Arab support
Erdogan's call was echoed by many Arab leaders.
Saad al-Hariri, Lebanon's prime minister, said the Middle East was suffering under Israel's "criminal and barbaric'' attitude.
"We support Turkey's demands not only about the international investigation, but for Israel to apologise."
Ahmed Aboul Gheit, Egypt's foreign minister, said: "We support Turkey's demand to try those behind these acts."
What does this mean to Israel? So far, no response.
One thing is clear: Nothing was a breeze for Israel about operation "Sea Breeze," the infamous military operation that took place four days ago in front of Gaza's coast.
Nine dead civilians and seven injured Israeli soldiers? Yes and yes. Destroyed reputation and an angry world? You got it. Damaged connections with one of its only Islamic allies? Yep. Hamas gaining more publicity and positive PR? Indeed. So what happened? What were the Israelis thinking when they attacked the Mavi Marmara, seemingly unprovoked, full of peace demonstrators in international waters? What county would do such a thing? No country, including Israel.
The Goal of the Passengers
The flotilla, a formation of six ships loaded with humanitarian supplies, set sail from Cyprus our days ago. Their primary goal was clear, as we can learn directly from their website: "We want to break the siege of Gaza." their secondary goal, as it turns out, was not to deliver the supplies to the needy Palestinians under siege in the city, but to die as martyrs: "as much as they wanted to reach Gaza, the other option [martyrdom] was more desirable.."
(A better video clip, containing an interview with Mavi Marmara passengers, cannot be embedded, but can be found here.)
The people aboard the ships knew what was waiting for them, and sought to provoke a violent reaction from Israel. They were well prepared to fight and die, as evident from several videos just like the above one.
When a ship full of un-inspected cargo and people sails toward an area under naval blockade, it will be stopped before it reaches its destination. This is exactly what happened to the Flotilla. Can you imagine a ship sent from the Middle East toward the US would be allowed to dock in post-9/11 New York City without inspection and military intervention, humanitarian aid or not? Would you trust the kindness of its passengers, if you knew they were sponsored by an organization with ties to global terrorism? Would you even need any excuse at all to justify a military intervention? Probably not. When the Flotilla left Cyprus, the question was not rather or not a military conflict will take place, but when.
Israel Repeatedly Warns the Mavi Marmara
Israel did not just storm the ship without warning. The Flotillas were intercepted after repeated efforts from Israel to stop them peacefully:
As a matter of fact, Al -Jazeera gladly broadcasted how "evil" Israel was preparing for the ships, sending them a clear message that they will be stopped, even before they set sail. Ignoring Israel's pleas and finally threats, The ships continued heading toward Gaza; the passengers made their choice.
The Flotilla was sponsored by the Turkish Insani Yardim Vakfi (The Foundation for Human Rights) [IHH], a terrorist organization through its connections to the “Union of Good,” according to Israel, the US and France (see link below). What was said to be medical supplies, could have been explosives. What was said to be construction materials, could have been pipes used to createmore home-made Qassam rockets, and concrete to reinforce underground smuggling tunnels. The people who said they want to help could have easily joined the Hamas lines and fight Israel as terrorists. As a matter of fact, if to judge from the various evidence here, these passengers would probably enlist themselves happily. Such possibilities are not inventions of a delirious mind. As a matter of fact, most of the aid delivered into the hands of the Hamas under the disguise of "humanitarian aid" is used to sponsor terrorism.
Despite all of this, Israel was willing to allow the humanitarian aid to pass into Gaza. [It should be noted that at the time of this writing, the aid was already delivered to Gaza, and refused by the Hamas, which represents the Palestinians in Gaza.]
Passengers Attack the Israeli Commandos
Israel managed to capture five of the six ships with no use of force and no injuries among passengers or Israeli soldiers. The system Israel chose, intercepting the ships with as little resistance and violance as possible, worked five times out of six: such was the effectiveness of the well-trained Israeli soldiers who did their job quickly, professionally, and as ethically as possible.
