Vote For Me, I Am Much Better Qualified Than Hillary Clinton

Hillary Clinton will formerly announce her candidacy for President today and after reading the build-up and the hype about her campaign and what she will focus on I came to the realization that I am just as qualified as Ms. Clinton to be President. So I will also announce my candidacy to be the 45th President of the United States.

The Glass Ceiling: A big part of Hillary's appeal is that she would be the first female President of the United States (and she would be).  But there also hasn't been a Jewish President, a Latino President, a Muslim President, an Asian President, et al. Should I be elected I would be the first Jewish President, breaking though a different glass ceiling.

The Middle Class: Apparently along with her lady-parts Hillary will be following Obama's 2012 strategy of improving the lives of the middle class and expanding opportunities for working families.  Ms. Clinton recently wrote that she hadn't driven a car in over a dozen years.  What the heck does she know about the middle class?  She was waited on hand and foot when she was first lady. And remember when she whined how broke she was when her husbands presidency was over? That was for about five minutes until she signed a multimillion dollar book deal...the woman is loaded.  And for the past year or so she had been adding to her wealth by giving speeches for $200k-$300k a pop.

Now I know all about the middle class, I have been busting my butt to make a living so my children can have a better life than me.  My wife a CPA has been working even harder especially during tax season.  I do sometimes use a car service when going to the airport, but besides those occasions I am behind the wheel driving myself somewhere or shlepping my kids around.  I live the life of a middle class working stiff and know what we need...lower taxes.. making it easier for companies to create jobs...the opportunity to make my own medical decisions instead of Obamacare.  And while not a top priority, if I were elected president I would get rid of the supposed ecology friendly laws that created toilet bowls that can't flush and light bulbs that take a week to get bright, and even then aren't bright enough.

I have never gotten a book deal for a few million dollars, however sometimes generous readers hit the tip jar because I work hard to tell the truth.  To be honest I will admit getting paid for making speeches, but generally the payments are in food...mostly bagels and coffee, never the $200k-$300k a pop that Hillary gets.

Foreign Policy: Face it, Hillary Clinton's only achievement as Secretary of State was to break an agreement between the US and Israel, making settlements an issue which delayed any Israeli Palestinian talks for years.  What else did she do?  There was the reset button with Russia which was not only mistranslated into Russian (she used the Russian word for overcharge not reset),  but for the last six years (four of them she was Secretary of State) the Russians have been taking advantage of a weak US foreign policy.  Under Hillary's tenure ISIS began, terrorism grew and lets not forget Benghazi where she lied and blamed things on a anti-Islam video.  She mismanaged the Arab spring forcing the Egyptian President out of office and ignoring the green revolution in Iran.  And don't forget the problems between Israel and Obama began under her tenure. That's because with the possible exception of the time from her first campaign  for a New York’s Senate seat in 2000 to her resignation from the Senate to become Secretary of State in January 2009-- except for the time she needed New York’s Jewish voting bloc, Hillary Clinton has never been pro-Israel.

As for me, I don't believe in rushing into war, but like Ronald Reagan I believe in peace through strength.  The United States should not nation build, but neither should we allow ourselves to be pushed around either.  We must destroy terrorist entities and we should be putting real sanctions on Russia.  I believe Israel is an ally and Iran is not, we should treat all of our allies better than our enemies. In fact to repair our relationship with the only democracy in the middle east, my first trip as President will be to Israel (as long as the feed me some good Kosher food). I will never support an Islamist revolution against one of our friends like Hillary did with Egypt.

Trustworthiness: Hillary has been chased by scandal her entire public life, most recently her emails and donations to the Clinton Foundation.  While I have erased plenty of emails its only because I work with public email accounts with volume limits. Should I be elected I promise to use the government's server for government work and limit my private emails to a secure private account on a government server. At the end of my term as the law requires all my emails will be reviewed to determine which get archived by the government.  As far as my wife's business, if elected she will sell her CPA practice so I can put her in charge of finding things in the budget that can be cut.  You should see her when the credit card bill comes...Jeff why did you buy this do we really need it? Did you check out competitors to get the best price...You give her the federal budget and the power to ask questions, I guarantee a balanced budget in four years.

Now please understand, while I do believe I am just as qualified as Ms. Clinton to be president, the majority of Republicans who are considering a presidential run are much better qualified than I am, and thus much better qualified than Hillary.  But in a race between the former Secretary of State and this blogger there is no contest, I am better qualified than Hillary Clinton.

The Scum Attacking Steven Sotloff As A Terrorist Sympathizer

In an era of a great political divide in America; even the most passionate ideologues on either extreme of the political spectrum were horrified at recent murders of James Foley and Steve Sotloff by the ISIS terrorists. There were some however who chose to use the death of Steve Sotloff to spin repulsive false narratives about Sotloff, contending that he deserved his fate because he was a terrorist sympathizer.

The name Charles C. Johnson has been in the news a lot in recent months. This Charles Johnson is not the one behind Little Green Footballs. This Johnson is the one who broke a bribery scandal about Thad Cochran's reelection campaign, a scandal proven to be false by Dave Weigel. Johnson also tried to get the juvenile record of Ferguson Missouri's Michael Brown released because he contended a cop told him the youth was involved in a second degree murder case, a charge also proven false. That claim was purely to slander Brown because if Officer Wilson is charged it would have no bearing on whether or not the shooting was justified.

Tuesday evening Johnson tried to use some old Sotloff tweets to prove that this dual U.S./Israeli citizen who faked illness to observe Yom Kippur while imprisoned by ISIS was a terrorist sympathizer.

Sotloff embedded himself with the Free Syrian Army (FSA), which at the time was the leading force battling Syrian president Assad. The Free Syrian Army was not a group of angels; they were a barbaric army who preferred to kill rather than capture the opponents and were comprised of both moderate forces and terrorist elements. In July 2014, eleven months after Sotloff was captured some of the FSA factions went to fight for ISIS. Johnson used that defection as evidence the murdered journalist was a terrorist sympathizer.

Another example of Sotloff's supposed terrorist sympathy was that he mourned the deaths of people he knew in the FSA

My friend Munthir Hussain was killed 2 days ago in #Al-Sakhoor #Aleppo . Don't 4get people in Syria--on both side--have names.
— Steven Sotloff (@stevensotloff) October 7, 2012

This tweet and others like this Johnson referred to do not indicate that Sotloff was a terrorist, but that he was a sensitive human who mourned the death of other humans. I don't know if Munthir Hussain was a terrorist, but Johnson's criticism of the above reminds me of the story of the splitting of the Reed Sea in the bible. When the Jewish people saw that the sea had destroyed Pharaoh’s army they celebrated their deaths. God said to them do not celebrate, Pharaoh's people are also my children. To be honest I forget that when people who are extremely evil are killed (bin Laden for example). However there is no indication that Sotloff's friend Hussain has done anything which could classify him as being in the bin Laden category (or even being a terrorist)

Johnson's also contended that because Sotloff's reporting had progressive leanings he must have jumped to the other side. If progressive leanings meant one had become a terrorist most of the mainstream media and half of Congress would be on the terrorist watch list, an interesting albeit dishonest idea.

Bare Naked Islam is another example (I won't link to their article because they also chose to post a picture of Sotloff's dead body/severed head).

