- 13 aug 2010
Flotilla Violence Expected - Israel Lies, Civilians Die
By ANTHONY DiMAGGIO
Recent revelations from the Israeli government reveal that the Gaza flotilla raid was an act of premeditated violence, planned weeks prior to the raid, in that it was understood in advance that it would provoke a violent counter-response. This finding, recently reported by Al Jazeera stands in marked contrast to claims from Israeli leaders at the time of the raid that the violence directed at activists was purely reactionary and in self-defense against violent attacks from the flotilla activists themselves.
Israel's Defense Minister, Ehud Barak, now admits that the violence related to the deaths of nine pro-Palestinian Turkish activists in May 2010 - was expected by Israeli leaders weeks ahead of the actual raid. He granted this admission during an Israeli commission set up to determine the legitimacy of the flotilla raid and Israel's now four year long blockade against Hamas and the people of Gaza. Barak's admission is consistent with on the ground reporting that there was an offensive mindset among Israeli commandos at the time the raid took place. Eyewitness accounts found that Israeli commandos had fired upon those in the raid prior to even boarding the boats (the original claim from Israeli leaders was that they only attacked the flotilla activists after boarding and facing serious threats to their safety and lives).
Barak attempted to legitimize the raid by claiming that Israeli leaders understood the organizations [supporting the flotilla] were preparing for armed conflict to embarrass Israel. Israel's commitment to violence, however, in order to dismantle and destroy a non-violent humanitarian campaign, ensured that Israel would be deeply embarrassed, in light of an embargo widely recognized as illegal under the Geneva Conventions. The raid itself is also a blatant violation of provisions of the San Remo Agreement, in addition to the U.N. Charter, and the Law of the Sea Treaty.
Israeli leaders have consistently maintained that they were within their rights to attack a humanitarian flotilla comprised of foreign nationals. Gabi Ashkenazi, the Israeli military Chief of Staff, for example, argues that the attacks on Turkish civilians were proportionate and correct and that Israeli leaders shot those who they needed to shoot in the raid; the commandos exhibited calm, bravery, and morality. These apologetics for what amounts to an illegal attack on a foreign nation (Turkey) and its citizens have been repeated for months by Israeli leaders.
In a coordinated misinformation campaign, Israeli officials fed the fiction that the violence on the part of its commandos was not premeditated, but was rather part of a spontaneous campaign to protect Israeli lives that only emerged when it was clear that the flotilla activists who were supposedly the real belligerents posed a threat to their lives. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced immediately following the raid that this was a clear case of self defense they [Israeli commandos] were attacked with clubs, with knives, perhaps with live gunfire, and they had to defend themselves they were going to be killed. Israel will not allow its soldiers to be lynched and neither would any other respecting country. Netanyahu referred to the incident as regrettable, but blamed flotilla activists, saying the deaths were the result of an intentional provocation of forces which support Iran and its terrorist enclave, Hamas, in the Gaza Strip. Worth noting here is that Netanyahu uses the word provocation to condemn the actions of Flotilla activists, although he now admits that he knew the entire operation would provoke a violent response from the beginning.
The Israeli Supreme Court publicly supported Netanyahu's propagandistic statements. The court's President, Dorit Beinish, rejected legal suits on the flotilla raid, harshly attacking those petitioning the case. She announced that the Israeli soldiers [were] forced to respond [by killing the activists] in order to protect their lives. This statement was relevant on one level, at least in the sense that the commandos were no doubt attempting to preserve their lives against civilians they were in the process of killing. That Israel was protecting the lives of belligerents engaged in criminal aggression, however, was hardly the framework in which Beinish was seeking to establish.
The Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs a name fitting of Orwell's 1984 made an equally Orwellian announcement following the raid that the organizers of the Gaza flotilla announced in advance (May 30) their intention of using violence against Israeli forces if the latter tried to prevent the ships from reaching Gaza. This narrative essentially turns on its head the reality that it was Israel that pushed for violent confrontation against what was (prior to the illegal attack) a peaceful, humanitarian flotilla.
The recent admission of aggressive intent on the part of Barak is disturbing, although not surprising, for those who have long argued that Israel's attacks on the Occupied Territories are illegal acts of collective punishment that essentially terrorize an entire nation of people. Sadly, this understanding of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is censored in western media that are content in uncritically repeating the propaganda of Israeli leaders (I chronicled this tendency of the U.S. press in two previous pieces: 1. Rogue State Politics, Counterpunch, 4 June 2010; and 2. A Tale of Two Raids, Z Magazine, 15 June 2010.
Recent reporting on the flotilla inquiry has again promoted a pro-Israeli narrative. The New York Times headline on August 11th read: Barak Says Friction was Expected in Flotilla Raid. The use of the term friction implied that the incident was far less severe than it really was when it came to the critical international reaction. The Times story repeated Israeli claims that the commandos were expecting only passive resistance An Israeli military investigation concluded last month that the anticipated level of violence used against the Israeli forces had been underestimated. Similarly, the Washington Post headline from August 10th read: Netanyahu: Action Against Gaza Aid Ship was Ordered as Last Resort. The story created the impression of a defensive Israel, reluctantly killing foreign civilians and violating international law (although Israel's violation of international law was recognized nowhere in either the Times or Post stories). The Post also reported that statements by the flotilla organizers indicated that they wanted to break Israel's blockade on the Gaza Strip by creating a provocation and instigating media-covered friction at sea with the Israel Defense Forces that would create international pressure to remove the naval blockade, Netanyahyu said. Both of these accounts, it should be pointed out, laid blame at the hands of non-violent activists seeking to violate an illegal blockade and an illegal occupation. That the raid could be portrayed as a provocation on the part of humanitarian activists, through no fault of Israeli officials, is a sign of the extreme propaganda that dominates the American media and political debate on the Middle East.
That Israel routinely provokes confrontations with its neighbors and other nearby countries so that it can engage in aggressive military attacks (designed to further its military dominance of the region) is painfully understood throughout the Middle East and much of the rest of the world, although Americans are shielded from this reality by the journalistic and political establishment in Washington. Barak's admission that Israel expected violence from the get-go have been predictably ignored or downplayed in the U.S. media and by U.S. officials. This is to be expected among those who see Israel as occasionally making mistakes in its generally necessary application of force in the name of self defense. Israel's commitment to regional peace and stability, rather than to militarism and domination, are considered beyond reprieve.
What's completely erased from this narrative, however, is the fact that Israeli leaders themselves admit it's a fraud. They cynically attack their enemies for planned provocation and violence at the time of the flotilla raid, then quietly admit months later that provocation and violence were, in reality, endemic in their own actions and planning. Why Americans should take further Israeli calls for defense and protecting Israeli lives seriously in light of such manipulation and propaganda is a question we should all be asking.
Anthony DiMaggio is the editor of media-ocracy (www.media-ocracy.com), a daily online magazine devoted to the study of media, public opinion, and current events. He has taught U.S. and Global Politics at Illinois State University and North Central College, and is the author of When Media Goes to War (2010) and Mass Media, Mass Propaganda (2008). He can be reached at: [email protected]
http://www.jnoubiyeh.com/2010/08/flotilla-violence-expected-israel-lies.html
What the Gaza flotilla probe reveals
What the Gaza flotilla probe reveals about Netanyahu, Barak, and Ashkenazi.
Details of testimonies offered to Turkel panel were similar, but the differences in approach revealed an embroiled, divisive leadership that evades responsibility.
The Turkel Committee investigation of the Gaza flotilla operation gave Israelis a rare opportunity to see the leaders of their country and its armed forces live before the cameras and microphones this week.
The prime minister, the defense minister and the chief of staff came to the hall in Jerusalem where the panel is holding its public sessions, answered questions and spoke for hours. The transcripts, which were published in real time - as opposed to those of the Winograd Committee, which investigated the Second Lebanon War - present the decision-makers as they are.
What did we learn? That Benjamin Netanyahu and Ehud Barak are very like their characters on the TV satire show "A Wonderful Country." The prime minister is superficial, interested mainly in image and uptight about what's said about him. That's why he was quick to "clarify the testimony" after he saw critical headlines online.
The defense minister likes to mention his time in the elite Sayeret Matkal commando unit ("I spent most of my years in operational activity" ), is contemptuous of civilian life and wants to show people that he understands both general strategy and details.
The chief of staff feels comfortable in the role of company commander with a knife between his teeth, and speaks in a gravelly army slang that lends him credibility (with expressions like, "from my point of view," "risk management," "the genetic code of the IDF" ).
One of the senior figures complained that the order of the testimonies would affect the public's reaction: Indeed, Netanyahu and Barak came across as evading responsibility and blaming their subordinates, whereas Ashkenazi came off as a man's man. If the order had been reversed - the chief of staff first, followed by the defense minister and the prime minister - perhaps they all would have looked responsible and serious.