But the passengers of Mavi Marmara transformed from peace-keeping humanitarians to a pack of warmongers, and lunched at the Israeli commandos with improvised weapons. Notice no shootings took place until a couple of soldiers have landed; they were under strict orders not to use their guns. Those of you who understand Hebrew can hear the shock and confusion in the radio once the commanders of the operations realized the passengers are shooting at them in the first video:
.
Without provocation from the soldiers, who slid down the ropes with their backup pistols holstered, the blood-thirsty mob grabbed weapons which were prepared as soon as the ship left the harbor in Cyprus. A crowd of frightened pacifists would not have the time to prepare slingshots and gasmasks; they would not have the knowledge to use grenades and guns which were stored safely with the commandos. They would not flail chains, and toss an Israeli solider overboard. But these passengers did.
Even after the first solider was thrown overboard and another severely beatten, the soldiers did not open fire. Fighting against the crowd, they tried to protect their comrades. Only after it was clear the situation is out of control, the soldiers asked for permission to use live ammunition. After they were bitten, hit by metal rods and baseball clubs, and stabbed with knives. They had to fight for their lives, or they would have ended up dead by the hands of the "pacifists" aboard the Mavi Marmara.
Israel had no interest in starting a fight. After all, stoping the flotilla peacefully was in their favor. They only wished to stop and intercept a potentially dangerous cargo, delivered by a dangerous group with known terrorists connections.
As the world condemns Israel for its actions, we should consider: who did truly benefit from this situation? Not Israel with its wounded soldiers and destroyed global reputation. Not the dead “peace” seeking people on top of the Mavi Marmara, unless we consider their martyrdom. Who then? Ask the terrorist organization who is now using the unnecessary death of so-called innocent passengers to provoke the sympathy of people such as yourself.
Israel has filled 20 trucks with cargo from the captured ships, mostly medical supplies, clothes, blankets and toys, but has not been able to take them into the territory, military spokeswoman Avital Leibovitz told reporters.
"Unfortunately at this point the Palestinians are not willing to accept the cargo so the trucks that are loaded are not entering the Gaza Strip," she said.
"Our understanding is that Hamas is actually stopping the entrance of this humanitarian aid," she added.
Hamas is already busy demanding Israel releases all the "peace fighters" (Israel released almost all of them and sent them back to Turkey), among other things that has nothing to do with this incident. The Palestinian people and their aid? They can wait until Hamas is done negotiating.
Russia stays in key points around South Ossetia, creating a buffer zone (brown belt.)
A bigger map of South Ossetia:
Russia started the invasion into Georgia after Georgia attacked South Ossetia, an independence-seeking region of the country after the fall of the USSR. Unlike its own people, the UN never recognized Oessetia's independence.
The media at large commented on Russia's invasion to Georgia; however, the attack on South Ossetia which preceded it is poorly covered by major media outlets. According to several sources, Russia sees Georgia as a tool in the hands of the US administration. To reinforce their statement, they pointing out the fact that 2000 Georgian troops left the Iraqi campaign in order to defend their own country.
In 2002 the Bush administration set up an 18-month, $65m programme aimed at training and equipping Georgia's impoverished army.
The programme was part of America's war on terror and it started after the US confirmed Russian allegations about the presence of Chechen and al-Qaeda fighters in Georgia's Pankisi Gorge, on the border with Chechnya.
Details are still to be announced of the new permanent programme, but analysts say that any sort of US military presence is good news for the Georgian Government, which sees the US engagement as a security guarantee against Georgia's northern neighbor - Russia.
The US has been helping the Georgian army for the last 4 years, and American involvement in the ongoing conflict was to be expected ( from EUCOM):
In the spirit of the NATO Partnership for Peace program, soldiers from the United States, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Ukraine will conduct the joint training exercise IMMEDIATE RESPONSE 2008 at Vaziani Military Base in Georgia beginning July 5, 2008.
The operation took place at the Vaziani Military Base (41.6947 , 45.0467), about 50 miles from the conflict zone. Is it possible that American soldiers who was actively involved in training and supplying Georgian soldiers also fought the Russians? Is it possible that American soldiers have died by the hands of the Russians, or worse, were taken is POWs?
