Religion, Nationalism, and Terror

Peter Bergen, How Osama Bin Laden Beat George W. Bush, TNR, October 15, 2007

The removal of Saddam Hussein would prove to be a boon to Al Qaeda–creating a base for the terrorist organization where none had existed before, energizing jihadists around the word, and confirming for many Muslims bin Laden’s contention that the United States was at war with Islam….

As the administration’s own 2006 National Intelligence Estimate explains, “[T]he Iraq War has become the [`]cause celebre’ for jihadists … and is shaping a new generation of terrorist leaders and operatives.”

Turkish general warns of irreversible damage to U.S. ties if genocide resolution passes - Los Angeles Times, October 14, 2007

President Bush has said the resolution is the wrong response to the Armenian deaths, but House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said the measure’s timing was important “because many of the survivors are very old.”…

But Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio, said the measure was “irresponsible.”

“Listen, there’s no question that the suffering of the Armenian people some 90 years ago was extreme. But what happened 90 years ago ought to be a subject for historians to sort out, not politicians here in Washington,” he told “Fox News Sunday.”

About 70 percent of U.S. air cargo headed for Iraq goes through Turkey as does about one-third of the fuel used by the U.S. military there. U.S. bases also get water and other supplies carried in overland by Turkish truckers who cross into Iraq’s northern Kurdish region.

In addition, C-17 cargo planes fly military supplies to U.S. soldiers in remote areas of Iraq from Incirlik, avoiding the use of Iraqi roads vulnerable to bomb attacks. U.S. officials say the arrangement helps reduce American casualties.

Gary Kamiya, Genocide: An inconvenient truth | Salon.com, October 16, 2007

The International Association of Genocide Scholars, the leading body of genocide researchers, accepts that the destruction of the Armenians fits the definition of genocide and has called on Turkey to accept responsibility….There is no doubt that the controversy comes at a delicate time, because of both internal Turkish politics and the situation in Iraq. The vote could trigger a Turkish response that would be highly injurious to American interests, not just in Iraq but throughout the Middle East. Turkey could close Incirlik Air Base, through which 70 percent of air cargo for U.S. troops in Iraq passes, and refuse to cooperate with Washington on the war.

But the most dangerous consequence would be a Turkish attack on northern Iraq. In a piece of exquisitely bad timing, the committee vote took place against the background of a mounting drumbeat of war talk from the Gul administration, which is under heavy domestic pressure to smash Kurdish militant group the PKK. Just days before the vote, Kurdish militants killed 13 Turkish soldiers near the Iraq border, one of Turkey’s heaviest recent losses in the decades-long war.

Is the (Haredi) party over? - Haaretz, October 16, 2007

Deri believes that the existence of ultra-Orthodox parties antagonizes the secular public, bringing about “phenomena like Shinui, that makes secular people think that the ultra-Orthodox want to force their lifestyle on them.” In short, said Deri, the ultra-Orthodox parties “create hatred and confrontation without being very useful.” As long as the ultra-Orthodox continue to operate within sectarian political parties, Deri stressed, the usefulness of such parties in terms of serving Haredi interests “will be small and the damage, in my humble opinion, will be great….”

According to Deri, the main internal struggle that Israeli society will face after “the implementation of the disengagement puts an end to political debate,” will be “the cultural struggle for the general character of the state. On the one hand are Shinui and others who want a completely Western and totally free country, and on the other hand, the whole public, that wants the country to be - to one degree or another - a Jewish state.” The ultra-Orthodox, he said, have got to get involved in this struggle together with traditional Jews in the Likud and other parties.

Cartoon spat prompts Shas to quit Knesset religious lobby - Haaretz, October 16, 2007

A new crisis has erupted between the Ashkenazi and Sephardi ultra-Orthodox over the usual bones of contention: racism, money, and politics. The quarrel resulted Monday in Shas announcing its resignation from the religious lobby in the Knesset.