The disparities between the accounts are not great. All three justified the maritime blockade of Gaza as a security necessity, intended to prevent arms smuggling. They said that the decision-making before the interception of the Turkish flotilla was reasonable and that the hitches were operational in nature, and they made an effort to defend the concept of army investigations and also to afford the soldiers and commanders immunity from criminal responsibility.
The stories they told were also identical: When they learned this spring about a large flotilla being organized in Turkey to break the Gaza blockade, Israel tried to delay it by diplomatic means and by secret intelligence activity, and succeeded in reducing it from a dozen ships to six. The decision-makers decided to use force to stop the ships that set out before dawn on May 31. The intelligence was faulty, the method of operation was not appropriate to the circumstances, and the soldiers found themselves in an inferior position, fighting on the deck of the Mavi Marmara against an unruly, violent, armed mob. Nine Turkish passengers were killed and Israel was roundly criticized internationally, but this will not drive it to change its policy toward what is called "Hamastan" in the Gaza Strip, beyond symbolically relaxing the restrictions on which goods may enter Gaza via the land border crossings.
Different approaches
The details in all three testimonies were similar, but the differences of style and approach revealed an embroiled leadership that evades responsibility. Ashkenazi, who enjoyed an intelligence advantage over his superiors, read their testimonies before testifying himself. His willingness to admit "I made a mistake" gave him a tremendous advantage over Barak and Netanyahu, who acknowledged only the mistakes of others. Ashkenazi turned out to be far more media-savvy than the prime minister and the defense minister, even though they're both far more experienced in public life.
Netanyahu and Barak put forward a similar worldview: Israel is an island, the front line in defending Western democracy in its confrontation against "Muslim radical terrorism," an open, liberal country with a free press and an independent judiciary surrounded by "nothing but terror and tyranny."
To survive in this environment you have to be strong, but that's not enough. It's equally important to enjoy international legitimacy. The prime minister appealed to "the decent and honest people around the world"; the defense minister asked for the support of "honest people in the free world."
It's comforting to know there are saints like this in the world. But Israel's problem is that the world doesn't buy its story: Israel insists there is no humanitarian crisis in Gaza, that the Gazans are doing fine and their markets are thriving, but the international community doesn't believe it. Netanyahu distinguishes between "substantiality" - i.e., reality as it is - and the "political and media substantiality" in which the confrontation with the Palestinians takes place, in the view of Western leaders and media consumers.
The situation assessment is identical, but Netanyahu and Barak draw different conclusions from it. The prime minister is concerned mainly about the political-media angle, and this is what motivates his decisions. From his point of view, Israel's Gaza policy has three goals. The first is to obtain the release of Gilad Shalit, "a matter that touches the hearts of all of us." Next is an immediate response to the rocket fire from the Gaza Strip, and third is the prevention of a humanitarian crisis in Gaza.
For Barak, the top goal is "to isolate and weaken Hamas vis-a-vis the Palestinian Authority." That does not interest Netanyahu. Barak's next goal is to reduce and prevent rocket fire from Gaza. Shalit comes last. That explains why Netanyahu is more popular than Barak: The prime minister thinks first of all about what preoccupies his voters.
The inversed order of priorities leads to different solutions. Netanyahu is engaged in the micro-tactics of "national hasbara" (diplomatic PR ). He doesn't remember the operational details discussed by the ministerial forum of seven on May 26, when the operation to intercept the flotilla was authorized. For him, the discussion was about "coordinated deployment in terms of media, publicity and diplomacy." He recalled his instructions "to reduce the hasbara damage through various means," such as by embedding foreign correspondents on the navy vessels.
The defense minister is far less interested in such activity. He recalled a serious discussion in the forum of seven, "in which the alternatives were raised explicitly and graphically." But he, too, recalled that the discussion was superficial: "A concise intelligence survey and a short operational description by the chief of staff."
According to Barak, the solution to Israel's political distress lies in working toward peace agreements with the Palestinians, Syria and "Inshallah, with Lebanon, too" - and not in improving the angles from which soldiers are filmed. That's Barak for you: He likes the big strategic moves and stumbles over the small stuff.
Barak's favorites in the forum of seven are Dan Meridor and Benny Begin, and not by chance: They were the first to defend him in the media (along with former Labor MK Ori Orr ) against allegations that he had abandoned the wounded in the second training disaster at Tze'elim base. Now Barak lauds Meridor and Begin for expressing reservations and asking the right questions about the risks involved in stopping the flotilla. It's a puzzling story: What's the point of such questions if no one turns them into operative answers and lessons?
The testimonies before the Turkel panel show that people don't change, that they remember only what interests them, and that it's hard for them to escape their background and experience. There is no "new Bibi" and no "different Barak." Only the third witness, Ashkenazi, prepared well and demonstrated an impressive command of operational and media detail, along with receptiveness to technological developments: He was the only one who inserted a video into his monologue, showing familiarity with the Internet, YouTube and the blogosphere.
Against the backdrop of his prolonged media silence as chief of staff, his testimony was the most fascinating of all. But Ashkenazi, too, clung to the same mindset as his superiors. In Israel 2010, that's how it is.
http://www.haaretz.com/magazine/week-s-end/what-the-gaza-flotilla-probe-reveals-about-netanyahu-barak-and-ashkenazi-1.307855
Ya'alon: Barak like snakes in Kirya base
Vice premier launches unprecedented attack on defense minister on backdrop of heated race for position of IDF chief. Addressing Barak's testimony to committee probing flotilla raid, Ya'alon says, 'He didn't let anyone get involved and now he's shifting responsibility on everyone'
Minister for Strategic Affairs and Vice Premier Moshe Ya'alon launched an unprecedented attack on Defense Minister Ehud Barak this week, on the backdrop of the high tensions in the Israel Defense Forces top brass following the heated race for the position of IDF chief of staff and Barak's attempt to shift the responsibility for the deadly raid on a Gaza-bound flotilla on the army.
Speaking at a closed forum in a private home in the central city of Ness Ziona, Ya'alon said that "the events of the past week emphasize what I have been saying about the snakes in the Kirya base (the IDF and defense minister's headquarters)."
The remarks, revealed by Ynet on Thursday night, are bound to create a real rift within Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's seven-minister forum.
"The defense minister didn't let anyone get involved, and now he is shifting responsibility on everyone," Ya'alon said, echoing Netanyahu's testimony to the Turkel Committee, which is probing the May 31 flotilla raid.
According to the vice premier, like Netanyahu said, the ministers had only discussed the media aspects of the operation to stop the flotilla. "The seven-minister forum did not discuss the alternative. We discussed PR aspects."
During the flotilla raid, Netanyahu was on an official visit to Canada, and Yaalon filled in for him. "During the incident I held the title of acting prime minister, but wasn't the prime minister in practice," he said.
Several days after the flotilla raid, Ya'alon admitted that the takeover of the Turkish-owned Marmara ship was a failure, saying that "in a place where citations should have been given, someone failed to prepare a standard operating procedure."
Speaking during a meeting with council heads from the Likud party, Ya'alon had said that "the decision was right, but there is room for improvement and I am not going to elaborate."
Despite the criticism, the vice premier had praised the commandos who took over the Gaza-bound flotilla. "The fighting on the deck was heroic and took place under impossible conditions," he said, while adding that "there were some malfunctions during the planning and operational stages."
Exchanging accusations
Prime Minister Netanyahu, Defense Minister Barak and IDF Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi testified before the Turkel Committee this week. Netanyahu shifted the responsibility on Barak, who shifted it on the army. The chief of staff had no choice but to take responsibility.
Barak told the committee that he takes responsibility for the flotilla affair, but shifted it on the IDF. According to the defense minister, the decision to stop the Marmara ship was right, but the performance lacked.
He contradicted Netanyahu's testimony, clarifying that the ministers discussed both the military aspect and the media aspect of the operation. "All the alternatives were raised," he said.
"Obviously, the political echelon cannot assign tasks that cannot be carried out. In the case in question the military echelon did not say it cannot be carried out. They said, 'It will be difficult, but will do it.' They did not say how it should be done, and rightfully so.
"They said there would be distressing images, but they did not say it couldn't be done and they even said the opposite." According to Barak, "If the decision was right, then the gap between what we wanted and what happened is the execution."
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3935602,00.html
Flotilla cover-up exposed by forensic exam of ships
The photo shows a smashed computer screen on the Mavi Marmara, which was attacked by Israeli naval commandos on May 31.
ANKARA. State inspectors have found around 250 bullet marks on the Mavi Marmara, which was attacked by Israeli commandos on May 31 while en route to Gaza carrying humanitarian aid.
The Israeli attack resulted in the killing of eight Turkish citizens and one Turkish-American.
Media reports claimed that initial forensic inspections revealed that bullet marks were painted over while the ships were held in Israel.
