On Monday, Turkish Cypriot Prime Minister Irsen Kucuk said a Turkish exploration vessel had started exploration. He did not give the exact location, but said the Piri Reis ship was working in "the AR/KKTC/G authorized zone". KKTC is the Turkish abbreviation for the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus.

A Greek Cypriot defense source said the Piri Reis was sailing in international waters south of the island earlier on Monday, about 80 km (50 miles) from the Noble Energy gas rig and between two plots Cyprus has mapped out for future exploration. The Piri Reis left the Turkish Aegean port of Izmir on Sept. 23.

Cyprus has 12 plots in all, but has given a concession to just one at the southernmost point of its maritime economic exploitation zone (EEZ).

Cyprus has been divided since 1974 into a Greek side recognized internationally and a Turkish region recognized as a separate state only by Turkey. Peace talks between the sides are due to resume on Tuesday.

Turkey insists no gas should be pumped until the island's fate is resolved. Turkish Prime Minister RecepTayyip Erdogan last week called the Israeli and Cypriot gas drilling "madness".

Tension rose after Cyprus announced last week that drilling had started offshore, close to a gas field in Israeli waters. Texas-based Noble Energy is carrying out the drilling in the Cypriot block and also drills for Israel.

Turkey has said it will drill on behalf of Turkish Cyprus if the Greek Cypriots do not abandon their plans. The Greek Cypriot government says it has a sovereign right to explore for energy.

Labels: Cyprus, Noble Energy, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Turkish occupation of Cyprus

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 12:01 PM 1 comments

Turkey threatens Cyprus, Noble Energy

Turkey called on Monday for the Greek Cypriot government to immediately halt gas exploration work off Cyprus with Texas-based Noble Energy and said Turkish naval ships could escort Turkish energy exploration ships in the Mediterranean.

Turkish Energy Minister Taner Yıldız told reporters that a planned agreement between Turkey and Turkish Cyprus setting out maritime boundaries would result in the Turkish Petroleum Corporation (TPAO) effectively having a presence in the waters off of northern Cyprus.

Yıldız said the agreement was ready to be signed, and added that the TPAO could start gas exploration in the Mediterranean as early as next week.

"We can say that Turkish naval ships may escort Turkish seismic ships doing exploration in the Mediterranean Sea," Yıldız said.

Texas-based Noble Energy, under license from the Greek Cypriot government, is expected to start exploratory drilling imminently on a block southeast of the island, despite protests from Turkey which say any reserves around the island belong not only to Greek Cypriots but also Turkish Cypriots.

The involvement Noble, which already sent a rig to the area, further complicates the problem for Turkey.

"Our wish is that we do not reach such a point, and that the work they are undertaking with Noble comes to an end before it even begins," Yıldız told reporters.

Turkey had discussed the issue with US officials, but not with the company itself, Yıldız said, adding the risks for the company are considerable. "I do not think they will undertake such a work in such a risky area, from a technical and a feasibility point of view," said Yıldız.

Labels: Cyprus, Noble Energy, oil and gas exploration, Turkey, Turkish occupation of Cyprus

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 7:47 AM 0 comments

Turkey warns Greek Cypriots about exploiting Mediterranean oil resources

Turkish EU Minister and Chief Negotiator Egemen Bağış has issued a warning to the Greek Cypriot administration, saying that Turkey will not hesitate to deploy war ships in the Mediterranean if Greek Cypriots enter Turkish terrestrial waters during their oil exploration efforts in the Mediterranean, scheduled to start on Oct. 1.

Saying that Turkey has sent naval vessels to the area in cases like this before, Bağış added, “This is what we have the navy for.”

Labels: Noble Energy, oil and gas exploration, Turkish occupation of Cyprus

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 9:45 AM 0 comments