Their article began

REAP WHAT YOU SOW: Steven Sotloff, Jewish grandson of Holocaust survivors with American-Israeli citizenship, held a “deep love for Islam”

Leftist Jew gets in bed with the mortal enemy of the Jews and suffers the consequences. Steven Sotloff spoke fluent Arabic and showed a deep love for the Islamic world, even while living in Israel. He is reported to have supported Hamas and the Syrian jihadist rebels before he was captured by ISIS militants in Syria in 2013 and beheaded by them yesterday.

The author posted a news story about Sotloff's life in Israel which said, in part, "he was apparently not a fan of the Israeli government's hardline approach to Palestine," which is true but it doesn't make him a friend of terrorists as the quoted article also states

‘Like most of us, he came here and he became very critical of the government,’ said Hillary Lynne Glaser, who studied conflict resolution, international relations and counter-terrorism with Sotloff. ‘I’m not so sure it was about the Israeli-Arab conflict, I think it was more how they treat their own people. But he still came back to visit,’ she said. ‘He didn’t hate it enough to not come visit,’ she said. ‘He still considered it his home.’

Much of Israel is critical of the Netanyahu government.  In the last election Bibi's party got around 25% of the vote.  As the old saying goes if you have two Jews you have four opinions. If they had done any research the author would have realized that there has never been an Israeli government that earned a majority of seats in the Knesset (parliament). Again if being a critic of the government believing it was to hardline in its approach to Palestine (a fact that I disagree with) made one a Hamas sympathizer the majority of Israeli's would fall into that category.

Other "evidence" used was that Sotloff learned Arabic (which is taught in all Israeli schools along with Hebrew and English). Think about that stupid charge for a moment. The guy lived in Israel and was a reporter primarily covering the Middle East. He wouldn't be a very good reporter if he didn't know Arabic.

The post also criticized the murdered reporter for being ‘committed to the Arab Spring and very respectful of Islamic culture’. Many Americans believed the Arab Spring was a chance for people living under tyranny to throw of the yoke of their oppression. Again I did not agree with that stance but I certainly can understand it. Islamic culture (as opposed to the Islamist culture of death)  is a tradition rich in the arts, medicine, astronomy etc. And while one can argue that the Muslim who invented Algebra should have been thrown in jail, a respect of the Islamic culture is not a indication of terrorist sympathy. In fact terrorist groups such as Hamas and ISIS suppress culture and the arts.

I am not a huge fan of most liberal reporters, but this is not an issue of politics it is an issue of decency. Everything I have read about Steven Sotloff showed him to be a sensitive guy, who cared about people, and someone who cared about Israel and his faith. There is nothing, nothing demonstrating that he had any allegiance to terrorist entities. Certainly there was nothing in the two reports above.

Some will criticize Johnson and Bare Naked Islam but use them as examples of the "wacko far right." In fact my friend Tommy Christopher (yes I pick friends based on what is in their hearts rather not what is in their politics)....my friend Tommy Christopher in the Daily Banter about these and other attacks on Sotloff:

These people obviously don’t represent the views of most conservatives, but just as the immigration crisis revealed the sort of intolerant hate that modern conservatism attracts and tolerates, these folks represent a teeming, writhing ecosystem underneath the same rock.

I strongly disagree with Tommy on this point, I believe that both sides have creeps and these and other examples he writes about are beyond the extreme fringes of the right side of the blogisphere. Let's face it...we have them but the left has them too. 

I have been told that Charles C. Johnson used to be legitimate. His book about the leadership of Calvin Coolidge has been recommended to me more than once. But somewhere sometime Johnson must have taken some bad acid. Today he is more of a 'click-whore" posting unsubstantiated stories just to generate traffic and press.

Most bloggers are true citizen journalists--if they are working on a story which could damage someone's career or reputation they make dammed sure it is correct, develop multiple sources before posting. Scandals do get traffic but false scandals are hurtful and destroy the entire argument behind citizen journalism. It is people like Johnson who damage the reputation of real citizen journalists and bloggers.

I never got to met Steven Sotloff however based on the research done since he appeared in the Jim Foley execution video, he seems like someone I would have loved to argue politics with over a Shabbos dinner.

May God comfort his family and loved ones, may his soul rest in peace and as we near the season for atonement may those who slander his memory realize the error of their ways.  They cannot soil the memory of a good man, but in the end they will face their slander on judgment day.

Prince Charles' Climate Stupidity!

Its easy to feel bad for Britain's Prince Charles, after all the guy's main purpose in life is to wait for his mum to die so he can take over her Job.  Even there he has recently compared that possibility of ascending the throne a prison. Charlie has spend his life looking for his "special purpose."

Remember the revelation in 1993 that he was so lost, looking so hard for a purpose in life that he offered to work as his girlfriend's trousers, or even her tampon. If that doesn't show a lost soul looking for a purpose, what does?

Since then Prince Tampon Wannabe has been concentrating on the earth's environment, still wanting to find a purpose, Prince Charles runs around the world blaming everything on mans inability to protect the environment. His latest claim failure to manage Earth's natural resources was a major hidden contributor to the Syrian crisis.

Speaking at the Islamic Economic Forum Prince Charles said:

"The tragic conflict in Syria provides a terrifyingly graphic example, where a severe drought for the last seven years has decimated Syria's rural economy," he said.

"Driving many farmers off their fields and into cities where, already, food was in short supply.

"This depletion of natural capital, inexplicably, little reported in the media, was a significant contributor to the social tension that exploded with such desperate results."

He said Islamic banking, or alternative banking, could provide the answers where conventional" banking could not, given Islam's emphasis on the "moral economy".

Perhaps the Prince never heard of the battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims. Because the Syrian revolution, which broke out in February 2011 as a democratic mass revolt against the dictatorship after the Arab spring, has now turned into a power struggle between the  Shias and Sunnis.

On one side the Shia front allied with Bashar Al Assad’s Regime, Iran, and Hezbollah with Russian Support and the Sunni Front consists of Free Syrian Army (FSA), Al Nusra Front, Islamist rebel groups including the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, and Hamas and is supported from Sunni-dominated regimes of Saudi Arabia, Turkey and the parts of the west.


The Sunni-Shia conflict has been going on since the  death of the Muslim Prophet Mohammad in 632 C.E. Shia followed Ali, Mohammad’s son-in-law and Sunni went behind Abu Bakr, Father of Mohammad wife Aisha. Therefore the roots of the Syrian "civil" war goes back approximately 1,400 years...long before the Prince's nemesis, industrialization and its effect on the environment.

Perhaps the Prince should stick to tampons, because his history and current events knowledge is really lousy.

How Obama's Policy Betrays the Muslim Moderates

By Barry Rubin

In 1848, the new Communist movement issued a manifesto. It began with the opening line:
“A specter is haunting Europe—the specter of Communism.”

For our purposes today, this threat might be reworded as:
“A specter is haunting the Middle East—the specter of America."

For example, about a year ago Dubai’s police chief addressed a major international Gulf Arab security conference. He said that there were about three dozen security threats to the Gulf Arab countries. But this well-respected security expert said the number-one threat was the United States.

Since that time, this American specter has become vivid. For instance, The New York Times had a recent editorial which stated that the only protection for Egypt’s democracy--meaning Muslim Brotherhood participation in the next Egyptian government--was the United States and Europe. The Egyptian regime, Israel, and Saudi Arabia and the Gulf Arab states were bad for wanting to protect their societies from Islamic ideology, revolution, and anti-Western Sharia states!