The Mavi Marmara was a part of an international flotilla attempting to break the Israeli blockade of Gaza and bring aid to the Palestinian people and together with two other Turkish ships was released by Israel last week. Following the attack, the Israeli army seized the ships and took them to the port of Ashdod in Israel. After they were returned on Saturday the ships docked at the Mediterranean port of Iskenderun. A team of inspectors headed by Iskenderun Chief Public Prosecutor Mustafa Ercan began inspecting the ships on Monday in a search for unexploded devices that may have been left on board. According to reports, the ships were also inspected by experts from the Turkish Atomic Energy Agency (TAEK). After the inspections, the ships were returned to their owner, the Humanitarian Aid Foundation (IHH).
The inspection focused mostly on the Mavi Marmara, where the killings took place. The evidence and a report to be filed by inspectors are expected to be sent to the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor's Office in two to three weeks. The inspectors collected around 180 pieces of evidence from the ships including bloody clothes. They removed paint from the bullet marks and numbered them. The inspection team was composed of 12 experts, including four engineers and two divers who examined the underside of the ship.
According to reports, a safe on the Mavi Marmara in the pilothouse had been opened after it was broken. The radar equipment and many other items on the instrument panel had also been destroyed. On the ship blood-stained life jackets were found and have been collected by inspectors as evidence.
After the inspections, three containers on one of the other ships were found to have been opened. Some of the passengers personal belongings have been recovered, except for laptops, cameras and mobile telephones.
Israeli soldiers have been convicted in Israel for looting several times in the past, such as during Operation Defensive Shield in 2002 in which Israel reoccupied almost all of the West Bank. The vice president of the IHH, Huseyin Oruç, had said that all the missing items will be added to their petition against Israel to the international and Turkish commissions which are investigating the deadly attack.
http://fwd4.me/05w7 6 jul 2011, 23:43 , Respect -
Maria 14 aug 2010
Committee probing flotilla raid should keep in mind that operation was successful
Jacob Turkel
Troops got the job done
Op-ed: Committee probing flotilla raid should keep in mind that operation was successful.
Your honor, Judge Turkel:
We bear no grudge against you over the great honor and respect you currently enjoy, while leading the commission of inquiry into the flotilla raid and questioning our leaders.
The media naturally proceed to eagerly cover whatever takes place in this probe. The journalists look for contradictions in the testimonies and raise difficult questions. However, if we may, a quick reminder is in order.
The committee members who are currently engaged in a thorough investigation of the IDF operation should keep one thing in mind: The operation succeeded, Goddamnit. It was an absolute success.
The soldiers who took part in the raid completed the mission presented to them by their commanders. The army was able to implement the orders issued by the political leadership. The flotilla was stopped, our sovereignty was safeguarded, and our troops returned to their bases safely.
It is fine to investigate, Mr. Turkel, and it's ok that we have had about 30 other commissions of inquiry looking into this thing; after all, the world wants to see us torturing ourselves for killing terrorists.
But make no mistake about it, committee members: The Israeli people are fully satisfied with our Navy commandoes and their commanders.
It is possible that there are some people out there in the world who expected to see the terrorists on the ship left unhurt, while Israeli soldiers get killed, yet that's their business.
So keep investigating, Mr. Turkel, but remember: You are looking into the failures that led to success.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3936058,00.html
Probe into flotilla raid reveals how pathetic our political leaders have become
Wanted: Leadership
On Wednesday, the defense minister gave us a brief leadership lesson. He told the Turkel Committee that the political leadership determines the what, while the military leadership decided on the how. But now we're asking: What about the who?
Is there someone, for heaven's sake, in our political establishment who would once and for all assume responsibility without saying one thing for the protocol and another thing for public opinion? Someone who would not declare that he is responsible yet a moment later shift the responsibility elsewhere?
When will we see someone who says: It's me. It wasn't the army, it wasn't the forum of top seven government ministers, and it wasn't the government. I'm responsible for the mistake, for the failure, for the defeat, for the needless killing, for the screw-up. Someone who would say: I was wrong, I will learn the lessons, I will implement the conclusions, and I will fix the flaws.
However, everyone around here assumes overall responsibility, yet then rushes to shift the burden to someone else. In that respect, there is no difference between what Barak did Wednesday and what Netanyahu did Tuesday, with one exception: Barak assumed overall responsibility before the committee, for the protocol, while Netanyahu assumed overall responsibility outside the room, in the hallways.
Yet in the final analysis, none of them truly assumed responsibility. Each one of them said: I'm responsible but Barak, or the army, are at fault.
It would be enough to look at the Rashomon-style performance we've seen in the past two days before the committee in order to look away in shame: After the prime minister admitted Tuesday that top government ministers only discussed the media and PR effect of the operation, Barak arrived Wednesday and spoke of a lengthy, in-depth discussion where ministers without portfolio yet with much brains asked questions.
God help us all
So we have a question too: Excuse me, were these two figures, Netanyahu and Barak, present at the same session? Are they members of the same ministerial forum? And really, do they in fact live in the same country? What's going on here?
These people granted the committee a pathetic mandate to draft a report that is not supposed to threaten anyone, yet here they are enlisting the services of top-notch lawyers, withdrawing into their offices, performing endless simulations, and ultimately performing a saber dance.
Now, the questions no longer focus on the decision-making process, but rather, on who told the truth to the committee and who manipulated the truth in a convenient manner.
What was revealed to us in the probe's testimonies is a PM who cannot be responsible because he was abroad, a defense minister who claims to be Mr. Security but whose job as he explained Wednesday is to determine the what and not the how, and a group of seven ministers, including two former army chiefs, said to possess incredible skill but sitting there like Muppets and engaging in a discussion about PR.
By the way, if this was indeed the case and the ministers only dealt with the PR angle, how could it be that the operation's greatest failure was on the public relations front?
What will ultimately determine where the truth lies among the various versions are the minutes of that miserable discussion held by the top seven ministers. Only then would we be able to see the weight given there to the intelligence briefing, the attention given to the army chief's words regarding risks versus chances, and which subject participants focused on.
Yet as to what will be revealed in the process, God help us all, because there's simply nobody else that could help us out there.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3934631,00.html
16 aug 2010
Turks return to Marmara, seek evidence (VIDEO)
(2:08) Returning to the Mavi Marmara
Al-Jazeera presents images from ship raided by IDF, reports that investigators analyzing direction of shooting and who opened fire. Commando chief tells BBC unaccustomed to media exposure
Investigators on behalf of the Turkish Police and representatives of the country's public prosecutor recently boarded the Mavi Marmara in order to search for evidence indicative of the development of events on the deck at the end of May.
Turkey seeks to use the investigation's findings against Israel.
Al-Jazeera reported that the investigators are analyzing the bullet holes on the ship deck as well as on the bloodied clothes and life vests. They will attempt to decode from what direction the bullets were shot and who opened fire. According to the report, a Turkish investigation team has collected evidence for 48-hours around the clock in order to use it against Israel.
On Monday, the BBC's investigative TV show, Panorama, will air an extensive segment on the Marmara. One of the commanders of the Israel Navy commandos said in an interview with the program, "Exposure and headlines in the press are bizarre to us."
In another interview on Panorama, the wife of one of the nine people killed during the raid said that her husband wanted to be "a Palestinian martyr."
A little over a week ago, the Marmara arrived back on Turkish shores after sitting in Ashdod and Haifa ports for two months. The Foreign Ministry sent a note to Turkey expressing Israel's expectation to prevent additional ships from violating the naval blockade on the Gaza Strip.
"The note emphasized that Israel transfers equipment and goods to Gaza on a regular basis via land crossings in a manner accepted by the international community and firmly based on recognized agreements," the Defense Ministry reported.
In addition to the commissions of inquiry established by Israel and the UN, Turkey also appointed a team to probe the flotilla raid. The Turkish commission "will investigate the attack and the treatment of the activists," reported a statement issued by the foreign ministry in Ankara, noting that the commission's findings will be presented to the probe set up by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon.
The Turkish commission will be comprised of clerks from the foreign, justice, interior, and transportation ministries as well as figures from the Turkish shipping administration. It is unclear when the Turkish commission will submit its findings.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3937616,00.html
Naval Commando 13 are training to tackle more flotillas heading to Gaza
Inside Israel's commando unit which raided Gaza flotilla
Giora Eiland said the activists "came to kill or be killed"
Israel's elite commando unit which raided a Turkish aid flotilla sailing to Gaza in May has given Panorama exclusive access to its top secret operatives.
Some of the Israeli special forces took off their balaclavas to talk to me and show me the wounds they received the night nine people were killed and 50 were wounded on board the Turkish ship the MV Mavi Marmara.
"I saw a knife in my abdomen and pulled it out," Captain R said.
"The beating was continuous - and the cries of Allah Akbar."
Israeli footage shows Captain R, a member of Naval Commando 13 being beaten with bars by activists, stabbed and then thrown to the deck below.
Who started the violence that ended in death on the boat, has been fiercely contested.
The Mavi Marmara was one of six ships crewed by activists from a coalition of pro-Palestinian groups in international waters about 80 miles (130km) from the Israeli coast on 31 May.
I was given exclusive access to Naval Commando 13 as they trained on a boat similar in size and layout to the Mavi Marmara.
