A debate has emerged in the wake of Sunday’s tragic border killings, turning on the question of whether  the commemoration of Nakba Day (which led to a fence breach in the Golan Heights [check the video out here] and at least ten people killed in Southern Lebanon) was orchestrated by the Assad regime and its allies in order to draw attention away from the protests in Syria.

That was more or less the gist of the Western press’s coverage of the event, as summed up by Radwan Ziadeh in this NYT piece by Anthony Shadid, but many Israeli commentators are wondering whether this isn’t actually a sign that the fervor of the Arab Spring has reached Palestine.

I’d recommend reading the following bits of commentary:

  • Andrew Exum weighs in here, here, and here.
  • Sean, at The Human Province, was actually in South Lebanon on Sunday and witnessed the demonstration firsthand. He takes Andrew to task in a well-reasoned essay here.
  • Not on the subject of Nakba Day, Sami Moubayed argues that Syria should ratchet up its diplomatic efforts to re-ingratiate itself with Turkey and France by playing nice in Lebanon and fast-tracking reforms. (Too little, too late?)

I have to admit that my first reaction to the events was, like Exum’s, a cynical one. However, based on what Sean and others have said about their experiences on Sunday, it does look like the high turnout was much more the product of a genuine swelling of popular sentiment and political participation in the wake of the various regional revolts, rather than a carefully hatched plan by Damascus, Hizbullah, and Hamas.

On the other hand, who couldn’t help but notice the sad juxtaposition of the two marches scheduled for last Sunday in Beirut? A few hundred people marched in support of secularism and brandished some cute slogans, while thousands made the trek down to the border with Israel and braved bullets to commemorate a decades-old struggle.

A friend of mine regularly chides me for imagining that any of Lebanon’s problems will ever be solved before the Arab-Israeli conflict is settled. On days like yesterday, I think he’s probably right.

wordpress stats

The following commentary was sent to me by a good friend and smart observer of regional politics. He comments occasionally at QN under the moniker “J of Chalcedon”…

**

Here are five thoughts on the flotilla debacle, its gifts to Tayyip Erdogan, and Turkey’s ambitions for regional and international influence…

1) It allows him to take credit for something the Israelis will have forced on themselves, if the blockade is lifted, and to play the role of the world’s slumbering conscience if it isn’t. And since the relevant context is outrage over the deaths of Turks, it allows an opportunity to…

2) Tie a knot in the tongue of what is supposed to be a revitalized political opposition. The Israeli raid came hours after an attack that killed six Turkish troops; ordinarily this would have been the moment to lambast the government for a failed Kurdish peace initiative that has stalled and given way to renewed fighting. Instead,  they’re cheering the decision to pull the ambassador from Tel Aviv and speculating in wooliest fashion about the timing of the two events. When you reduce the opposition to tracing your steps around the flag and muttering about conspiracy, you effectively have no opposition.

3) Soft power among leaderless Arabs? Make mine a double. Egypt’s decision to open the border, at least temporarily, only highlights embarrassing complicity in the blockade to begin with. And the position of the other Arab powers – silence, or cheerleading while Turkey pounds podiums in the Security Council – is little better. By one account, the ship in question was Istanbul municipal scrap, sold to an Islamist NGO and flagged to the Comoros. That it could be the vessel of Arab diplomatic ambition is the saddest, and most apt, measure of the those states’ ability to make any case other than the one for their disarray.

4) Turkey doesn’t get many chances to be righteously peeved on the big stage. The things that  inspire the greatest indignation in the foreign ministry – think Kurds and PKK – tend to look self-inflicted to the rest of the world. How this one plays out will be interesting.

5) … And yet, there may be room for Turkey to transform itself from victim to villain. See Erdoğan’s remarks yesterday on the local implications of the crisis (don’t have English handy, but here’s a quick and dirty translation of an interesting bit):

“Let me say this openly and clearly: I’m not emotional; we’re not emotional. But it’s impossible to describe a humanity that’s bereft of emotion in the face of these events. It’s all a matter of managing emotions, and I believe we’ll do that successfully.