Might the United States and its allies rather be expected to battle Turkey, Iran, Hamas, Hizballah, Tunisia, Bahrain, and Hamas or might it otherwise support Islamists while Saudi Arabia fought Europe’s and America’s response as too soft on Hizballah?

But what if a crazy notion seizes policymakers, blessed with the mush of ignorance about the Middle East, that they can take control of the troublemakers? Perhaps Germany (World War One and Two jihads), or the Soviet control of radical nationalist regimes in the 1950s and 1960, or the French rescue of the Palestinian leadership in the late 1940s, or Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in Iran during the 1970s, or America in the 1950s (Arab nationalism), or the 2010 Muslim Brotherhood would turn nominal extremists into friends?

Imagine, dunderheads in Washington, London, Paris, and so on thinking they are masterfully preserving stability, making peace, and harnessing Sharia in the cause of boosting democracy!

How smug would be the smiles when those who perpetrated September 11, 2001, were supposedly defeated by those mentored into power a decade later by the West in Benghazi on September 11, 2012, or in the Arab Spring or the Syrian revolution!

Look at it through the eyes of the Arabs, Iranians, Turks, Kurds, and Israelis who think they will try to impose a new order in the region.

Consider a famous speech by Winston Churchill at Fulton, Missouri, on March 5, 1946. In contrast to the Communist Manifesto,100 years later, Churchill began, “From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic, an Iron Curtain is descended across the continent.” It might be strange that to compare these two statements to the current situation in the Middle East. But such a comparison actually makes sense.

The intention of great powers seemed to impose one (European) system on the region. In the first case, it was Communism. In Churchill’s case, it was anti-Communism he advocated, which in parallel would be Anti-Islamism.

But today, what is the system that Arabs, Iranians, Turks, and Israelis think they will try to impose on the region? The answer for those who have been watching in recent years is revolutionary Islamism.

It might seem strange that this is the thinking, but it isn’t. The question is whether there is a system that Western Europeans want to impose on the Middle East to ensure its hegemony; and the answer that the Arabs, Persians, and Turks usually give today--although this does not mean it has to be true--is Islamism. The Islamists themselves view Western policy, however, of as a sign of their own victory and of Western fear and weakness.

Incidentally, Churchill's title was "the Sinews of Strength," and he favored a policy of leading a coalition of the Free World, which would be welcome today.

To summarize, in the 1930s, Churchill favored anti-fascism and advocated a united front against Nazi Germany. After World War Two, he supported an alliance of the Free World against the Iron Curtain.

Where is the Churchill of today?

Well, his bust was quickly chucked from the White House because he was the symbol for Obama of Western colonialism.

Who was the genuine symbol of anti-colonialism for Obama? The left wing anti-Western revolutionary ideological movement represented by the Muslim Brotherhood or Chavez, and other demagogues.

If you favor Islamism--a U.S.-sponsored movement except for the extremists of al-Qaida--you cannot be accused of Islamophobia. Not liberals or real pro-democrats or conservative traditionalists or nationalists or communal nationalists, but Islamists.

That also means that non-Islamists can also be the enemy in Western eyes. Moderates are actually less desirable friends to terrorists and extremists. The West seems to view its three main threats as Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Israel; its three main friends as Turkey, the Muslim Brotherhood, and the Syrian Islamist rebels.

Consider this: In Egypt, Tunisia, Syria, Turkey, and other countries, Western powers and especially America were seen to be behind Islamist governments. And in the Gaza Strip, Lebanon, and even Iran, they were portrayed in this way with perhaps somewhat less justice. But here is the bottom line: The overwhelming majority of Arab governments and the Turkish-Iranian democratic opposition had many reasons to think that the Western countries, and especially the United States, were actually supporting their Islamist foes. In 2013, that view became even more accurate.

It should be understood in the current regional picture that the Western world, and especially the Obama Administration, have taken the Islamists’ side in the battle between these forces.

---------------------
We need your support. To make a tax-deductible donation to the GLORIA Center by PayPal or credit card: click Donate button: http://www.rubinreports.blogspot.com. Checks: "American Friends of IDC.” “For GLORIA Center” on memo line. Mail: American Friends of IDC, 116 East 16th St., 11th Fl., NY, NY 10003.
------------------------
Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. His latest book, Israel: An Introduction, has just been published by Yale University Press. Other recent books include The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley), and The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). The website of the GLORIA Center and of his blog, Rubin Reports. His original articles are published at PJMedia.    

Hundreds of Thousands of Egyptians Tell Morsi: GET OUT!!

Two Hundred thousand in Cairo....thousands in other cities, all across  Egypt citizens are flooding the streets on the first anniversary of President Mohammed Morsi's inauguration, to demand that the president resign and call for an early presidential election.

Tahrir Square which housed the demonstrations that ousted Hosno Mubarak saw a crowd of more than 200,000:

"Amid a sea of national flags, a festive atmosphere reigned supreme for the most part of the day, with chants of "Irhal!"— Arabic for "Leave!" — urging the president to relinquish his post. The numbers are expected to swell further into Monday.The people want the fall of the regime!" they shouted, echoing the Arab Spring rallying cry that brought down Mubarak - this time yelling it not against an ageing dictator but against the first elected leader in Egypt's 5,000-year recorded history.

Organizers called on demonstrators to continue to occupy central squares in every city until Mursi quits. The Tahrir Square crowd roared with approval as an army helicopter hovering overhead dropped Egyptian flags on the protesters.

A military source said the move was intended to promote patriotism and was not a gesture of political support.

Many demonstrators bellowed their anger at the Brotherhood, which they accuse of hijacking the revolution and using electoral victories to monopolize power and impose Islamic law.

"I want my country back," said Dua Badrawy, who came to the square from Giza, a neighborhood that is home to Egypt's most prized pyramids. "We are all Egyptians, and we want a real democracy."

Protests are being held all across Egypt:

• In Alexandria, the second-biggest city, thousands of protesters gathered for a march to the central Sidi Gaber area, BBC Arabic's Rami Gabr report.A Reuters journalist said hundreds of thousands of anti-government protesters marched through the Mediterranean port of Alexandria, Egypt's second city, and a military source reported protests in at least 20 towns around the country.
  

• A big stage has been erected in the main square of the Suez Canal city of Port Said, and protesters are checking the identities of those going in and out of the square, BBC Arabic's Attia Nabil reports

• Rallies were also expected in Suez, Monofia and Sharqiya - the birthplace of President Morsi.

 Interviewed by the British paper The Guardian , Mursi voiced his resolve to ride out what he sees as an undemocratic attack on his electoral legitimacy. He offered to revise the Islamist-inspired constitution, saying clauses on religious authority, which fuelled liberal resentment, were not his choice. He made a similar offer last week, after the head of the army issued a strong call for politicians to compromise. But the opposition dismissed it as too little to late. They hope Mursi will resign in the face of large numbers on the streets.

The military, for its part, was not taking any chances. Helicopter gunships were hovering around parts of the capital Cairo, while tanks and soldiers maintained a visible presence. Security was ramped up around the Suez Canal, one of the world's busiest waterways. Army officials have made it clear they would intervene if violence escalates just as they forced Mubarak out when it was clear he couldn't calm the violence.