I went to sea with them in one of their small inflatable boats, known as "morenos", as they trained in preparation for future aid flotillas.
The Gaza flotilla was organised by The Free Gaza Movement, and a Turkish group called the Foundation for Human Rights and Freedoms and Humanitarian Aid (IHH).
There has been widespread international condemnation of the violence. Turkey withdrew its ambassador from Israel and cancelled joint military exercises. It wants an apology and an international investigation.
Israel recently announced it would co-operate with a UN investigation in to the deaths, but is currently holding its own inquiry in which it has defended its commandos' actions.
The commandos insist their lives were in danger and they were under attack when they opened fire.
Turkish officials said autopsies carried out on the nine dead activists showed a total of 30 bullets had been found in their bodies, with one shot four times in the head.
Lieutenant A was one of the commandos in the boats that pulled up alongside the Mavi Marmara at 0430 after the flotilla ignored five Israeli navy warnings to turn back.
They said they were driven off by men with hoses and bars they had cut from the ship's railing earlier that night.
"They held metal rods and they were banging on the railings," Lieutenant A said, "they threw stones at us, metal and junk they had on the ship and several soldiers got hurt from that."
Sergeant Y was one of the commandos who abseiled from a helicopter on to the deck of the ship.
He said: "The activists tied the rope to the ship's antenna.
"It's very, very dangerous, we need to put our legs on the ground or else we just drop 15 or 20 metres." The commandos cut the first rope and abseiled out the other side of the helicopter.
I also spoke to Turkish activists in Istanbul.
After he was injured, Captain R and two other wounded commandos were taken below by Murat Akinan, a volunteer for the Foundation for Human Rights and Freedoms and Humanitarian Aid (IHH), to where the wounded and dead were.
"Understandably, some people were saying - we should do to them what they did to us," Murat Akinan told me.
"But I calmed them down saying according to our religious beliefs we should treat them and take them back."
Feared for life
Captain R said he feared for his life: "I realised there were two opposing forces, one that wanted to kill us and the other more moderate trying to pull away those trying to escalate the situation and finish us off."
The captain was then taken upstairs - afraid he had been taken hostage.
"My guard was hit by an Israeli stun gun and ran inside," said Captain R. "I saw I was alone and jumped off the ship and our boat picked me up."
Israeli commandos have boarded several ships looking for arms destined for Gaza, which is governed by the Palestinian group Hamas.
Hamas denies Israel's right to exist and militants have fired thousands of rockets against civilian targets in Israel in recent years.
Israel has implemented strict controls over what goes in and out of Gaza by sea and land.
It says the naval blockade is needed to stop weapons entering Gaza. But the Palestinians say it causes suffering and has cut off economic life, and the blockade has been widely criticised as a form of collective punishment.
But the IHH is not just known for its humanitarian work. Western authorities and Israel have accused it of links to terrorists, a charge the IHH strongly denies.
The IHH has defended its use of bars, chains and knives against the commandos.
"It went beyond passive resistance because the Israelis had been firing from the start," Bulent Yildirim, the head of the IHH said.
"Our people were defending themselves while being fired at."
The Israelis said it was not possible to abseil from a helicopter while shooting and that they only switched from non-lethal weapons to live fire when they were shot at by the activists.
"We have very clear evidence that in at least four cases the other side did use live fire," said retired major general Giora Eiland, who carried out the investigation into events on board the ship.
"In some they used Israeli weapons stolen from our soldiers - in at least one case they used their weapon because we found bullets and shells not used by Israeli forces."
He said that the Israeli commandos' use of live ammunition was justified but admitted they "made mistakes" in intelligence and planning.
"These people came to kill and be killed," he said.
"And under the circumstances in a very complex area like a ship, the results - the deaths - are surprisingly low."
Giora Eiland said the IHH succeeded in its mission to draw the world's attention to the Gaza blockade.
"Unfortunately they managed to achieve exactly what they wanted, a provocation, to be able to show the Israelis caused the nine deaths," said Giora Eiland, "so Israel is seen as using excessive force and is guilty for everything."
Naval Commando 13 is continuing its training for more flotillas - expected this autumn.
The battle of the Mediterranean is not over yet.
Panorama: Death on the Med, BBC One, Monday 16 August at 2030 BST and then available in the UK on BBC iplayer.
(pict & video's) http://news.bbc.co.uk/panorama/hi/front_page/newsid_8909000/8909361.stm
IHH lauds new Hamas terror group
Turkish group made congratulatory video in honor of Al-Ahrar.
In another sign of the ties between the Turkish organization IHH and Hamas, a representative of the group that organized the aid flotilla blocked by the Israel Navy on May 31 made a congratulatory video address at a recent ceremony marking the establishment of a new terrorist group in the Gaza Strip.
The ceremony was held in mid-July in Gaza and marked the establishment of a military wing by the Palestinian movement Al-Ahrar The Free which broke off from Fatah following Hamas's takeover of the Gaza Strip in June 2007. The new military wing's name is Al-Ansar Battalions.
IHH, according to Israel, is a radical Islamic organization which supports Hamas activity.
It was behind the flotilla to the Gaza Strip in late May that was stopped by the navy. During the boarding of the Mavi Marmara passenger ship, navy commandos were attacked by a group of mercenaries armed with knives, metal bars and bats, and killed nine Turkish nationals in the ensuing clashes.
Al-Ahrar is closely aligned with Hamas and espouses armed struggle as the way to end the so-called Israeli occupation of the West Bank. The ceremony last month a military ceremony which was attended by several dozen armed operatives carrying Kalashnikov rifles was also attended by top Hamas administration officials in the Gaza Strip, including Interior Minister Fathi Hamad and Legislative Council Deputy Speaker Ahmed Bahar.
A recent report released by the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center (MALAM) claimed that during the ceremony Turkish flags were raised while Israeli and US flags were burned. The MALAM said it was likely that Hamas would use the Al- Ahrar network as subcontractors for terrorist activity against Israel.
http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=184874
Italian lawmakers: Put IHH on EU terrorist list
http://www.jpost.com/Home/Article.aspx?id=182846
Turkel Committee: Coordinator of activities in territories to testify in raid probe
Major-General Eitan Dangot, the coordinator of the government's activities in the territories, has been summoned to testify before the Turkel Committee probing the deadly Navy raid on a Gaza-bound flotilla.
Dangot will be asked to address Israel's civil-economic policy in Gaza and the humanitarian situation in the Strip. (Attila Somfalvi)
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3937381,00.html 6 jul 2011, 23:46 , Respect -
Maria 20 aug 2010
Death in the Med: Panorama's response: We simply allowed viewers to make up their own minds
Panorama has received a large response to Death in the Med.
Among the responses were complaints from viewers who felt this programme showed bias in favour of Israel. Some viewers were unhappy about some of the video and audio footage we showed and disputed its sources. Viewers also felt that certain points regarding the flotilla raid were not documented, notably the location of the flotilla at the time of the raid. Complainants also alleged that the programme showed bias against the group in charge of the Mavi Marmara, the IHH and against the Palestinian situation in Gaza and as a whole.
Panorama's Response:
We understand the strength of feeling regarding the Israel Defence Force's operation against the Mavi Marmara on 31 May 2010. We recognise the complexity of the subject and note its ramifications within the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a whole.
This programme intended to explore the considerable confusion about what actually happened on the Mavi Marmara on the day in question.
Israel has been accused of breaking international law by seizing a Turkish ship. Israel says they were terrorists. Turkey insists they were innocent victims. With several inquiries underway Jane Corbin uncovered new evidence from both sides in a bid to uncover what really happened.
Jane Corbin is a world renowned journalist with 20 years experience reporting for 'Panorama' on the on-going conflict in the Middle East. She is respected for her dedicated, impartial and balanced work from both sides of the conflict and approached this subject with the same level of fairness which she is known for.
We appreciate some viewers were unhappy about the nature of the video and audio footage we showed. We can assure you that a great level of detail was involved in selecting the footage we showed. During the programme we made it clear that a variety of different sources were shown, some from the Israeli Defence Force, some from the IHH and "culturesofresitance.org" and others from individuals who were on board the Mavi Marmara on the night in question. The majority of the footage used in the programme is openly available on the internet.
All featured footage was meticulously double and cross checked to verify its accuracy, any footage of uncertain events during the raid were clearly labelled as such.
Viewers were shown a wide range of opinions and whenever a question of authenticity of footage arose, we made this clear.
We also spoke extensively to the groups and individuals involved in the incident including three Israeli commandos involved in the raid; the head of the IHH - Bulent Yildirim; the Free Gaza Coordinator on board the Mavi Marmara - Lubna Masarwa; three Turkish activists and activist Ken O'Keefe, all who were on board the Mavi Marmara on the night in question. We also spoke to Hamas official Dr Ahmed Yousef in Gaza. They were all given sufficient time and a platform to make their points.
The programme made it clear that the flotilla was still in international waters, 90 miles from Gaza. The programme also made it clear that a number of inquiries are ongoing.
