The Gaza Flotilla
A few weeks back retired Ambassador Ed Peck sent an email to a couple people, including me. "Friends, I have just been invited to take part in this noble effort," Ed wrote, "a different kind of cruise." Ed likes cruises. Indeed, he takes quite a few of them. Nevertheless, this was different. The last time I saw Ed in person — I'd sat down next to him by accident about ten months ago — he looked in good health and his mind (and humor) were certainly as sharp (and funny) as ever. But I worried. "I hope you've got a life jacket and that you're a good swimmer," I emailed in reply, and said that, if he wanted, I'd be honored to interview him once he got back. Well, news crossed the wires yesterday that Ed, age 81, survived Israel's murderous assault on the flotilla and that Israel is sending him home.
Let me make one other connection than the usual here, a more general observation I haven't seen anybody else make but one which Gen. Colin Powell hinted at ever so subtly the other day.
When foreign governments see that Mr. Obama hasn't got the balls to confront BP — a foreign company (!) — over the most monstrous environmental catastrophe in U.S. history, they draw conclusions. When it's crunch time, this guy folds. So when some cabinet underling, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, whomever, shows up acting tough, saying that they "speak for the President of the United States," their foreign interlocutors will now discount that almost to the point where the only issue is whether the underling has any independent clout. Otherwise, going forward, the ritual invocation of presidential power won't cost anyone in foreign capitals much sleep.
I've no doubt that this was a factor in Israel's attack on the Gaza flotilla. It could become a factor in resolving tensions with North Korea. It's worrisome... And it's worth pointing out.
Posted by George Kenney on June 1, 2010 3:34 AM 
« Census Nonsense | Main | Google Switches »
Comments
Some thoughts on the raid upon the Mavi Marmara:
As well as I can discern, a raid on Mavi Marmara was authorized, but not the raid that took place. Netanyahu, in Canada and scheduled to meet with Obama shortly, would never have authorized the raid that took place with such a visit on his immediate docket, and there are a number of comments from the Israeli defense oversight that this was never supposed to happen. I can only conclude that IDF command "went rogue" either before or during the raid, and went far beyond anything that the Israeli government would ever have allowed.
Mind you, I'm not making any excuses. I am against the Gaza blockade (seige) and have no liking for the Netanyahu government, but I can't believe they could be stupid enough to give a go-ahead for anything like this.
And as for Netanyahu's latest speeches backing it now? What is he supposed to do? Say he lost control of his military? He simply can't do that, at least not publicly.
[The more logical and dispassionate interpretation is that the assault was carried out exactly as planned. See, for example, Robert Fisk, here. g.]
Posted by: Benedict@Large | June 5, 2010 11:05 PM
For me, the most striking feature of the Israeli attack was the complete disregard for the alliance with Turkey.
You have previously covered the deep ties between Turkey and Israel in influence-peddling and intelligence-trading in Washington, but do the events of the last few years suggest to you that while Israel seems more imbedded then ever in the US list of allies, Turkey seems irreperably alienated?
Turkey's alliance with the US/Israel seems to have been based on four main points:
1. common defense against the Soviet threat
2. the promise of future entry into the European Union
3. Zionist support in the US Congress
4. NATO stay-behind militants who could be counted on to kill civilians and destabilize any Turkish government that strayed from a US-centric position.
No. 1 has evaporated. No.2 was always BS. No.3 is less and less meaningful given Israel's role in pushing for war with Iraq, Israeli support for the Iraqi Kurdish factions, and Israeli support for war against Iran (Turkey's likely second most important energy supplier). No.4 was never a "benefit" to Turkey as a whole anyway and just might be in the process of being marginalized given this mysterious Ergenekon affair.
Weapons sales and the attendant kickbacks are not enough to build an alliance on.
On the Turkish side, it seems clear that Israel's value has sunk to next to nothing.
Remember the Uighur-Han riots in Xinjiang? There, despite some tough language at first, Ankara has made substantial efforts to keep the relationship with China going. No such restraint from the Turks seem to be present this time around.
Posted by: JS | June 6, 2010 4:37 PM