Can Morsi survive? That is still unknown.  But what is known is despite what President Obama and other progressives have maintained the Muslim Brotherhood is not "secular" and the proof is in today's protests in Tahrir Square and across Egypt.

The REAL Middle East War: Sunni versus Shia

By Barry Rubin

Domestic fury and fierce civil strife….
Blood and destruction shall be so in use
And dreadful objects so familiar
That mothers shall but smile when they behold
Their infants quarter'd with the hands of war;
All pity choked with custom of fell deeds….
Shall in these confines with a monarch's voice
Cry 'Havoc,' and let slip the dogs of war….”
William Shakespeare, "Julius Caesar"

This is not merely coincidental violence. True, the currently self-flagellating West used to have scenes like this but no more. Today, the West is an island of tolerance despite the orgy within it of self-blame and criticism. Meanwhile, other places daily show orgies of violence but not self-criticism.

Let’s take one little example from the daily situation of places from that vast expanse between Nigeria and Indonesia that coincides with Muslim-majority countries. Yet Muslims are also the main victim from the violence, due to the horror of radical Islamism and whipped-up-into-a-frenzy fanaticism which characterizes Arab World War Two.

In early June, Salafists stirred up hatred at the purported threat from a tiny minority of 30 Shia Muslims living in the village of Zawiyat Abu Muslim near Cairo. Shias are a microscopic portion of Egypt's population, far less than one percent. Until recently one was barely aware they existed at all. But then until recently the same was true of that 1 percent minority of real Shia Muslims in Syria (along the Lebanese border, the Alawites are about as Shia Muslim as the Catholic pope is Mormon) which has done so much to prompt the Hizballah offensive in the Syrian civil war.

On June 23, a Muslim holiday, a leading Shia cleric named Hassan Shehata was visiting and spoke at a small religious gathering. A mob of up to 3000 regular people, the neighbors, marched on the house where the Shia were gathered. The guests were beaten up, three petrol bombs set the house on fire, and four Shia were murdered. Five Shia houses in all were burned.

Shehata, an inoffensive and apolitical religious scholar was stabbed to death and dragged through the streets.

Let’s not take any point for granted here:

--The attackers and killers were ordinary villagers.

--The attack was not spontaneous but deliberately organized.

--The Arabic-speaking world is gearing up for a massive Sunni versus Shia bloodbath as well as a Sunni war on Christians. The war on Jews is nothing new and if Israel could not defend itself what happened in that village would be our fate in this modern edition of the European Middle Ages.

Generally, please note, the Christians cannot defend themselves. And Kurds, Druze, the Bahais in Iran also face such potential or actual problems. In all cases these are wars of extermination or at least expulsion.

--The victims were not engaged in any violent or provocative acts. They were killed because of their religious identity and for no other reason.

--The villagers were proud of what they had done.

--The police did not try to stop the violence even when one Shia was killed in front of them as they stood by.

--The Egyptian government won’t do anything. Nobody who is not a conformist supporter of the dictatorship and in the right group can expect protection. (With occasional exceptions as with a single Muslim preacher brought to court because he burned a Christian Bible a few months ago.

--The government and police are on the side of the murderers.

--The police threw the victims into a pile, adding to the lack of respect for them.

--A Salafist television station and websites praised the killers and accused Shehata of having insulted Muhammad, the founder of Islam. Note that any non-Sunni or in other cases non-Shia can be falsely accused of doing something insulting to Islam and murdered.

--Certainly the government will not denounce this crime and the perpetrators probably won’t be arrested as those who attack churches and Coptic Christians are not arrested. This includes those who carried out the very public attack on the Cairo cathedral last month, during a service itself commemorating the earlier murder of Christians. Al-Azhar, the center of (Sunni) Islam religious authority did do so.

--An important principle in Islamic states is that the actual government, that is by the allegedly moderate Muslim Brotherhood, also unleashes and uses the more militant Salafists to do what they want as long as they don't challenge the regime. You cannot just go by government behavior but by the vigilante activity the government permits. The recent upsurge in opposition activity has pushed the Brotherhood and Salafists together. A key point in an Islamist state is that there is no real government protection for the rights of minorities despite the promises based on Islamic texts.

Here's a Syrian Salafist commander in a typical such claim:

"We have been providing the minorities with their rights ever since the establishment of the state of Islam, since the beginning of the Caliphate in the days of the Prophet Muhammad, and in the days of the Righteous Caliphs, and to this day. Throughout history, nobody has suffered injustice under the state of Islam – the state of truth and justice."

Only now in recent years, that lie about minorities has been extended to Shia.

--Every day such crimes are committed by pogroms and terror attacks, especially right now in Nigeria, Pakistan, Iraq, and Syria. Indeed, terrorism against Israel is a militarily sophisticated type of pogrom, complete with the frequent rationalization of Palestinian governments. (And this is an issue that the American elite thinks is on the verge of solution, especially if there are one-sided Israeli concessions?)

--Violence in Iraq on a Sunni-Shia basis (mostly Sunnis attacking Shia) is at a high point. Imagine what things will be like when a Sunni Islamist ruled Syria hates and tries to foment unrest in s Shia-ruled Iraq which will no doubt push Baghdad toward the waiting arms of Iran! Two American "clients" at war backed by two anti-American backed alliances!

--Since this is such explosive stuff, the Western mass media and institutions put the main emphasis on playing it down on the off-chance that…what? Western citizens will go burn down houses and stab their Muslim neighbors? They assume that their audiences must be kept in ignorance lest they turn to prejudice and hatred. Even admitting that the contemporary American track record is better than the Middle East skirts the supposed edge of racism. Heaven forbid that Western civilization regard itself, at least today, as more advanced.

--The proper response would be to sympathize with the victims against the murderers and point out that, just as Germans oppressed other Germans during the Nazi era, sympathy and support should go to the victims against the political criminals and not to minimize the threat lest sausage shops or Lutheran churches be attacked.

--Iran condemned the attacks on Shias, saying it was contrary to Islam. But of course the whole central narrative of Islam is based on Sunni persecution of Shia. Of course, don't try to find a Sunni mosque in Tehran, and Iran's ally, Syria, is treating Sunnis far more ruthlessly than the norm in Egypt. Have no doubt about the intensity of this conflict. Egypt and Iran may well eventually find themselves in a proxy war. In fact, they are now doing so in Syria.

--A high-ranking Hamas leader even said that overthrowing the Syrian regime is a higher priority than staging jihad in Palestine. Of course, the Sunnis know that overthrowing Assad is a step forward on the jihad against Israel but he isn't supposed to say that. Still, it reveals the depth of hatred and antagonism toward the fellow Arabs and Muslims.

As a new report by the Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center puts it:

“The depth of the Sunni-Shi’ite schism can be seen in all the major arenas where regional conflicts are being waged. It is reflected in Hezbollah’s growing involvement in the fighting in Syria, the spilling over of the Syrian civil war into Lebanon, record-breaking sectarian violence in Iraq, and the aggressive stance taken by the Persian Gulf states towards Iran and Hezbollah. Thus, the Sunni-Shi’ite schism is emerging as one of the most influential factors shaping the Middle East in a time of regional upheaval.”