Overall we dismiss claims that this programme showed bias in favour of Israel. The programme's aim was to try to uncover what really happened on the Mavi Marmara. Panorama went to great lengths to give opposing sides the opportunity to air their views and we felt the programme accordingly carried out its analysis in a fair, impartial and balanced manner. We simply allowed viewers to make up their own minds in their own time based on what they saw and heard.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/panorama/hi/front_page/newsid_8924000/8924473.stm
28 aug 2010
Turkey gives full support to UN panel despite Israeli threats
Despite Turkish confidence, the mandate of the four-member UN panel that convened Tuesday for the first time is still vague, although it is certain that it is not a criminal investigation. Some observers say all issues were left vague to prevent further problems in Turkish-Israeli ties, adding that the panel was formed following concessions from both sides. Israel agreed to join a UN panel, while Turkey's concession was that it is not a real inquiry,' says one observer
Turkey is giving full support to the U.N. probe into the Israeli raid on a Gaza-bound flotilla despite Israel's threats that it could consider withdrawing if its soldiers are called to testify.
Whatever the U.N. panel requests of us we'll provide. We demanded this commission. We have been supporting the work of the secretary-general from the very beginning, a senior Turkish Foreign Ministry official told the Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review on Wednesday.
Although Turkey has been confident, the mandate of the four-member United Nations panel remains vague. Regardless, the probe is not a criminal investigation, meaning it is unknown whether the findings will satisfy the Turkish government, which is pressing for an apology and compensation from Tel Aviv.
The probe's first hearing was Tuesday, during which the parameters of the panel were discussed, according to officials.
The U.N. panel is tasked with reviewing reports of national investigations; requesting clarification and additional information; examining and identifying the facts, circumstances and context of the incident; and recommending ways of avoiding similar incidents in the future, the U.N. said. The panel will submit an initial progress report by the middle of September and a final report by February.
Israeli government officials, however, are threatening a pullout, saying their agreement to take part in the U.N. panel was tied to the panel relying on reports from Israel's own inquiry, not direct testimony from soldiers.
Israel is insistent on the principle that its soldiers will not be interrogated, Amit Zarouk, a spokesman for the Israeli Embassy in Ankara, told the Daily News.
Although U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon denied Monday a behind-the-scenes agreement with Israel that the panel would not summon the country's soldiers to testify, U.N. spokesman Martin Nesirky did not rule out the possibility that the panel could seek to talk to or obtain information directly from Israeli soldiers, as well as officials from either side.
The committee, however, appears set to approach the relevant governments in the event it wishes to obtain clarification or data from any of the actors in the event, according to Israeli reports, which cited official sources.
While there is no written agreement between Israel and the U.N., there appears to be an important verbal understanding that the panel will not impose themselves on the governments and will instead give authority to them.
In the present situation, all the issues were left vague in order to overcome obstacles in the Turkish-Israeli relationship, which descended into crisis in the wake of the flotilla incident, according to diplomatic observers.
If it were a criminal investigation, it would be hard for the U.N. to handle it because problems in Turkish-Israeli ties would get even more complicated if one of the states were held responsible, said one observer. Both Turkey and Israel made concessions here. Israel agreed to join a U.N. panel, while Turkey's concession is that it is not a real inquiry.
Yet it is unclear how the U.N. and Ban will handle the inquiry.
We'll see what emerges out of this mess. But even if Israel is hurt because of the attack on the Mavi Marmara, this would not necessarily suggest that a result desired by Turkey will emerge, columnist Semih 'diz wrote in daily Milliyet on Wednesday. If there had been a U.N. secretary-general who could stand up and be a more distinctive personality this might have been possible, but there is not.
Turkish commission continues working
Both Turkey and Israel have established national commissions to investigate the May 31 incident that left nine activists dead, including eight Turks and one U.S. citizen of Turkish descent.
Israel has established two commissions to investigate the flotilla incident, including a military committee that already released its report and a civilian committee, which also includes two international supervisors. The latter continued listening to testimony from Israeli government and military officials on Wednesday.
Turkey established a commission which convened twice in June and included officials from the Justice and Foreign ministries, as well as the Maritime Undersecretariat. Turkish officials told the Daily News the commission was working both at a high level and technical levels.
http://bit.ly/bZ5vaV 6 jul 2011, 23:51 , Respect -
Maria 30 aug 2010
UN team begins Gaza flotilla probe in Jordan
A UN inquiry team started hearings on Monday with Jordanian activists about the fatal May 31 Israeli raid on a Turkish ship that was part of a flotilla trying to break an Israeli naval blockade of the Gaza Strip.
The team arrived in Amman Sunday night after eight days of hearings in Turkey. The panel is due to report back to the UN Human Rights Council during its next session, between September 13 and October 11.
"The panel, which is due to stay in Jordan until Friday, met several people over the past hours," Badi Rafayaa, a prominent trade unionist, told German Press Agency dpa.
Rafayaa was one of 33 Jordanian activists aboard the Gaza-bound flotilla when Israeli forces raided the Mavi Marmara ship, killing nine Turkish citizens.
Rafayaa said he was scheduled to testify Tuesday afternoon.
Rafayaa said that the UN panel will also meet in Amman with two Arab activists from Israel %u2013 MK Hanin Zuabi (Balad) and Mohammad Zeidan, director general of the Arab Association of Human Rights - who were aboard the Turkish vessel when the Israeli attack occurred.
The fact-finding mission is chaired by Karl Hudson-Phillips, former judge of the International Criminal Court at The Hague.
Israel has refused cooperation with the team, claiming it lacked neutrality.
http://www.haaretz.com/news/international/un-team-begins-gaza-flotilla-probe-in-jordan-1.311086
UN panel in Jordan probing flotilla raid
The UN investigators have arrived in Jordan to probe Israel's deadly attack against an international Gaza-bound aid convoy that killed nine Turkish activists.
The investigators interviewed four Jordanian activists who were on board the Mavi Marmara ship that came under attack by Israeli commandos.
The assault in the international waters on May 31 left at least nine Turkish pro-Palestinian activists dead and many others injured.
Alaa Borqan, who is in charge of public relations at the Jordan's trade unions, said that the UN panel would also meet with the majority of the 33 Jordanians who were on board the ship.
The experts would be in Jordan until September 4, following an eight-day mission to Turkey, according to the statement released by the UN human-rights office.
The UN committee is expected to prepare a report for the UN Human Rights Council at its next session, due to take place from September 13 to October 11.
http://www.presstv.com/detail/140608.html
31 aug 2010
IDF general: 'No justification for Gaza aid flotilla'
Maj. Gen. Eitan Dangot
IDF Maj. Gen. Eitan Dangot tells Turkel Committee that Gazans have the goods needed to maintain basic lifestyle; says flotilla was intended to strengthen Hamas, not Gaza residents.
"There was no justification for the flotilla, because there was no humanitarian crisis in Gaza," Israel Defense Forces Maj. Gen. Eitan Dangot told the Turkel Committee on Tuesday.
Dangot, the coordinator of government activities in the territories, told the committee that Gazans have all the goods necessary to maintain a basic lifestyle.
"There isn't hunger in Gaza, now or in the past," he said.
Dangot said that during Operation Cast Lead, Israel's three-week offensive against Hamas in December 2008, the IDF detected the potential for a flour shortage and acted in coordination with international organizations to prevent a shortage.
According to Dangot, even during periods when, at the request of international organizations, Israel increased the number of trucks allowed to enter Gaza, there was no significant increase in food entering the coastal enclave which is controlled by Hamas.
Dangot said that the aid flotilla which was intercepted by the IDF in May was unnecessary because "those who wanted to help the population of Gaza were invited to deliver supplies via land, as it was always possible to do."
According to Dangot, the Mavi Marmara, the ship on which nine Turkish activists were killed during clashes with Israeli naval commandos, did not bring any humanitarian equipment. Also, he said, the equipment brought by the other ships of the flotilla "was organized amateurishly and any port in the world would not have been ready to unload it."
Dangot told the committee that ten days before the flotilla, he met with the Turkish ambassador in Israel and suggested to him that the aid be delivered to Ashdod, where it could be speedily transferred to Gaza. Dangot said that under this proposal, Israel would have allowed the entry to Gaza of cement and other building materials, which had been limited to that point.
Dangot said that the flotilla was "intended to strengthen the Hamas terror entity and not to aid the citizens of Gaza."
Dangot remarked that, in the months before the flotilla, Israel detected an economic crisis within Hamas in Gaza. The crisis was mainly to due Hamas' difficulties in bringing money into Gaza, due to Egypt's efforts to halt smuggling activities.
Among other things, Egypt closed the Rafah border crossing and took actions against the smuggling tunnels beneath the Egypt-Gaza border. Egypt even confiscated cash that senior Hamas leaders tried to bring into Gaza.