The current round began when Shas’ spiritual leader, Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, saw a cartoon in Yeted Ne’eman, the flagship journal of Degel HaTorah, the “Lithuanian wing” of the Ashkenazi Haredim.

The cartoon showed a man dressed in shorts and sandals wearing a skullcap and trimmed black beard, representing a Shas follower, in cahoots with a secular person representing Kadima. Wearing a big grin, the two were dumping a rock labeled “2008 cuts” on the head of a Haredi man.

The symbols appear obvious, lacking sophistication, and according to Shas, loaded with anti-Semitism and racism of the sort Ashkenazi ultra-Orthodox feel about Sephardi Haredim. MK Yakov Margi, chairman of the Shas faction in the Knesset, said Ovadia Yosef was deeply offended.

“He saw the caricature and protested strongly, telling us to respond very strongly,” Margi said. The response came Monday, with Shas announcing its resignation from the religious lobby in the Knesset, which is headed by United Torah Judaism.

“Degel HaTorah and its journal Yeted Ne’eman have set out as policy to continue racism and hatred of Sephardim,” the faction said in a statement. “For the first time an anti-Semitic cartoon that would not have shamed any anti-Semitic paper in the world was published. The Degel HaTorah leadership must rid itself from its hatred for Sephardim, from its patronizing attitude for the Sephardi community, which was its habit before the establishment of Shas.”

Ben Simon, The oracle of the right - Haaretz, October 16, 2007

The more time passes, the clearer it becomes that the foreign policy worldview of Shas fluctuates between the right and the extreme right. Eli Yishai, the party’s current leader, has in the past several years laid down a blunt foreign policy that has pushed it from moderation to extremism. Not a day goes by that he does not lay out his red lines and warn against any possibility of compromise with the Palestinians.

Yishai has already threatened Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, telling him that if he dares to address the core issues of the conflict at the Annapolis summit, Yishai and his party will leave the coalition. In doing so, he became one of the main agents who has made the gathering superfluous even before it has begun.

It was not always this way. When Shas burst onto the political scene in 1984, it voiced moderate opinions….

It is a great pity that the party that was born in order to rouse the poor and the disadvantaged and to restore the lost glory of the Sephardim has turned into yet another extremist right-wing party. It forgot its initial motto and is now up to its neck in an unprecedented fever of religious revivalism. One more fundamentalism movement, crazed by religion.

And what of the oppressed, screwed-over poor? Well, since Shas joined the government, they have only become more numerous. It’s enough to look at the shocking poverty figures published each year by the National Insurance Institute to recognize that Shas broke its promise to the poor.

The Israeli Right Has a Peace Plan - by Ran HaCohen, AW, October 16, 2007

While the world holds its breath in anticipation of the Mideast Summit in Annapolis – which, no doubt, will constitute a historic landmark, giving a most significant boost to the economy of that small town in Maryland – the Israeli right wing comes up with a new peace initiative, launched by MK Benny Elon, chairman of the National Union and the Moledet Party, as “The Israeli Initiative,” “a new way of thinking about the conflict, in learning from our mistakes, and in rereading the regional map toward a revitalized and genuine quest to achieve The Right Road to Peace.” Elon also praises his plan in the media as being “beyond Left and Right.” And it has already been endorsed by U.S. Sen. Sam Brownback….

To gain support for this ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian territories, Elon quotes “Independent polls indicat[ing] that half of all Palestinians are considering moving to a different country.” This might be true – thanks to Benny Elon and his fellow settlers. Years ago, when asked to explain what he meant by “voluntary transfer” of Palestinians, Rabbi Elon gave an example from Jewish law. According to the Halacha, a rabbinical court cannot impose a divorce on a refusing husband; but what it can do is use sanctions, including incarceration and even physical penalties, until the husband succumbs. This is what Elon meant by “voluntary transfer”: making Palestinian life in the Territories unlivable, to the extent that they would rather live somewhere else….