You can read about the modern history of the Sunni-Shia relationship in that report. It points out the new parallels with anti-Jewish thinking among Sunnis including the creation of a forged “The Protocols of the Clerics of Qom” which matches The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.”

The Shia, for their part, reciprocate with their own hatred. How distant seem the days when Iran’s ambition to lead the Muslim Middle East seems credible or the Arab-Israeli conflict seemed central to the region!

As the report cited above continued:

“The meaning of that escalation is that, ideologically speaking, the fight against the Shi’a (and its representatives, Iran and Hezbollah) takes precedence over the fight against the West and Israel—although it does not mean that the fight will necessarily be backed by actual on-the-ground efforts. This coincides with the political and social reality brought about by the regional upheaval: a widening of the fundamental fault lines that run through the Arab and Muslim world.”

Here's my article on a recent report from a Muslim Brotherhood think tank that confirms this analysis.

Yes, that is the fruit of the “Arab Spring.” Not as the Western sorcerer’s apprentices’ expected love, peace, and democracy but the rise of Islamism and the Sunni-Shia war.

This does not mean--as the brilliant young analyst Phillip Smyth points out--that the Shia Iranian Revolutionary Guard and the Sunni al-Qaida won’t soon be competing over how many Americans each group can kill in Syria. It does mean, however, that things have really changed in the region.

Forget the dreams of a new era of peace and democracy. The next several decades—and that’s the optimistic version—will be full of Zawiyat Abu Muslim’s writ large. Anyone who is sensible will avoid the wreckage and send out the lifeboats.

Note: Arab World War One was the nationalist era's equivalent of today's battle,what Malcolm Kerr called the Arab Cold War of the 1950s and 1960s between the radical nationalists and the more conservative traditionalist forces.

-----------------------
We need your support. To make a tax-deductible donation to the GLORIA Center by PayPal or credit card: click Donate button: http://www.rubinreports.blogspot.com. Checks: "American Friends of IDC.” “For GLORIA Center” on memo line. Mail: American Friends of IDC, 116 East 16th St., 11th Fl., NY, NY 10003.
------------------------

Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. His latest book, Israel: An Introduction, has just been published by Yale University Press. Other recent books include The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley), and The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). The website of the GLORIA Center and of his blog, Rubin Reports. His original articles are published at PJMedia.
 

Unlike Madonna, the Middle East Isn't A "Material Girl"

by Barry Rubin


In my article, “How to Understand Islamism: Read What Its Leaders Actually Say,” I wrote about how Sunni Islamist leader Yusuf al-Qaradawi:

“Does not talk about the need for urbanization, the equality of women, modern education, and greater freedom as the solution. Indeed, his view is totally contrary to a leftist or liberal or nationalist Muslim who would stress the need to borrow any ideas and methods other than purely technological ones, from the West in order to gain equality and even superiority. Think of how Asia has succeeded–Japan, South Korea, Singapore, and now even China–through eagerness to blend borrowings, adaptation, and its own historic culture. No, for al-Qaradawi the issue [of why the Muslim world hasn’t done better] is completely one of the abandonment of Islam."

A reader pointed out that in the West, it is assumed to be obvious that Arabs understand that material advancement is necessary for progress and power. For example, Tom Friedman talked about the UN Arab Human development report written by Arab liberals. In other words, the Arabic-speaking world is shaped by the failure of leaders to understand that Western pundits know far more about their society than they do.

Understanding that Friedman doesn’t understand the Middle East, though he has persuaded a big audience otherwise, is the beginning of wisdom on the region. He still insists:

“Read the U.N.’s 2002 Arab Human Development Report about what deficits of freedom, women’s empowerment and knowledge did to Arab peoples over the last 50 years. Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, Yemen and Syria are not falling apart today because their leaders were toppled. Their leaders were toppled because for too many years they failed too many of their people. Half the women in Egypt still can’t read. That’s what the stability of the last 50 years bought.”

But this is not the real issue. It is because—as happened in the USSR, Nazi Germany, and elsewhere in history—the problem is radical ideology in command on the sides of both leaders and the masses. As a result, the masses of the Middle East don't care about deficits but mainly about conformity, hatred of the "Other," killing, revenge, and--to borrow a term--what is Politically Correct, not Factually Correct. As for the rulers, they know how devastating in terms of stability the kind of policies naive Westerners are.

Remember, the West saw the fall of Communism as the blooming of democracy; the Middle Eastern leaders see it as the wilting of empires. The West remembers the passing of the Soviet bloc as the fall of the Berlin Wall. The Middle East leaders saw it as the fall of their counterparts, and the putting of Romania's dictatorial couple, the Ceausescu's, in front of a firing squad. Now, 20 years later, Mubarak is in prison and Qadhafi was killed.

Is Syria in a state of civil war because the regime failed its people or because it tried to ride the tiger by toying with the promotion of Sunni Islamism? Perhaps the regimes inevitably must fail their people because of a lack of resources, the state of their societies, the nature of the dominant ideas, and the era of anarchy that would have to be unleashed by even the best attempt to address the "deficits."

And perhaps there is a Western"deficit" in understanding the Middle East, a failure to take religion, ideology, and radicalism seriously; the inability to grasp truly that one is dealing with a different history and culture.

Often in this case I think of an incident that happened shortly after the U.S. overthrow of the Taliban regime after September 11, 2001. Pro-Taliban and al-Qaida prisoners rioted and an incredibly brave CIA man went in to try to deal with the situation. He said to one of the Arab al-Qaida volunteers, "Why did you come here [to Afghanistan]?" It was the typical Enlightenment question, an attempt to gain knowledge, the belief that dialogue leads to better understanding.

The al-Qaida terrorist replied, "I came here to kill you." He knew what he wanted and would not be reasoned with or dissuaded by an explanation that his real enemy was a deficit of women's inequality. The mob preceded to murder the American brutally.

Now, the United States is still trying to negotiate with the Taliban, to find its moderate wing; the Taliban and al-Qaida still want to murder Americans. And they do.

Think of the perfect symbolism of what happened on February 18, 2011, in Cairo’s Tahrir Square which shows where the locals think the West can physically insert its deficits. President Husni Mubarak had just been overthrown in the “Arab Spring.” There was the huge rally to greet al-Qaradawi with an estimated one million people, ten times what the “moderates” (many of whom were Muslim Brothers in disguise) had been able to muster.

Wael Ghonim, an executive of Google on leave who had been a leader of the revolt, a young man of about 30 and married to an American convert to Islam tried to get on the platform. He was thrown off. Since then, Ghonim has been a political zero.

And so Ghonim, the 30-something hero in the West, got to be in Time Magazine’s list of the world’s 100 most influential people; was presented by the JFK Profile in Courage Award (whose name was based on a book that had Kennedy’s name on it but was written by my PhD advisor, Professor Jules Davids) by Caroline Kennedy on behalf of “the people of Egypt.” He was listed as the second most powerful Arab in the world by Arabian Business magazine for leading Egyptian youth.

Yet perhaps it would have been more appropriate if the award had been given by a hijab-wearing Caroline Kennedy to the Muslim Brotherhood leadership, who really represented "the people of Egypt."

What happened to the 80-something al-Qaradawi? Oh, he didn’t get any Western awards or plaudits. He just got Egypt.

Perhaps you remember the old joke about two guys fishing. One says: "I know everything about fishing because I've read all the books about it."