According to Dangot, illegally smuggled cash constituted 90 percent of Hamas' income.
http://fwd4.me/0upc 6 jul 2011, 23:58 , Respect -
Maria 3 sept 2010
Shariv's parting shots
There is a widening gap between Israel and American Jewry, and it's not the Israelis fault, says outgoing NY Consul Asaf Shariv.
In my opinion, the story that caused us the most damage in the past few years was that Israel didn't allow iPads to be brought in, departing Consul-General in New York Asaf Shariv tells me on a hot, rainy Thursday in August. That did more damage than either the flotilla or the war.
We're sitting in his office on Second Avenue.
It's only a few days before Shariv is set to go home, ending his term as consul-general. In a suit and tie, he sits in an armchair next to a rocket shell. Most visitors, he tells me, think it's an ashtray. It's going to stay in the office for his as-yet unnamed successor, like the portraits of Yitzhak Rabin and Binyamin Netanyahu, and the tattered American flag recovered from Staten Island's dumps among the horrible detritus of September 11.
Surrounded by all this history, Shariv sits back and explains his stance.
The flotilla operation and all the great PR we produce from our daily effort to keep Israel safe hurts us mainly with the people who are not our biggest fans, and I feel are a little more secure in going and attacking us in other words, it causes people to be more explicit in their criticism of Israel.
Stories like Israel keeping the iPad out, in contrast, make Israel look like Iran, or like Saudi Arabia with the BlackBerry, or North Korea and Facebook. As long as we're pushing the idea that we're a start-up nation, and all these stories of innovation, you get one story like that and it just kills us.
Our hour-long conversation is sprinkled with tidbits like this one, gleaned from his time here. Over the course of the conversation, Shariv seems happy if not happy to be leaving New York, then at least pleased to be going back to Israel with his family. At 38, the youngest person to ever hold the post, he has a degree of insouciance that doesn't fit in with the somewhat foreboding nature of the geopolitical climate: There's a last-day-of-school feeling to our conversation. Perhaps, one might think, the diplomat is being more cavalier than diplomatic. Because, really? Between Operation Cast Lead and the flotilla, a diplomat based here would say that the story that did the greatest damage to Israeli-American relations was the iPad? Yes, Shariv reasserts, underscoring the point.
We're trying to reach normal average Americans who in the best-case scenario lean toward Israel, but don't know a lot about it, he says.
It causes problems with that audience those young American Jews who don't remember the Holocaust or the Six Day War. You know, the ones who get their news from [political satirist] Jon Stewart or blogs. They're not so politically savvy. And it makes it that Israel is not something you want to connect or relate to. And that's a big problem.
It's that youth quotient, the 35-and-unders, that concerns Shariv: The gap is just growing wider and wider.
Despite his emphasis on the iPad, he is quick to note that the flotilla gave critics of Israeli policy a very good reason to complain about our PR again. It took the State of Israel way too many hours to get the story out, and then to reach all the people we wanted to reach.
Israel never goes to war, in my opinion, without provocation, and usually we convince the world,Shariv says. Cast Lead, the Second Lebanon War, even Defensive Shield, everyone understood. But after seven to 10 days, after that, people forget why we started the war.
The flotilla, he says, was different: The first day was the worst, but every day after that became much better. There was more information, more footage, showing that it was completely different from the other operations.
The first day, [New York] Mayor [Michael] Bloomberg came out and supported Israel, and that was amazing. But others took some time before they heard the story.
ON COLLEGE CAMPUSES in the tri-state area, though, Shariv says, we don't have a problem.
He notes that this is not the most popular answer, but states that Israel's PR among college students is no worse than it was at the end of the 1970s.
When you're at an American college, 99.9 percent of the kids there don't care about Israel, Shariv says. I have a guess that most American college students never even heard of the flotilla. They're busy! They're on Facebook! They're more interested in [singer] Justin Bieber, sports, parties and maybe schoolwork they're not into politics in the first place, and certainly not into Israeli politics.
During his years as consul-general, Shariv visited almost 60 universities and colleges. We got some rough questions, we gave interviews to campus newspapers, but we never saw violence or anything more problematic than that.
Shariv notes that in the past few years, people have been more explicit in their criticism of Israel. We got grace of a few years because of 9/11, not because of us per se, but rather because no one was very enthusiastic about supporting the Muslim community. As much as I hate it I don't think it should be a zerosum game but there is a feeling of Jews versus Muslims, even here.
The Birthright program, Shariv says, is perfect.
People are coming for 10 days, they hear great stories about how much fun it is, how great Israeli soldiers are, how beautiful Israeli women are.
Yes, he says, Birthright does good work in covering gaps in identification with Israel. But Shariv also says that he'' s seen a lot of people who returned to Israel after Birthright, only to be disappointed.
The Israel they've been taught about is not the same country as the reality. People tell me all the time the people are too rude, too vocal, it's impossible to drive. There's all kinds of conflict that doesn't belong to the conflict. But most importantly, Shariv says, American Jews are very liberal, and they think Israel is not as liberal as they'd expect it to be.
Shariv says in his tenure as consul-general, he has seen a growing gap between Israel and American Jewry,and attributes it to the liberalism of American Jews. When they look on the Zionist movement, they see that Israel has become more and more conservative, and the original Zionism that they thought would be liberal is now conservative.
At the same time, Shariv is quick to point out that American Jews who demonstrate against Israeli combat operations don't demonstrate against the US and its policies. They have expectations of us, as the Jewish state no one has expectations of Iran, for example, he says.
It's good that they have expectations of us, the idea that this is not the Jewish way, this is not how it's supposed to be. And that causes a lot of problems.
In terms of Israeli political corruption alienating the American Jewish community, Shariv says corrupt politicians learned from the best, referencing the political turmoil during his tenure stateside.
For many people, settlements are the biggest issue, Shariv says, but that comes more from people who are not actively informed about Israel. He says he was pleasantly surprised, if somewhat intimidated, by the informed element of the Jewish community.
Jews would ask me why this guy was appointed to be this commander, an ambassador going to Romania... day-to-day issues in Israel! Shariv laughs. They all read the Web sites. They're involved. Everyone has friends and family in Israel. It surprised me, how many of them have strong feelings for Israel and how involved they are. Sometimes they%u2019re more concerned with things the Israelis take for granted.
WHAT OF THE CONVERSION debate triggered by the Rotem bill earlier this summer? Yes, Shariv says, it was a big story, but he notes that members of the Reform and Conservative movements had fought against the bill from the beginning, and that their support of Israel is significant. He estimates that 85% of the members of the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish American Organizations are Reform and Conservative.
I don't think this bill will be implemented, he notes.
Of more concern to Shariv is the increased politicization of the Israel discussion among Jews. He notes that according to polls, Republican support for Israel is stronger than that of Democrats, but he doesn't put too much stock in the findings. Rather, Shariv cites new forces in the US who are more connected to the Democratic Party, specifically Latino voters.
Israel should put more emphasis on reaching out to these groups, and not only our supporters, Shariv says. There are expanding communities that will emerge as powerful groups in 15 years. I don't think they have a special connection to Israel right now.
I don't think we have a problem with Hispanics, don't get me wrong, but it's not the same connection to Israel that other groups have. We should try to do more mutual projects with them. I don't think we have a problem now, but if I look at where things are going, I'd be worried. We should pay attention to the situation to make sure we're not helping it by only playing with one side of the aisle.
When Shariv entered the world of diplomacy in 2002, working for former prime minister Ariel Sharon as senior adviser to his chief of staff, the political world was a different place, even among Jewish organizations.
While Shariv doesn't think any of the Jewish organizations are less influential now, he commented on the birth of the left-leaning J Street as indicative of the change in the political climate.
Characterizing J Street as being mainly for American Jews who are more liberal than AIPAC's membership, he says they are players in Washington, definitely but I'm not sure they're players around the country. It's not an organization that we feel in our work. I'm not saying bad things about them, but as an organization mobilizing people well, they're not yet there in the tri-state area.
J Street's power, Shariv says, is most indicated by the rift its creation exemplified, if not caused: The fights between J Street and AIPAC show that Israel is becoming more and more a partisan issue in the United States. That's the biggest risk we have right now.
He is quick to point out that similar problems existed in the US Jewish community in the mid-1970s, but that this situation is different.
J Street really tries to show that it is the lobby of the Democratic Party, and I don't think it's true, Shariv says. I definitely don't think it's true. There's a difference between Republican voters, the way the Republicans support Israel and the way the Democrats support Israel, and Jewish organizations have something to do with it. But they're playing that card, and I don't think that's a good thing not good for Israel, and not good for the Jewish community. And I don't even think it's good for AIPAC or J Street.
And what of those who would counter that the real problem isn't political infighting, but rather the depiction of Israel in the American media? I'll give you the very unpopular answer I think they were fair, Shariv says. My friends in the Jewish community won't like that answer, but I don't think the American media are less fair than the Israeli media, or less supportive of Israel than the Israeli media.