In a speech from the White House library, President Bush claimed responsibility for the failing Iraqi campaign and offered means to deliver victory: 20,000 additional troops into Iraq.
"The situation in Iraq is unacceptable to the American people, and it is unacceptable to me," he said. But unlike most Americans -- those in congress and ordinary citizens -- Bush's solution is to "help the Iraqis carry out their campaign to put down sectarian violence and bring security to the people of Baghdad." In order to do so, "I've committed more than 20,000 additional American troops to Iraq," said the President to millions of viewers worldwide.
In his speech, the President explained the major problem with the old strategy was insurgents returning to cleared villages and neighbourhoods after U.S. forces left. This time, however, "we'll have the force levels we need to hold the areas that have been cleared," said Bush. He also explained that Iraqi Prime Minister, Nouri al-Maliki, will allow U.S. troops to enter neighbourhoods and areas they could not before. The first such neighborhood that comes to mind is Sadr city, formally known as Saddam city, a poor neighborhood in northern Baghdad which serves as a home and base of operations for the Mahdi Army, a powerful Shiite militia lead by Shiite clerk Moqtada al-Sadr.
Perhaps it will work this time around, some say, due to one major difference: Maliki's advisers publicly threatened Sadr in front of the media.
According to Time magazine, "top Maliki adviser Sadiq al-Rikabi criticize Sadr: 'You cannot be in the government and working against the government at the same time. You cannot be a part of the government while breaking the law. If you're going to be a part of the government, you should respect the institutions of the government.' " An AP article on Yahoo news goes even further: "Iraq's prime minister has told Shiite militiamen to surrender their arms or face an all-out assault by U.S.-backed Iraqi forces, senior Iraqi officials said Wednesday," it reads (credit goes to LGF).
Sadr has been Maliki's poppet for a long time. When U.S. forces tried to raid Sadr city, Maliki condemned the attack, arguing the real enemies of the democratic government are Sunni extremists associated with Al-Qaeda. Maliki is a Shiite at the head of an almost exclusively Shiite Iraqi government. He has never previously dared to go against Sadr, a highly-regarded political and religious Shiite figure, even though the Mahdi Army was behind several attacks on U.S. soldiers and carried out many raids against the Sunnis, contributing to the overall sectarian rift in the country.
But the reporters only spoke to Maliki's advisers, not to him directly. And Maliki has learned the rules of the game. While President Bush has proved beyond any doubt that he is a man of his word - for better or for worse - he doesn't seem to realize that his Iraqi counter pendent t is far from it. Maliki could sing a completely different tune in a couple of weeks, when American forces are standing ready to charge into Sadr city.
Sadr is rooted well within the Iraqi government, as Rikabi claimed. His Shiite Militia has many followers, all of who would like to see a Shiite country come into being, with the Sunnis having no part in it.
Struggling with a worsening economic situation, Syria finally gets a break: The Iraqi Study Group (ISG) report helped put "banned" Syria back on the Western diplomatic map, allowing it to talk to the U.S. and other Western powers present in the Middle East.
Senator Bill Nelson of Florida met with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in Damascus, defying the Bush Administration policy. President Bush officially signed Executive Order 13338 in March 2004, a doctrine which restricts financial and diplomatic connections with the country.
An article from the Syrian Tishreen, a Syrian-government newspaper and a mouthpiece for President Assad, reports that the Syrian leader met with Nelson and discussed ways of "scheduling [timely] withdrawal from Iraq and preserving its unity." Discussions also included the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the accumulating Lebanese crisis. An article from the Israeli newspaper Haaretz quotes Senator Nelson saying "Assad 'clearly indicated a willingness to cooperate' in controlling its border with Iraq." The article also brings forth the controversy between Syria's willingness to help now with Iraq, whereas it was highly critical of the invasion in 2003.
However, The U.S. Administration remains doubtful and suspicious of Assad's willingness to help. White House Press Secretary Tony Snow told the media "We've talked to Syria. We have diplomatic relations with Syria. I think it's a real stretch to think the Syrians don't know where we stand or what we think. It's not as if there's been failure to communicate. The communication has been crystal clear."