To which his companion replies, "But have the fish read the books?"

-----------------------
We need your support. To make a tax-deductible donation to the GLORIA Center by PayPal or credit card: click Donate button: http://www.rubinreports.blogspot.com. Checks: "American Friends of IDC.” “For GLORIA Center” on memo line. Mail: American Friends of IDC, 116 East 16th St., 11th Fl., NY, NY 10003.
------------------------

Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. His latest book, Israel: An Introduction, has just been published by Yale University Press. Other recent books include The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley), and The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). The website of the GLORIA Center and of his blog, Rubin Reports. His original articles are published at PJMedia.

Obama Middle East Policy: Wrong Team, Wrong Ideas

By Barry Rubin

In the Middle East, to paraphrase President Barack Obama's mentor, the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, the dodo birds are coming home to roost.

At this moment, the administration's policy team consists of CIA director John Brennan, father of the ""moderate" Islamism-and-the-Muslim Brotherhood-are-good school; the Secretary of State John Kerry who thinks he is going to make Israel-Palestinian peace in one month; the know-nothing Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel; the chilling ideologue Samantha Powers as UN ambassador; and the dupe of the Benghazi scandal Susan Rice rewarded by being made national security adviser.

Can things get any more Alice in Wonderland? But what's really happening in the region.

In Egypt, the country is falling into anti-Americanism and tyranny, the United States is embarking on a new policy in Syria that one can see won't work. What is the solution? Simply to support moderate and anti-Islamist forces while opposing Islamists and terrorists. Except if you wait too long there will be no good forces left to help anymore.

Egypt first. The Supreme Constitutional Court, the country’s highest court, has now ruled that the January 2012 Shura Council election for the upper house of parliament was unconstitutional. The same decision was rendered for the Islamist-dominated body that wrote the new Constitution. But the chief judge said that the Constitution was not annulled.

In short, there is total confusion. Indeed, it isn’t even clear that the new election for the lower house of Parliament will be held. Egypt is in maximal mess phase.

Meanwhile, what allegedly friendly country just sentenced the son of a U.S. cabinet official to five years in prison? Answer: Egypt, to the son of Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. Crime: Supporting democracy. Four more Americans received the same sentence.

The Egyptian Islamist regime does not fear America nor does it show gratitude for President Obama’s help in its taking and consolidation of power. Offices were closed and prison sentences of up to five years—for 27 people--were meted out. Many of those charged fled the country. Among the groups closed were the International Republican Institute and the National Democratic Institute.

Secretary of State John Kerry said the United States was “deeply concerned” but of course the Egyptian government knew America wouldn’t do anything except keep shipping in tear gas and provided financial and political support.

After getting into power in part due to U.S. help, the Egyptian court called the promotion of democracy a form of “soft imperialism.” Get it? They get into power by a vote and then that’s the end of free elections.

The court’s verdict says that history shows U.S. policies believe that its “interests as best served by totalitarian dictatorships and harmed by genuine democracies….The U.S.—fearing democracy ushered in by Egypt’s popular revolt—has used funding to take the revolution off its path.”

So even as the U.S. government supports the Egyptian revolt and regime, the ruling elite claims that it opposed them. Thus the pro-Muslim Brotherhood policy doesn’t win any influence or benefits since the Brotherhood accepts the help and then declares that America is its enemy.

Thus, for friendship toward America; how about peaceful intentions toward neighbors? Here we have possibly the most embarrassing open microphone scandal in history. The televising of a meeting held by President Muhammad Morsi allowed listeners to hear plans for military attacks on Ethiopia because of a dam that country is building on the Nile in order to generate electricity. Participants didn’t know the meeting was being aired on live state television.

Egyptian leaders discussed covert operations to destroy the dam or giving covert support to rebel groups. This gives some hints of what longer-term policy toward Israel might well be. Advocates of aggressive action included moderate politicians.

How about cultural news? Well the Culture Minister Alaa Abdel-Aziz has just installed an Islamist professor of Arabic literature by firing the head of Egypt’s National Library and Archives. Also fired were the heads of the opera house, book publishing, and fine arts sections of the ministry.

The ministry’s foreign relations’ director resigned in protest, saying that the minister was seeking to Islamize Egyptian culture and put religion in place of national identity.

What other trends are visible? How about the sentencing of a Christian lawyer to one year in prison and a fine for allegedly insulting God and the Quran? This is one of many such trials. The complaint was brought by Islamist lawyers. Previously, a Christian schoolteacher had been sentenced to six years for, among other things, allegedly insulting Morsi. Last December it was the turn of a Christian who posted a short film claimed to be derogatory to Islam and who was sentenced to three years. Two Christian children, aged nine and ten years old, were put in juvenile detention for allegedly tearing up a Koran.

But perhaps the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood supports “Arab Spring” type revolts elsewhere? No. Leaders asserted that the demonstrations against the Turkish Islamist government that have broken out on a grassroots’ level are in fact a war against Islam by showing that Islamist regimes have failed. It’s interesting that the Muslim Brotherhood considers the Turkish counterpart of being that kind of government while the U.S. government doesn’t.

So, opposing the spread of democracy, viewing the United States as an enemy, putting Islamist power as the highest value, oppressing Christians, and fundamentally transforming Egypt into an anti-American, anti-Christian, oppressive dictatorship. These are the hallmarks of contemporary Egypt. And there are scores of other examples that can be cited.

In Syria, reports Reuters on May 31 from Beirut, the Saudis have now clearly changed policy in line with the United States. The Saudi government is now frightened of its own support of radical Salafist Islamists in the rebel forces. They are pressuring Qatar to stop backing the hardliners though it is not clear how successful this effort is at present. Qatar has become the main backer of the Muslim Brotherhood financially.

The new policy is being influenced by military failures now that the Assad regime has more Russian, Iranian, and Hizballah backing. But it is also prompted by worries that Syria might be taken over by anti-American, anti-Saudi Islamist radicals. This concern was heightened by American observance of what was happening in rebel-held northern Syria. Another factor is the disorder in rebel ranks seen at the recent summit meeting in Turkey and the intransigence of the Muslim Brotherhood exile leadership to accept other forces into the direction of the battle.

At a critical moment when the United States and European Union were going to send arms directly, fear of the dominant Islamist forces—which also include a growing al-Qaida presence—is holding up this escalation. And without more arms the rebels cannot win.

This has led the United States to postpone handing over $63 million dollars in promised aid to the rebels' Syrian Opposition Coalition which is dominated by the Brotherhood.

U.S. policy is still in disorder but has now changed. Up to now, the Obama Administration has favored a rebel victory, disregarding the growth of Muslim Brotherhood, Salafist, and al-Qaida forces as well as worrisome signs of ethnic massacres. Amazingly enough, it backed a Muslim Brotherhood dominated group as the rebel leadership even when that organization kept out others!

Now, in theory, the Obama Administration is switching to support for moderates, the policy that this column has advocated for almost two years and had been disregarded. It is too late, however. The rebel groups have formed; they control much territory, ideological blocs have hardened; and there are relatively few moderates. Moreover, the Free Syrian Army controls few forces on the ground.