I've met the heads of the Daily News, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Fox, CNN they're not against Israel. It's ridiculous to say they're against Israel. I think we have more supporters here than in Europe I don't think we have anti-Semites in the American media, not even on CNN.
The New York Times has more Jews working for it than any media organization, including Haaretz. I'm joking, but there's not a newspaper or a TV channel biased against Israel as a decision that came from a publisher. National Public Radio, he notes, is not Al Jazeera.
Shariv admits that he doesn't think a government should control the media, but Call I need is for somebody to be fair. Bias, he says, is much more blatant on blogs and Web sites that are part of the new citizen media movement, and there is little recourse.
Citing a terrible story on Israel in the Village Voice two years ago, Shariv recounts, I called the editor, they agreed to have a meeting with us and we gave him our side.
That's all I want.
WHAT DOES SHARIV want now? Along with his office materials, he's taking back the two main things he learned during his time in the US, he says. He is concerned that there is no culture of philanthropy in Israel like that of the US.
I'm not talking only about money talking about volunteers, he says. It's not as developed as it is here, and it would make Israel a better country. We can't always look at the rich uncle of the United States, and not look at the very real growing wealthy community in Israel. After 62 years, I think we should have more Israelis supporting more in the Israeli community.
Shariv returned to Israel with Nefesh B'Nefesh, a group he credits with doing a great job at making it easier and less terrifying to go to Israel. He speculates about future programs that would make a difference in the American perception of Israel. If we could have Birthright for Christians, that would have a huge impact, he says.
His second lesson from his American experience, he says, is one he never expected: He rediscovered Judaism.
In Israel, you sometimes take Judaism for granted, and you think that Judaism is just the Orthodox, that to be Jewish is to be haredi from Mea She'arim, he says. That's a big problem for us as a country. There's a lot of ignorance inside Israel among the most brilliant young people regarding Judaism.
In the last two years, Shariv says, he went to synagogue more than I ever did in my entire life in Israel. Here, there are millions of people who have never visited Israel, and they're proud Jews. They're Jewish because it's a beautiful thing.
Upon his return to Israel, Shariv says, he'll attempt to replicate his Jewish experience in the US. don't think I can have any influence on the Orthodox parties, he said, referring to the widening gap between secular and religious Israelis as a big danger.
But my secular friends will have to make kiddush with me on Friday night, he says.
You wouldn't hear me say it two years ago, but being Jewish is great.
http://www.jpost.com/Magazine/Features/Article.aspx?id=186800 6 jul 2011, 23:59 , Respect -
Maria 4 sept 2010
Irish activist threatened by Israelis
Fiachra O Luain, the Irish Gaza campaigner is seen here onboard Rachel Corrie, the Gaza-bound aid ship.
Israeli Prime Minister's men seriously threatened an Irish man detained after Israel army attack on Freedom Flotilla heading for the besieged Gaza Strip last year.
The Donegal man told the UN he received a serious threatfrom an official close to Benyamin Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister.
Fiachra O Luain from Carndonagh was second mate on the Challenger 1 and watched in horror as the Israeli troops descended on the Mavi Marmara and opened fire.
Israeli commandos shot dead nine people onboard a Turkish-flagged ship heading for Gaza to deliver humanitarian aid to its impoverished people.
The 28-year-old, who went to secondary school in Derry, said he had yet to decide whether he would return on the next aid convoy in October.
This week O Luain submitted his statement of evidence to the United Nations Secretary General's Panel of Inquiry.
In his statement, he revealed how before the attack he alerted Senator John Kerry's office in the US and the Irish Department for Foreign Affairs to a serious threat he received in an email from an official close to Binyamin Netanyahu - the same official with whom he had celebrated the Passover.
Their relationship deteriorated when the official learned O Luain was on the flotilla.
In the evidence forwarded to the UN O Luain said the official wrote, Details have been sent to the Foreign Ministry... May you and your boat sink to the depths of the sea, may you know the punishment meted out to the enemies of God's Chosen People'. Knowing how close this man was to the Israeli Prime Minister, I realized how serious this threat was.
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/141157.html
5 sept 2010
Turkey-Israel relations: Where do we stand?
Results of upcoming referendum for revolutionary constitutional changes proposed by Erdogan's AKP gov't will determine country's path toward the Jewish state.
Lately, it seems Turkey is showing a more conciliatory stance vis-àvis Israel. A senior Turkish official told Yediot Aharonot recently that the two countries must now avoid escalation, quiet down the verbal incitement and once the crisis ends the Israeli prime minister would be welcome in Ankara.
To salvage the relations Turkey is only asking Israel to issue some sort of an apology and compensate the victims families.
Actually, the contradictory statements by Turkish leaders, some escalating the situation, others calming tensions, are the result of two conflicting constraints: the attempt by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan to use the May 31 flotilla crisis to strengthen the governing Justice and Development (AK) Party before the critical September 12 referendum and the growing pressure by the US to keep Turkey as an important ally.
The attempts to mend fences with Israel began at the end of June, when Industry, Trade and Labor Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer secretly met Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu in Brussels, apparently due to pressure from the Obama administration.
President Barack Obama reportedly warned Erdogan that actions Turkey has taken in its relations with Israel and its vote against sanctions on Iran have caused worry in Congress concerning its standing as an ally. He allegedly called on Ankara to cool its rhetoric about the flotilla raid.
Also, for the first time in the USTurkey relationship, the House Foreign Affairs Committee conducted a special hearing on whether Turkey's axis is indeed shifting, and Republican congressmen blocked the appointment of Francis Ricciardone as ambassador to Turkey, because he is seen as too soft to deal with the Turkish government.
As a consequence, Turkish policymakers are planning to intensify contacts with Congress, after a series of talks in Washington between a high-level Turkish delegation and senior administration officials.
The formation of an international commission under the auspices of the UN secretary-general to look into the events surrounding the flotilla incident was considered a victory for Turkish diplomacy and its results crucial for relations with Israel.
But the US approach to the international commission focused on reconciling Israel and Turkey and proposing recommendations as to how to avoid such incidents in the future, a statement that angered Ankara.
ISRAEL DECIDED on an independent public commission with international observers to examine the maritime incident. Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, in his testimony before the commission declared that the tension with Turkey was Ankara's choice and left the door open for recovery.His surprising decision to cooperate with the UN commission also reflected an interest in maintaining good ties with Turkey.
Turkey for its part decided on a national commission under the coordination of the Prime Minister's Office, with the participation of bureaucrats from the Foreign, Justice, Transportation and Interior ministries for investigating the treatment to which persons in the convoy had been exposed.
No word about its responsibilities in the incident.
Moreover, Turkish prosecutors launched an investigation against top Israeli leaders, which could result in pressing charges of murder and assault on Turkish citizens on the high seas and piracy.
Other negative Turkish moves included a meeting in mid-July between Davutoglu and Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal to discuss efforts to heal the rift between Hamas and Fatah. Hamas claimed the talks also covered Turkish efforts to break the Israeli embargo on Gaza.
Israel's envoy to Turkey has not been invited lately to the annual Iftar dinner hosted by AKP for representatives of the diplomatic corps, an unprecedented hostile diplomatic act.
The Italian daily Corriere della Sera reported that Turkish intelligence personnel and the Iranian Revolutionary Guards have recently signed an agreement to assist Hizbullah by transferring weapons from Iran to Syria and Lebanon through Turkey.
The Turkish Foreign Ministry denied the report.
The Turks were already infuriated by Defense Minister Ehud Barak's claim that the new head of Turkish intelligence, Hakan Fidan, was a friend of Iran and that military information provided to Turkey might be handed over to the Iranians.
The Turkish opposition accused Erdogan of seeking a confrontation with Israel to advance his internal nationalist credentials before the September referendum and planning to advance the scheduled elections of July 2011.
According to the Turkish daily Hürriyet, the Hamas-friendly AKP government cannot afford to give any impression to the public that it accepted anything short of an international inquiry that will ultimately find Israel guilty and unless a settlement is reached which enables both sides to save face matters will continue to get worse.
On September 12, Turkish voters will go to the polls to approve or reject revolutionary constitutional changes proposed by the AKP government, which are intended to consolidate its influence, particularly in the judiciary.
If the AKP wins the referendum and thus continues to tighten its grip on the media, military andjudiciary, it will persevere on the path of Islamization and the shunning of Israel.
A sign in this direction is Turkey's reaction to the latest terrorist attacks in Israel intended to derail the peace negotiations in Washington.
Turkey welcomed the resumption of direct talks between Israel and Palestine and stated that it was important to avoid unilateral acts which would negatively affect the process, but said nothing about the Hamas responsibility for the "heroic" murder of four innocent civilians last week.
The writer is senior research scholar at the International Institute for Counterterrorism and the Institute for Policy and Strategy at the Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya.
