Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk

Here's a pretty interesting article, which does give one reason to ponder. Further insights into the politics behind all this and future predictions would make for a fantastic discussion.
So to set the ball rolling,


On Sunday, Israeli naval forces intercepted the ships of a Turkish nongovernmental organization (NGO) delivering humanitarian supplies to Gaza. Israel had demanded that the vessels not go directly to Gaza but instead dock in Israeli ports, where the supplies would be offloaded and delivered to Gaza. The Turkish NGO refused, insisting on going directly to Gaza. Gunfire ensued when Israeli naval personnel boarded one of the vessels, and a significant number of the passengers and crew on the ship were killed or wounded.

Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon charged that the mission was simply an attempt to provoke the Israelis. That was certainly the case. The mission was designed to demonstrate that the Israelis were unreasonable and brutal. The hope was that Israel would be provoked to extreme action, further alienating Israel from the global community and possibly driving a wedge between Israel and the United States. The operation’s planners also hoped this would trigger a political crisis in Israel.

A logical Israeli response would have been avoiding falling into the provocation trap and suffering the political repercussions the Turkish NGO was trying to trigger. Instead, the Israelis decided to make a show of force. The Israelis appear to have reasoned that backing down would demonstrate weakness and encourage further flotillas to Gaza, unraveling the Israeli position vis-à-vis Hamas. In this thinking, a violent interception was a superior strategy to accommodation regardless of political consequences. Thus, the Israelis accepted the bait and were provoked.

http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20100531 ... ic_opinion

Misery Called Life wrote:Here's a pretty interesting article, which does give one reason to ponder. Further insights into the politics behind all this and future predictions would make for a fantastic discussion.
So to set the ball rolling,


Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon charged that the mission was simply an attempt to provoke the Israelis. That was certainly the case. The mission was designed to demonstrate that the Israelis were unreasonable and brutal. The hope was that Israel would be provoked to extreme action, further alienating Israel from the global community and possibly driving a wedge between Israel and the United States. The operation’s planners also hoped this would trigger a political crisis in Israel.
http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20100531 ... ic_opinion

I don't think there is much to ponder since it was the Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister who made the statement. Its just a watered down version of everything else that Israel has been saying.

Thanks. It does raise interesting issues - and ones discussed in Haaretz at length in the past few days. Today's editorial and separate piece by Levy are particularly interesting. (Editorial says blockade has failed and it is madness to continue, Levy turns his cross-hairs on Bibi Netanyahu)

Finkelstein's theory on why the attack took place (see thread on Entebbe) gives a plausible explanation for why the Israelis seem to have gone loco and carried out what Haaretz was calling 'stupidity on the seas' before the flotilla was attacked. As the Stratfor article says - the PR trap was glaringly obvious to all, and still the Israelis fell for it!

Cheers,
Shafique

Bora Bora wrote:

Misery Called Life wrote:Here's a pretty interesting article, which does give one reason to ponder. Further insights into the politics behind all this and future predictions would make for a fantastic discussion.
So to set the ball rolling,


Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon charged that the mission was simply an attempt to provoke the Israelis. That was certainly the case. The mission was designed to demonstrate that the Israelis were unreasonable and brutal. The hope was that Israel would be provoked to extreme action, further alienating Israel from the global community and possibly driving a wedge between Israel and the United States. The operation’s planners also hoped this would trigger a political crisis in Israel.
http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20100531 ... ic_opinion

I don't think there is much to ponder since it was the Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister who made the statement. Its just a watered down version of everything else that Israel has been saying.

LOL..the articles much more in-depth!

Misery Called Life wrote:

Bora Bora wrote:

Misery Called Life wrote:Here's a pretty interesting article, which does give one reason to ponder. Further insights into the politics behind all this and future predictions would make for a fantastic discussion.
So to set the ball rolling,


Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon charged that the mission was simply an attempt to provoke the Israelis. That was certainly the case. The mission was designed to demonstrate that the Israelis were unreasonable and brutal. The hope was that Israel would be provoked to extreme action, further alienating Israel from the global community and possibly driving a wedge between Israel and the United States. The operation’s planners also hoped this would trigger a political crisis in Israel.
http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20100531 ... ic_opinion

I don't think there is much to ponder since it was the Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister who made the statement. Its just a watered down version of everything else that Israel has been saying.

LOL..the articles much more in-depth!

I know that silly!!! I'll get back to you when I can sit and read it in full. (In the process of sorting and settling in to new apartment. Grrrrrrr!!!!! Love/hate thingy.)