Note by the way that the domination of the rebels by the Islamists have kept Christians and Druze, as well as Alawites, on the regime’s side. That is more than 25 percent of the population. Another 15 percent, the Kurds, are in effect neutral seeking to maintain their autonomy won by their militia in the civil war. It is probably too late to change these positions

So the real alternatives of the Western states may be reduced to three:

--Withhold aid and live with a long-term civil war in which the Assad regime controls half the country while Russia, Iran, and Hizballah claim a partial victory.

--Give strong backing to rebel forces regardless of ideology and see Syria taken over by a radical Islamist government in which the Brotherhood rules, the Salafists operate freely, and al-Qaida establishes a strong base.

--Say that they are supporting moderate forces which have few soldiers and relatively little support within Syria. This policy won’t work but will look good. Meanwhile, Sunni Islamist radicals and a pro-Iran dictatorship battle for predominance.

The likely option is the last one.

Isn't it time for the U.S. government, journalists, and academics to admit that they've been getting the Middle East all wrong? That they have often reversed the good and bad guys so that they have been backing the bad guys, anti-Americans, and even terrorists? Haven't the contradictions gotten to be so obvious that they cannot be denied any more?

American interests are with the rebels of Turkey and Iran; the moderate Muslim-Christian opposition in Lebanon, with Israel and the Kurds; with the real moderates in Egypt; with Jordan's kingdom which small amounts of money would help enormously; and, yes, often even with the Gulf Arab states (except Qatar) if only given the American leadership they are begging for.

Western and American interests are not with the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Tunisia, and Syria; not with the stealth Islamist regime in Turkey for which the Obama Administration just renewed a waiver on sanctions against Iran (!); not with the rejectionist Palestinian Authority, not with some "moderate Islamist" faction of the Iranian regime.

It is past time that this be recognized. But it is a task requiring a Churchill, not the churlish.


We’d love to have your support and work hard to earn it. See our new feature with 13 free books at http://www.gloria-center.org. Why not make a tax-deductible donation to the GLORIA Center by PayPal: click here.

By credit card: click here. Checks: "American Friends of IDC.” “For GLORIA Center” on memo line and send to: American Friends of IDC, 116 East 16th St., 11th Fl., NY, NY 10003.
For tax-deductible donations in Canada and the UK, write us here.
--------------------
Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. His next book, Nazis, Islamists and the Making of the Modern Middle East, written with Wolfgang G. Schwanitz, will be published by Yale University Press in January 2014. His latest book is Israel: An Introduction, also published by Yale. Thirteen of his books can be read and downloaded for free at the website of the GLORIA Center including The Arab States and the Palestine Conflict, The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East and The Truth About Syria. His blog is Rubin Reports. His original articles are published at PJMedia.

Turkey is Burning! What Happens When a Free Society Gets Taken over by Islamists

The cause for freedom usually happens with a small stand! On Friday a small demonstration started of the Turkish government's plan to tear down a small park in the center of Istanbul, and replace it with a shopping area has turned into a major protest against Islamist Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan. The park has long been an iconic rallying point for mass demonstrations and its destruction was seen as a fight against free expression.


As of today both sides are digging in, the now-angry protests show no sign of easing and the Islamist Erdogan shows no inclination to give in to their demands. Erdogan blamed the main secular opposition party for inciting the crowds, and said the protests were aimed at depriving his ruling AK Party of votes as elections begin next year.

"We are servants of the people, not masters. We did not use violence," the Prime Minister said before leaving for a four-day trip to North Africa. Those in Turkey who speak of the Turkish Spring are right; the season is, in fact, spring," he said. "But there are those trying to turn it into a winter."

Turkey was a relatively "westernized" country till Erdogan took over ten years ago, since that time there has been a tension between the military, the Islamists and the people wishing the country would return to its less repressive "secular ways."

Meanwhile, the interior ministry urged residents to not take to the streets Monday.

"We invite our citizens especially our youth to act with common sense and sensitivity and refrain from taking part in these illegal demonstrations being carried out by certain groups today, the day when the work week begins," it said.

The protest movement seems to be spreading:

There have been protests in 67 of Turkey's 81 provinces in recent days, according to Turkey's semi-official Andalou News Agency. More than 700 people have been detained since Tuesday, and most have been released, the agency said. Fifty-eight civilians are still hospitalized and 115 security officers have been injured.

"There is civil police arresting people all over the place," Cenker Kardesler, a 30-year-old businessman, said by phone from Adana on Sunday. "The police tried to corner the people.

They came at us from both sides."

In Istanbul where the protests started the crowds have been chanting "Tayyip resign" referring to Erdogan -- and "Shoulder to shoulder against fascism."

"We have a prime minister who has done great deeds and he really has run the economy well," she said. "But you also have this paternalistic style: 'I know what's good for you. I, as your father, can decide on the park, the bridge, the city and the constitution.' So, I think people are just wanting to have a more inclusive form of democracy in Turkey."

The protesters say that the park is no longer the issue:

"This park was just the ignition of all that," said Yakup Efe Tuncay, a 28-year-old demonstrator who carried a Turkish flag while walking through the park Saturday. "The Erdogan government is usually considered as authoritarian. He has a big ego; he has this Napoleon syndrome. He takes himself as a sultan. ... He needs to stop doing that. He's just a prime minister."

No one really knows what will happen next, this may end up to be a different kind of Arab Spring one where the people oust a democratically elected but repressive Islamist regime.

 SOURCE: UK Daily Mail

Turkey, Israel, and Syria: Why Things are Going So Wrong

By Barry Rubin

I was interviewed by Radikal, possibly the best Turkish newspaper today.

• What is your assessment of the current state of relations between Turkey and Israel?

Relations will remain bad because Prime Minister Erdogan wants it to be that way. No matter what Israel does—as we have just seen—he will find excuses to do so.

• Are relations as tense as they seem or both parties play the tough guy before the cameras whereas they enjoy better relations behind the scenes?

Relations are as tense as they seem because Israel DID compromise before the cameras and Erdogan—for domestic reasons—is still playing tough guy both in public and behind the scenes.

• --Have you followed Prime Minister Erdogan’s recent visit to the US? Does it seem to you that Erdogan has been convinced by President Obama and will adopt a more multilateralist and moderate stance on Syria?

 I’m not sure what this question means. If Obama becomes more multilateralist that means he will go to the UN and Russia will veto any action. So being more multilateralist  means nothing will happen and that’s not what Erdogan wants.

As for “moderate” what does that mean? Does Erdogan want to give less aid and support to the rebels? I don’t think so.

• While Turkish officials were having talks with their American counterparts, the CIA Chief John Brennan has visited Israel. Is there any connection between these two visits? Could we say that Turkey, Israel and the US have already or may in the near future start coordinating their efforts towards Syria?

They have already been coordinating their efforts but because of Israeli interests in not taking either side in the civil war that doesn’t mean a huge amount. The coordination has been mainly over sharing assessments and Israeli attacks to ensure that the Syrian regime’s advanced weapons do not get sent to Hizballah in Lebanon.

• What is the current Israeli policy on Syria?

Neutrality. Defending itself against the transfer to Lebanon of advanced arms by the Syrian government. Israel will 100 percent definitely not get involved in the war on either side.

• Do the developments in Syria bring Turkey and Israel closer or take them further apart?