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-EdContributors/Article.aspx?id=187194
Gaza Flotilla. Eiland: Gov't unfamiliar with IDF's capabilities
Preoccupied with intelligence.' Maj-Gen (ret.) Eiland
Chief flotilla investigator claims political echelon fails to hold enough operational hearings, preoccupied with intelligence. 'PM, ministers love intelligence, because it involves sexy sources,' he says
Maj-Gen (ret.) Giora Eiland, who headed the investigation into the Gaza-bound flotilla raid, alleged Sunday that the different Israeli governments are not familiar with the IDF's capabilities, adding the number of operational hearings held prior to military operations was too low.
Referring to the decision making process at wartime, Eiland noted that the political echelons were "over-occupied with intelligence.
"The prime ministers and cabinet ministers love to listen to intelligence overviews, because it's interesting and involves sexy sources; but they neglect information pertaining to IDF capabilities," he said.
According to Eiland, who was speaking at a conference hosted by the Institute for National Security Studies, since the withdrawal from Lebanon and until 2006 there was no discussion to determine an operational policy vis-à-vis Lebanon.
"In order to decide on ways of action you need to be familiar with IDF's skills as thoroughly as you are with those of the enemy," he said, adding that the same mistake has been repeating itself since the Yom Kippur War.
"Before the Yom Kippur War there were warning signs of an upcoming war, but the ministers were confident that the Air Force can handle the enemy. If they would have bothered learning what the Air Force can and cannot do, the situation might have been different," Eiland noted
In reference to the flotilla raid, Eiland said, "The deliberations took place five days before the operation. The timing leaves the military only two options stop the flotilla, or don't stop it. If the hearing would have been held three months prior to the flotilla, there would have been more possibilities at hand."
Eiland also criticized the Mossad for completely staying out of the affair.
"The military was dealing with the matter seriously, while the Mossad stayed completely out of it. If it had fully engaged its intelligence and operational skills three months prior to the flotilla, the whole handling of the affair would have been different," he claimed.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3949881,00.html
7 sept 2010
Israel reminded it may lose Turkey
Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu
Turkey renews threat of severing its relations with Israel, should Tel Aviv fail to redeem itself over its bloody attack on a Gaza-bound aid convoy.
On May 31, Israeli commandos stormed Freedom Flotilla, a Turkish-backed relief mission, while it was on its way to the impoverished enclave, which has been deprived of food, fuel and other necessities due to more than three years of an all-out Tel Aviv-imposed siege. The assault in international waters killed nine Turkish human rights activists.
Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said on Sunday that "Israelis have three options: They will either apologize or acknowledge an international-impartial inquiry and its conclusion. Otherwise, our diplomatic ties will be cut off," Turkish daily Hurriyet reported.
The United Nations has launched a probe into the incident. A report by the Israeli website Ynetnews, however, has pointed to Tel Aviv's intentions to prevent the international team from questioning Israelis.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman have, meanwhile, insisted that Tel Aviv will not be apologetic about the attack.
http://www.presstv.com/detail/141517.html
Turkel Committee requests additional information from IDF
The Turkel Committee that is investigating the Navy raid on the Gaza-bound Turkish ship Marmara has requested additional information from the IDF.
A committee official said they have requested the IDF to hand over raw materials used by Maj-Gen (ret.) Giora Eiland, who headed the expert committee that investigated the flotilla raid, as well as additional answers to questions that were not examined during Eiland's investigation."
http://bit.ly/b7K0Ar 7 jul 2011, 00:00 , Respect -
Maria 14 sept 2010
Mossad chief apologizes to Turkel committee for delay
Mossad chief Meir Dagan has finished testifying before the Turkel committee, investigating the IDF flotilla raid in May. His testimony took two hours and was conducted behind closed doors.
The committee announced later that Dagan had apologized for the delay in handing over files necessary for the investigation, and said he had "the utmost respect" for its members.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3953949,00.html
15 sept 2010
Foreign Ministry official: Malaysia considering petitioning Hague over Gaza blockade
Israel is aware of the reports and preparing itself for possible row at the International Court of Justice.
Israel's Foreign Ministry director-general, Yossi Gal, told the Turkel Committee that Malaysia is considering petitioning the International Court of Justice in the Hague over the blockade of Gaza, as reported by Army radio.
Gal made the comment during his testimony to the committee, which is investigating the flotilla incident in late-May where the IDF boarded the Gaza-bound ship, the Mavi Marmara.
According to the director-general, Israel is aware of Malaysia's plans and is "aware of the reports and is preparing itself accordingly."
http://bit.ly/9qplUC
Official: Flotilla could have had happy ending
Gal testifying. 'Naval blockade is right way'
Foreign Ministry Director-General Yossi Gal testifies before Turkel Commission, says Ministry handled deadly raid in 'best possible way'
The Turkish flotilla could have ended differently but Israel is not to blame for its outcome, Foreign Ministry Director-General Yossi Gal said Wednesday.
Testifying before the Turkel Commission probing the IDF raid on the Gaza-bound flotilla, Gal said: "Had the organizers accepted our pleas, the incident would have ended in a positive manner."
The official also expressed his regret over the operation's tragic results. According to Gal, the Foreign Ministry tried to prevent the flotilla from departing via diplomatic means, but when "the violent clash occurred we dealt with the situation in the best possible way."
Gal said that the Ministry's efforts extended to Israel's missions in Ankara, Washington and other world capitals. He noted that once officials learned there were plans for violence onboard, further talks were held with Turkey.
Gal also addressed criticism included in a Foreign Ministry report regarding the exclusion of the Ministry's Policy Planning Bureau from the diplomatic efforts, and said he did not endorse the claims.
"The premise was that any entanglement in the operation would be serious," he said. "The Ministry raised the need to address the flotilla not just as a military operation but as a media one as well before the IDF."
Gal said that the delay in releasing footage to the media stemmed from a need to wait for a clearer picture of affairs and to take operational aspects into consideration.
"Our representatives in the IDF Spokesperson's Unit tried to speed up the arrival of the materials," he said.
Restoring relations with Ankara
The director-general further noted that the flotilla incident bears serious consequences for the relationship between Ankara and Jerusalem, adding that the Ministry is now focused on restoring relations to their proper course.
"It is in Israel's interest to restore relations with Turkey to their proper course. I visited Ankara prior to the flotilla and finalized a road map with my colleagues to improve relations with the Turks, but it didn't pan out," he said.
Gal said Israel is facing a serious de-legitimization campaign led by groups trying to create "humanitarian provocations" in order to compromise the Jewish state's moral image.
"Even today we are unfortunately busy trying to stop future flotillas," he said.
Asked whether the Foreign Ministry has considered alternatives to fighting back the de-legitimization, Gal replied that Israel's willingness to accept all humanitarian equipment and transfer it to Gaza is an obvious alternative, while maintaining the Gaza siege.
"I think that the naval blockade is the right way to go," he said.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3954699,00.html
At Ben-Gurion University, student protests can lead to disciplinary action
Student who organized demonstration for maintenance workers' rights at the campus was brought in for disciplinary hearing, and on Wednesday, several students who protested against Israel's Gaza flotilla raid will be summoned.
Ben-Gurion University of the Negev this week started subjecting students involved in campus protests to disciplinary action, in contravention of its own regulations.
On Tuesday, a student who organized a demonstration for maintenance workers' rights at the Be'er Sheva campus was brought in for a disciplinary hearing, and on Wednesday, several students who protested against Israel's Gaza flotilla raid will be summoned as well. In all, seven students will be disciplined, with penalties as severe as suspension from classes.
Students and faculty criticized the measures, with several law professors volunteering to represent the summoned students. Dr. Dani Filc, head of the Politics and Government Department at BGU, said students shouldn't be turned into "lawbreakers," adding, "We should be glad to have students like these." Filc will represent the students called in on Wednesday.
Sources at the student unions at Tel Aviv University and the Hebrew University of Jerusalem said they couldn't remember any instances of students at their institutions being disciplined for similar matters.
"A student who intends to demonstrate is treated as a lawbreaker even before he actually demonstrates ... The result is real damage to freedom of expression," a source said.
Tuesday saw the disciplinary hearing of Tal Baharav, a student in the Education and Politics and Government departments who led the maintenance workers' fight. That campaign began six months ago, with a rally for which Baharav had received university authorization. But after he took the campaign further by writing a letter of protest to university president Rivka Carmi, he was accused of "violating the terms set for holding the demonstration." Still, Baharav received a relatively light sentence: a warning against engaging in similar activity in the future.
Baharav said after his hearing on Tuesday, "This summons carried a clear message, that students who want to be socially active on campus are under threat, as are their studies."
Boaz Toporovsky, head of the National Union of Israeli Students, has also thrown his weight behind Baharav. Earlier this week he wrote to Carmi describing the Ben-Gurion student as "an activist dedicated to the rights of contract workers. I ask you to reconsider Baharav's behavior in light of all the work he has done for social justice and equality."
A statement from the university read: "Regulations for social and political activity at the university hold that anyone violating them will be called in for a disciplinary hearing, or will be charged in court, depending on the circumstances."
The university added that the students summoned for disciplining "are charged with violating regulations, irrespective of political orientation."
http://bit.ly/avsKOC