The fate of the coalition was written in the ballot boxes as an absurdity: It would either be an absurdly and extremely right-wing and narrowly winning coalition, or it would be an absurdly wide coalition of an almost national unity government nature containing far right and far left political parties under the "uniting" leadership of Netanyahu. That is what has in fact happened. A great deal of political bribery should have taken place in order for this coalitional Frankenstein to be put together. Inescapably, the 32nd government of Israel features the largest cabinet in Israeli history. Not only has the number of ministries been increased to 30 so as to be large enough to be used as bargaining material, deputy ministerial posts were also distributed among coalition partners. This undermined public confidence in the new cabinet even before it received a vote of confidence in the Israeli parliament on the night of March 31. The Knesset, the Israeli parliament, voted 69-45 to approve the new and largest cabinet in Israeli history. It is this government that Turkey, among other nations of the world, needs to formulate a way to work with. The new cabinet features Avigdor Lieberman of the Yisrael Beiteinu [Israel is Our Home] party as foreign minister of the state of Israel. I remember the days when Ms. Tzipi Livni was not a welcomed name in Ankara because of her "harsh" discourse about Gaza and because she was so ready and willing to send Israeli soldiers to Gaza.
Lieberman is against sending Israeli soldiers to Gaza.
He finds that too dangerous for "our sons." He prefers sending atomic bombs, instead. Well, he had said that while he was in the opposition. Power changes politicians. He may have changed his positions, and we hope that he has changed himself. Regardless, Ankara will have to formalize ways to communicate with this Lieberman. Who would have thought that the day would come that we would miss Livni!
Netanyahu's defense portfolio went to its previous holder: Labor leader retired Gen. Ehud Barak. Barak has been the voice of moderation and peaceful solutions to the Arab-Israeli conflict in the Israeli imagination. He is all-and-only "image." But he is a good image. In the year 2001, he managed to make the world believe that he had promised Yasser Arafat all he wanted and needed but that old Arafat left the negotiation table in Taba, thus leading his nation to despair and provoking the reoccupation. Barak had made several promises indeed. But he had already lost the support of parliament at home. Everyone in Israel knew that the maximum support he would get for the deal he would sign in Taba would be 32 out of 120 chairs in the Knesset. He made promises with the security of knowing that none of them would be approved back home.
This Barak has been a "savior" in Turkish-Israeli relations. Whenever bilateral relations entered dire straits, Barak intervened and found a solution. He paid several emergency visits to Ankara to overcome misunderstandings and personally deal with problems emanating from a lack of communication.
On the day the new Israeli government took office, Israeli newspaper Haaretz published a short news item claiming that, despite the recent battle of words between the leaders of the two countries, the Israeli army would participate in a joint Turkish-American military maneuver. The news item was not denied by Turkish military sources. With Barak at the Defense Ministry, the Turkish military must not have seen any reason to have reservations in working with the Israeli army.
Speaking at the last session of his government, outgoing Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said he felt for once that there had been a chance for lasting peace with Syria and that he was very sorry to have failed to accomplish that peace. The chance Olmert referred to was Turkey's mediation between Syria and Israel that failed only after Israel reoccupied Gaza in late December of last year. Speaking after Olmert, new Prime Minister Netanyahu called such peace efforts "shortcuts."
It is such a "shortcut" government that Turkey needs to find a way to speak with.