Israel and Turkey share a common interest in that they do not want al-Qaida to take over Syria. It is not clear whether they agree on the radical Salafists not taking power. They both do not want to see a wider area destabilized. But Erdogan wants the Muslim Brotherhood to win and perhaps doesn’t care about the Salafists winning also. Israel simply doesn’t want to be attacked from Syria by the regime or the rebels. The answer is it should bring them closer together but Erdogan doesn’t want that and has announced he won’t even consult with Israel on Syria. As far as I can see that statement is true.

 Turkey, though, is in great danger for not only is it involved in a proxy war with Iran, which supports the regime, but also now with Russia which is escalating its support for the regime. The Turkish government’s “no enemies” policy is clearly gone since it has now made three major enemies by its own choice: Iran, Israel, and Russia, to which could be added Hizballah, a group that Erdogan courted.

But there is more than that regarding the problems for Turkey. What few people recognize is that the “Arab Spring” means the end of the regime’s regional ambitions. Whatever people think within Turkey the Sunni Islamists, and especially the Muslim Brotherhood, don’t want Turkish influence because Turks are not Arabs. In addition they think they don’t need Turkey anymore. True, Erdogan became briefly popular in the Arab world when they didn’t have anyone else to turn to but now they have their own new revolutions.  Do you really think that a radical Islamist government in Syria will be friendly toward Turkey? And now, remarkably, the Turkish government has helped install a PKK regime on its border in northeastern Syria!

This policy is not working very well.

• Do you think Israel and Turkey may have started coordinating their efforts on Syria?

Definitely not.

• If Israel suspects that Hezbollah received advanced weapons from Syria, will it intervene into Lebanon again?

 Definitely yes.

• Is there any solution to the Syrian quagmire in the near future?

 No. There is no real diplomatic solution. People can hold conferences and give speeches but the only way this will be settled is by one side’s victory over the other and that is not likely to happen in less than two years and perhaps not even then.

• Is it coincidence that the Israeli air attacks on Syria and the Israeli apology to Turkey have overlapped during the first half of this year?

 Yes it is a coincidence.

• Why do you think Israel apologized from Turkey?

 Because President Obama asked it to do so; because Israel’s action was what the Turkish government had been offered by it for two years, because Israel wants good relations with Turkey. And finally because Israel didn't apologize--despite the media spin--but expressed regrtet and made a deal on the basis of the same terms it had been offering the Turkish government for about two years.

• Do the Israeli decision-makers trust Erdogan and Davutoglu?

 No, especially now after the rejection of attempted conciliation.

• There were reports in the Turkish media some time ago that Israeli intelligence officials were uneasy with the appointment of Hakan Fidan to the post of the head of Turkish intelligence agency, MIT, as they feared that Fidan may be too close to some anti-Israeli players in the region. Is there any truth in these speculations?

What’s important is Turkish government policy, not personnel. With the current government in Ankara’s policy, it doesn’t matter who the officials are.

• What does the Israeli government think about Erdogan’s visit to Palestine?

Actually, remember this. If Erdogan was going to the West Bank to visit the Palestinian Authority nobody would be annoyed. Israel would probably be pleased. But he has never supported the Palestinian Authority because he has backed Islamist Hamas. The Palestinian Authority is as angry as Israel is and has said so publicly. Instead of backing Palestine, Erdogan is helping a rebel area which openly seeks genocide against Jews and the destruction of Israel, a group that has also killed members of the ruling group in the Palestinian Authority, Fatah.

• Does Israel want Turkey to reconcile Hamas and El Fatah?

I don’t think that’s what he is doing. He is supporting Hamas against Fatah and everyone in Fatah knows it.

• Last week Sunday Times published some remarks of an unnamed Israeli official who said that Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia were forming a Sunni block in the Middle East and Israel would actually like to be a part of this partnership. What do think about such scenarios?

Never believe anything that appears in the Sunday Times. I’m not joking as it has a record of making stuff up and all their `scoops' never materialize. Obviously, Israel will not be part of this partnership. Inasmuch as Israel views Iran as its main enemy, defeats for Iran by a Sunni bloc are viewed as positive. But Turkey, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia are not delivering a moderate government in Syria but a revolutionary Islamist one. They may all mourn the day they made that error. They could have supported more moderate forces, got rid of Bashar al-Assad, and enjoyed far more Western help in doing so.

• Put simply, who are the friends of Israel in the region and who are the foes?

Israel would like to have Turkey as a friend, as happened for many years. The foes are Iran, the current Lebanese government (led by Syrian puppets and Hizballah) and the current Syrian government, as well as Hamas. The potential foes are the Muslim Brotherhood regimes—Egypt, Tunisia, and a rebel-ruled Syria. The rest are neither. Even Egypt has been cautious in practice despite its harsh rhetoric. Any Arab factor that wants to can become a neutral party simply by not attacking Israel.

• What are the chances for Israel to strike Iran in the near future? If Israel activates such a scenario what role would it expect Turkey to play?

 No and no.

• Do you think there will be any changes after the elections in Iran?

 No because even if the rhetoric is cooler the regime will be controlled by the same faction, that of Supreme Guide Khamenei, and it will continue efforts to achieve nuclear weapons.

• When government officials talk about the present process with the PKK, they keep emphasizing that if Turkey reconciles with her Kurds she will become greater. Some suspect that these statements refer to quasi-irredentist motivations. How do you read such statements?

I understand that this is a difficult issue to solve and it is an internal Turkish matter.

• --Would Israel support the creation of an independent Kurdistan? There are many conspiracy theories in Turkey around this question. Many people believe that Israel would support such a Kurdish state as it would be yet another actor against Iran.

Well, it isn’t true. I don’t think even the Kurds aim at an independent Kurdistan. In Iraq and Syria they have the benefits of independence without stirring massive Turkish and Iranian opposition. Turkey is getting along well with the Iraqi Kurds. Why should the Kurds take such a tremendous risk? I think they understand the situation. I know there are many conspiracy theories but they aren’t true. Remember this: In a previous term of office, Prime Minister Netanyahu declared the PKK a terrorist group at Turkey’s request! This involved a real risk of Israel—that the PKK might launch terrorist attacks against it—and some loss of potential freedom of action. It might be good to remember such cooperation, including cooperation against Armenian terrorism, mutual economic benefits of the bilateral relationship, and aid during the earthquake.

Israel is not   Turkey's enemy though, regrettably, Islamist Turkish politicians are Israel's enemies, and perhaps a democratic and free Turkey's enemy as well.

Here is an article by me on Turkish-Israel relations that might be of interest.

See also this on Sharia and this and this on anti-government demonstrations.

We’d love to have your support and work hard to earn it. See our new feature with 13 free books at http://www.gloria-center.org. Why not make a tax-deductible donation to the GLORIA Center by PayPal: click here. 

By credit card: click here. Checks: "American Friends of IDC.” “For GLORIA Center” on memo line and send to: American Friends of IDC, 116 East 16th St., 11th Fl., NY, NY 10003.

For tax-deductible donations in Canada and the UK, write us here.

-------------------- Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. His next book, Nazis, Islamists and the Making of the Modern Middle East, written with Wolfgang G. Schwanitz, will be published by Yale University Press in January 2014. His latest book is Israel: An Introduction, also published by Yale. Thirteen of his books can be read and downloaded for free at the website of the GLORIA Center including The Arab States and the Palestine Conflict, The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East and The Truth About Syria. His blog is Rubin Reports. His original articles are published at PJMedia.