And the Administration has been doing more than just hinting that Syria's regime is not a trustworthy partner in the new post-Saddam Middle East. Time Magazine claimed that "The Bush Administration has been quietly nurturing individuals and parties opposed to the Syrian government in an effort to undermine the regime of President Bashar Assad," on December 19. The article reported that "part of the effort would be run through a foundation operated by Amar Abdulhamid, a Washington-based member of a Syrian umbrella opposition group known as the National Salvation Front (NSF)." This report created echo in the Middle-Eastern Bloggers' community, mainly due to the fact that Amar Abduhlamid is a blogger himself. (in a response to the Time's article, Syrian blogger Abdulhamid claims that while he would "really like to see our illustrious regime overthrown and reconciled to the dustbin of history (to borrow a term that is so dear to the hearts of regime spokesmen), news of my involvement in such “sinister” plot come as news to me as well. I was never aware of that fact that I was that creative.")
Syria had been ruled by the Assad family since 1970, when Hafez al-Assad took control of the country by force during a military coup. Bashar al-Assad, his son, took his place as the head of state in the year 2000. Syria's Alawite leadership represents about 10 percent of the population (According to the CIA Factbook , Syria's Alwites, Druze and other minor Muslim sects together represent about 16 percent of the country's total population), while the majority Sunnis make about 75 percent of the population of the country. Syria's economy is highly dependent on agriculture and oil. According to theWold Bank Website, "Syria’s GDP is highly dependent on the oil and agriculture sectors, both subject to uncertainties due to changes in oil prices and rain dependency respectively. The oil sector provides half of the government’s revenues and about two thirds of its export receipts. The agriculture sector, for its part, contributes to about 30 percent of GDP and employment." It also predicts oil reserves in the country are going to deplete in 10 to 15 years.
In an interview for this blog, Dr. Ely Karmon of the Israeli Institute of Counter-Terrorism in Israel explained that the Syrians are mimicking Iran by negotiating with the West - they would say one thing at the table and then a completely different version to their own people and militant allies, like the Hezbollah.
Another point of interest for Syria, according to Karmon, is Iranian nuclear race: Syria and Iran already have a strong diplomatic (and military) connection; if Iran succeeds with its nuclear plans, Syria will follow suit, using Iran as their excuse. The Counterterrorism blog has more information about Syria's nuclear status: "new reports show that Damascus is up to no good. Indeed, while world attention is rightly focused on the nuclear capabilities of Iran and North Korea, Syria has been quietly — but quickly — advancing its own secret nuclear program," writes Olivier Guitta, one of the blog's contributors.
Regarding the Syrian heating situation with Israel, Karmon explains that what really interests the Syrians is their control of Lebanon. They are not really worried about Israel attacking them: "The Syrians know that Israel and the U.S. are worried that if the [Syrian] government will collapse, a new and more radical leadership will emerge," he explained, contradicting the logic behind the plot discussed above. An article from a certain Lebanese news-site (unfortunately, the link is lost) reviled that Lebanese authorities and military recently found weapons and explosives in a Syrian-loyal political party center in Southern Lebanon, further proving the existence of Syrian influence in the country.
Media reports from Israel suggest a coming war with Syria as early as next summer. The Syrians have been watching the June war in Lebanon carefully and learned an important lesson, a similar to the one Americans learned in Iraq. An article in the Jerusalem Post affirms just how literally the Syrians have taken the "Hezbollah way": "villages recently built by Syria along the border are planned to be used as "death traps" for IDF troops in Hizbullah-inspired attacks. Since this summer's war in Lebanon, Syria... has invested large amounts of money in replicating Hizbullah military tactics, particularly in establishing additional commando units and fortifying its short- and long-range missile array."
In a speech from the White House library, President Bush claimed responsibility for the failing Iraqi campaign and offered means to deliver victory: 20,000 additional troops into Iraq.
Senator Bill Nelson of Florida met with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in Damascus, defying the Bush Administration policy. President Bush officially signed Executive Order 13338 in March 2004, a doctrine which restricts financial and diplomatic connections with the country.