Regarding all our citizens, and particularly our Jewish citizens living in our country, I’d like to say this: they’re our citizens. We’ve never, up to now, gone and taken Israel’s approach toward our own citizens, whatever their religion or ethnicity, and we’re not going to. They’ve been entrusted to us. I want my people to act even more sensitively on this point. I want our people to know that, in the framework of their sensitivities, as a state we are and will be following up on every aspect of this incident. I believe care will be taken to show democratic reactions with dignity and self-possession in a manner befitting our nation. And that’s their most natural right. I  respect that.”

As far as I know, no one had suggested that the AKP’s appeal to the bleacher seats of Muslim sensibility over the boat crisis would translate into a backlash against Turkish Jews. And it’s not clear how reassuring they – given Erdogan’s remarks about Jews being guests (i.e., foreigners) in Turkey at the time of Israel’s destruction of Gaza and the Davos tussle – are supposed to find this guarantee.

It does point out, though, the way that the AKP flirts – self-consciously – with the uglier strands of domestic sentiment while pressing its case for a broader Turkish international role. It’s hardly a new tack in national politics, and their handling of the US-brokered bid to bury the Armenian genocide question by normalizing relations with Armenia is exactly what any other Turkish government would have done. What remains to be seen is how they’ll balance that set of impulses with the rare opportunity to advance the flag on an international issue, from the unmapped territory of the moral high ground.

Bookmark and Share

wordpress stats

The news out of Gaza is being covered by plenty of other able bloggers and analysts (like Steve Walt, Issandr El Amrani, Gideon Levy, and my buddy Sean over at the Human Province), so I won’t rehash what everyone’s already said except to make this very cynical point: high-visibility non-violent protests pack a disproportionately heavy punch in this age of 24 hour news, Twitter feeds, and live-streaming video.

Oops, Helena Cobban already said that. But no matter. The point is that this tragic incident is doing more to put the plight of ordinary Gazans back on the front page than any kind of military operation undertaken by Hamas. And speaking of Hamas, they’ve chosen the right moment to show their cuddly side. Khaled Meshaal recently told Charlie Rose (again) that his organization would end its resistance towards Israel if a two-state solution were adopted on the basis of the 1967 borders. Two days later, the IDF killed a bunch of humanitarian workers.

What’s the next step? Syria has called for an emergency meeting of the Arab League, and both Bashar al-Assad and Saad al-Hariri have warned that the flotilla killings could lead to a regional war. Maybe this is a naive reading, but it strikes me that beating the war drums is the wrong move. Instead of threatening to launch another intifada, why not actually launch an aid flotilla that is ten times the size of the one that was assaulted? The humanitarian non-violent strategy has clearly proved to be the winning one, so why not press it?

Your thoughts?

Bookmark and Share

wordpress stats

palestine-archipelago-loresStrange Maps has a hi-res version of the brilliant aquatic visual metaphor of West Bank ghettoization. Read the introduction there, as well as Helena Cobban‘s useful commentary.

Apparently, the response of pro-Israel pundits to this map is that it is anti-Semitic because it implicitly suggests that the Jews should be driven into the sea. (Yawn…)

Strange Maps reports: “Even though this map of L’archipel de Palestine orientale (‘The Archipelago of Eastern Palestine’) is set in the same area and uses a similar theme, the cartographer behind it refutes any allegation that it is meant to reflect the same Biblical dry = good, wet = bad analogy. “The map is not about ‘drowning’ or ‘flooding’ the Israeli population, nor dividing territories along ethnic lines, even less a suggestion of how to resolve the conflict,” gasps Julien Bousac, the Frenchman who created this map.”

I was going to conclude with a remark about the impact of global/regional ‘warming’ on the continuing archipelagization of the West Bank but it occurs to me that I’m probably the 1,948,000th person to make that connection.

wordpress stats

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 120 other followers