Message Published on June 23rd, 2010 | by Jim Lobe 11 A must-read on implications of the Gaza Flotilla by Rami Khouri Share this:Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on Google+ (Opens in new window)Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)MoreClick to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window) “A big corner has been turned in Gaza” Share this:Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on Google+ (Opens in new window)Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)MoreClick to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window) Follow LobeLog on Twitter and like us on Facebook About the Author Jim Lobe served for some 30 years as the Washington DC bureau chief for Inter Press Service and is best known for his coverage of U.S. foreign policy and the influence of the neoconservative movement. Related Posts Reconciliation → School Children in Aleppo Forced Underground → New Resource for Tracking US Military and Police Aid → Lindsey Graham’s Guide to Diplomacy → 11 Responses to A must-read on implications of the Gaza Flotilla by Rami Khouri Show Comments → Newer Comments → Jon Harrison says: June 24, 2010 at 6:13 pm Agreed, an important piece. If the ships keep coming, and are clearly, only, humanitarian in nature, will that break the blockade? It just might. Will breaking the blockade lead to a rolling-up of the occupation? On that I’m not so sure. But it might. I really like this piece. It’s in line with what I’ve been saying about a nonviolent approach being the key to Palestinian statehood. I do, however, believe that a 2-state solution is no longer possible — that is, I don’t think the Palestinians will sincerely accept same. If they do accept it, they will move on from there to demanding the whole of Palestine. A Jewish apartheid state is doomed. There is still time for a Palestine in which all peoples and creeds live together democratically. Palestine can be a Jewish homeland without being a Jewish “state.” But we need a major change in the Israeli outlook before it’s too late. Israeli has no far-seeing statesmen (or women),not a one. scott says: June 24, 2010 at 9:46 pm Jon, I’m sorry you seemed out of pocket during the Turkey/Israel Flotilla Flap. I agree with much of what you write, here and elsewhere, even if I enjoy picking at those details where we differ. Anyway, if there is a real rift between Turkey and Israel, I believe that WILL change our relationship with Israel. It seems to me Turkey is indispensable to the US Military where Israel is worth less without Turkey. Turkey provides access to critical routes into the Middle East, Caucuses and the former Soviet Basin. While our entire political establishment has been keeping faithful to the guiding star of David, reality could catch them unawares. Perhaps we will just have a conniption once we are faced with the absurdity of our policies. Jon Harrison says: June 25, 2010 at 7:54 am I don’t see the Lobby or the Christian Right changing their views because of Turkey’s strategic importance. And since a majority of American politicians kowtow to one or both of these groups, I don’t believe your thesis carries weight. When some major disaster to America occurs that can be seen as undeniably the result of our connection to Israel, public opinion will turn and the politicians will have to follow. Until that happens, I see no real change occurring, scott says: June 25, 2010 at 9:02 am That may happen. It may take that to change opinion. In a world of sophist and intellectual and political cowards, I don’t know if the Military Brass have the brass balls to make this fight public. Yet, I think we will see change coupled with pandering. (the alternative is worse than this scneario) This is yet another self deception, and the reconciling of our “books” is being deferred. I like to say that dams don’t work. They may persist for centuries, but eventually, they fail. This is a dam of another kind, a resisting of the forces equilibrium. Entropy (death) eventually wins, the longer we resist equalizing of forces the greater the risk of cataclysm. The alternative, to belabor the analogy, is slow leaks through fractures, and this Turkey Israel rift is a real fracture. I don’t know if the politicians will simply pander to the religious right and Zionists or if there will be an internal divide in our own gov’t. This could lead to a coup, or military takeover–which might ironically be less militant than our current power structure. I’m don’t disagree with your point, but that doesn’t mean the military will lightly burn that bridge. I don’t know how aware our political leadership is regarding our covert ops. There are many opportunities for rogue activity, free lancers and the like, not to mention those approved covert ops. There’s no simple dichotomy here, but a range of actions, positions and policies, overt and covert. Jon Harrison says: June 25, 2010 at 11:45 am The U.S. military is not going to stage a coup over national security matters. Why would the military want to take responsibility for a country with so many problems? It’s just not going to happen that way. Now, you may find at some future point that the country is in danger of falling apart — economic collapse, defeat in war, ecological catastrophe or some combination of all three could leave us in a situation that requires the central government to bring in the military to provide essential services, maintain order, and keep the country from splitting apart. In that situation you might see a “creeping coup” as the military takes over (and not necessarily deliberately) from a civilian leadership that can’t cope. But the U.S. military is never going to stage a coup d’etat as in a banana republic. It conceivably could’ve happened in 1863-64, if Gettysburg had been lost. It might’ve happened in the period of the Cuban Missile crisis, but didn’t. (Or did it? Were rogue elements of the military involved in Dallas? That remains an open question.) The military today will follow the political winds. If the winds shift against Israel, the soldiers will follow. If not, they won’t go beyond the occasional remark about damage to our interests in the Islamic world. And remember that the one active duty general who spoke up in this vein was Petraeus, a figure who has achiveved a position of political untouchability. And he spoke on this matter once, and left it at that. Newer Comments → Back to Top ↑ CategoriesCategories Select Category Afghanistan Africa Analysis Azerbaijan Bahrain Central Asia China Drones Economy Egypt Energy Markets EU France GCC Homeland Security Human Rights India Iran Iraq Israel Israel Palestine Japan Jordan Latin America Lebanon Libya Mali Message Michael LaSusa military News Nigeria North Korea Oman Pakistan Political Islam Qatar Russia Sanctions Saudi Arabia Syria Tunisia Turkey UK Ukraine UN US Domestic Policy US Foreign Policy Yemen Subscribe to LobeLog Enter your email address to subscribe to our site and receive notifications of new posts by email. Email Address Popular Posts Islam's Lesser Muslims: When "Khuda" became "Allah" Trump Is No Realist White House Proposes Slashing US Programs in Caucasus, Central Asia Costs of the Clenched Fist Trump's Apology Tour © 2008-2017 LobeLog.com ContactAboutArchivesAuthorsComments Policy Back to Top ↑ Send to Email Address Your Name Your Email Address Cancel Post was not sent - check your email addresses! Email check failed, please try again Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.