RJ. Nice side-swipe smear.

The topic is why Israel's PM apologised for mistakes it made that may have led to the deaths and injuries of Turkish citizens. You brought up how bad Turkey is because of things from a century ago it has not apologised for, and how that made it a bad candidate for being Israel's friend (which didn't bother Israel for most of the past 65 years). It is fine for you to mention Turkish crimes, but you seem to think it unfair to mention Israeli crimes. In the context of the subject, I find that to be more about your 'need' to idealise Israel and defend it as if you were a loyal citizen.

Glad you agree that not all nations are perfect. Having applied your principled objections.to Turkey for ots past and present crimes, will you allow us to turn a lens to Israel, who you seem to begrudge making an apology other than as a bargaining chip?

Danivon:

I find that to be more about your 'need' to idealise Israel and defend it as if you were a loyal citizen.

I'm not at all idealizing Israel. I'm saying that they are "apologizing" (or whatever it is that they have done) for geopolitical or economic reasons. I'm saying they are doing it because of the larger strategic position (Iran/Syria) or because of gas exports now that Cyrpus has hit the skids. That is not idealizing at all. I'm not saying that the Israelis all of a sudden care about the Turks or the Palestinians. You are reading it as idealizing, but the evidence is that if your read what I write, it's the opposite.

You and Ricky (in a much less artful way) keep coming back to the morality of it, as if that's what the Turks care about. I'm disputing that notion that the Turks are moral actors based on Turkish history and current behavior. They have a history of treating minorities terribly, and that continues to this day. They care a lot about the Gazans, but not so much about their own minorities. I think that's about internal Turkish politics. Demonizing Israel and Zionism is good politics.

As to whether Israel should make an apology or not, well, that depends on whether they did something wrong. I don't think they did on the larger principle of the blockade. If there were operational errors, then sure, Netanyahu should apologize for that, and he did. The reality is that the Turkish activists could have avoided the confrontations and would still be alive today if they acted differently. It took two to tango.

As to Ricky bringing up the West Bank, I don't see why we have to have that conversation again. I've already stated my opinion that I'm in favor of a 2-state solution and that I don't agree with Netanyahu or the settlements. On other stuff that's been mentioned, I don't agree, but do we have to go through every action of the Israeli government since its founding to discuss this particular issue?

I never said that the Turkish government was moral. I was responding to your 'friends like these' comment, your mention of the Armenian genocide and the Kurds. Cyprus is somewhat more complex as the 1974 invasion was a response to a military coup led by Greek nationalists associated with the terrorist EOKA-B, and was heavily anti-Turkish, leading to fears that the minority Turks would be endangered. Neither of the entrenched sides in Cyprus come out very well (and neither do the British who held it as a colony from WWI to independence in 1960 and still have military bases there).

The thing is, Turkey and Israel were very friendly. Turkey was the first majority muslim country to recognise Israel in 1949. There have been all kinds of links. For example, during the Dec 2010 Carmel forest fire (note the date is after the Gaza flotilla incident) Turkey and Greece were the first countries to send planes to assist. You mentioned all the crimes of Turkey against others, but it did not stop Israel being friendly enough to sell arms to Turkey up to 2011 (when Turkey suspended contracts). Erdogan was welcomed to Israel in 2005, on a trip designed to build trade and military ties, in which he attacked anti-semitism.

Suddenly you claim Israel has better 'principles' than to have Turkey as a friend because of how it treated/treats minorities? I don't believe that you mean to say that before 2010 Israel was unprincipled.

Even at previous nadirs of Israeli-Turkish relations (1956, 1967, 1980) diplomatic relations were reduced by the Turks in response to Israeli actions (Suez, 6-day War, annexation of East Jerusalem) and Turkey would urge restraint from Arab nations.

Generally Israel and Turkey have had good relations and it is a shame that the past few years has dented that, for the interests of both countries. It would be churlish to suddenly decide history that had been overlooked or unmentioned should now be a.reason to avoid rekindling any friendship.

You want to go back to events before the founding of the Republic of Turkey anyway (formed in 1923, the Armenian genocide took place during the early-mid part of WWI) and make them relevant to the discussion on Israeli-Turkish relations today. What is the difference between that and looking at events from around the time Israel was formed?

Besides, back in 1926 Kemal Ataturk condemned the 'Young Turk' leadership and said they "should have been made to account for the millions of.our Christian subjects who were ruthlessly driven en masses, from their homes and massacred".

Ray Jay wrote:Ricky, if you describe the Israeli government as "insensitive". "bullying", for such a late apology, how would you describe the Turkish government for its treatment of the Armenians during WWI

The current Turkish government had nothing to do with the treatment of the Armenians. There was a revolution in Turkey a few years after the Armenian genocide which included the overthrew the Ottomans and the foundation of a secular republic. The revolution was so complete that it outlawed the previous language (Ottoman) and replaced it with modern Turkish, which is an amazing story if you've never read about it, (and not unlike the adoption of Hebrew in what became Israel.) Blaming the current Turkish government for what happened to the Armenians, to me, is like blaming Soviets for the crimes of the Czars.

Geo, the countries of Turkey and Azerbaijan officially deny the Armenian genocide.
This despite the distance from responsibility that you illustrate.

For comparison: In Germany holocaust denial is a crime...

Maybe the modern Turkish government could justify not apologizing for the events...but to actively work to remove it from the historical record is another thing...

(cross posted with Ricky)

Point taken on the change of Turkish regimes. It is not the current Republic's fault (but that does not preclude them from acknowledging their historical role. West Germany apologized for Hitler's sins even though they were a different regime.)

Danivon, You are misinterpreting my point. You and Ricky are seeing this through a moral lense; I don't think that's the way to understand the recent "apology". I'm telling you that the government of Turkey does not see it through a moral lense. It sees it through a political lense, just like Israel sees it through a political lense. The Turkish PM plays to his constituents, just as other PMs have done during the 60+ year history that you describe.

Danivon:

Suddenly you claim Israel has better 'principles' than to have Turkey as a friend because of how it treated/treats minorities? I don't believe that you mean to say that before 2010 Israel was unprincipled.

No, that's not what I am saying and not what I claimed. My point is that Israel should not lie to curry favor with the Turks. There are long term consequences to claiming guilt that does not exist. They shouldn't apologize if they didn't do anything wrong. They should apologize for what they did do wrong which is related to operational deficiences, and that's what they have done.

I'm saying that given their history, Turkey is full of crap when it calls Zionism a crime against humanity. That being said, I agree that Israel should make friends when it can. However, just because you are unpopular does not mean that you should sacrifice your principles to have good relations. For example, there's no need to make friends with Assad or Iran, as if that was an option.

rickyp wrote:Geo, the countries of Turkey and Azerbaijan officially deny the Armenian genocide.
This despite the distance from responsibility that you illustrate.

For comparison: In Germany holocaust denial is a crime...

Maybe the modern Turkish government could justify not apologizing for the events...but to actively work to remove it from the historical record is another thing...

Yeah, I agree with that. Not sure why they deny the historical record.