National Interest USA

JASON KOUTSOUKIS HERALD CORRESPONDENT

Tel Aviv: The Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, returned to Israel last night after an apparently disastrous meeting with the US President, Barack Obama, in Washington.

According to leaked accounts reported in the Israeli media, Mr Obama humiliated Mr Netanyahu by leaving the meeting early.

”I’m going to the residential wing to have dinner with Michelle and the girls,” Mr Obama reportedly said, adding that Mr Netanyahu should consult his aides about goodwill gestures Israel was prepared to make towards the Palestinians before renewed peace talks. ”’I'm still around,” he said. ”Let me know if there is anything new.”

The talks were shrouded in an unusual news blackout, with no statement issued after the meeting and no official photographs released. US officials said the two met alone for about 90 minutes. Mr Netanyahu then huddled with staff separately for 90 minutes before requesting a second meeting with Mr Obama.

When the President returned, Mr Netanyahu is said to have made a counter-offer which Mr Obama did not accept.

In an Israeli TV interview before leaving for Israel, Mr Netanyahu said he had made progress in his meeting with Mr Obama. “I think we are finding the golden mean between the traditional policy of all the Israeli governments, and our desire to find a way to renew the peace process. I think we made progress today.”

Relations between Israel and the US were shaken this month when, during a visit by the US Vice-President, Joe Biden, Israel announced plans to build 1600 Jewish homes on Palestinian land in occupied East Jerusalem.

One congressman who met Mr Netanyahu after his White House meeting said: ”It was awful. Netanyahu looked excessively concerned and upset. He waved around those pages, eager to persuade us that because of the complicated approval process for issuing construction permits in Jerusalem, one could never know in advance when a decision would be published on the issue.”

Writing in the Israeli Maariv, columnist Ben Caspit said there was no humiliation exercise the Americans did not try on Mr Netanyahu. ”Bibi received in the White House the treatment reserved for the president of Equatorial Guinea,” Caspit wrote.

Yedioth Ahronoth said the White House ambushed Mr Netanyahu. ”Everything was scrupulously planned, most likely, and the Israeli Premier, perhaps the most sought-after personage in the Oval Office in the past two decades, was received like the last of the wazirs from Lower Senegal.”

The consensus among Israeli commentators is that the US will continue to exert more pressure on Israel to move swiftly towards the creation of a Palestinian state.

”The US is abandoning us and effectively turning into Europe,” Caspit wrote. ”From now on, we are completely alone. The entire world, from one end to another, talks about a Palestinian state inside territory similar to 1967.”

”Obama wants to know whether Netanyahu is there. In explicit words, in writing, not with hints, not with a ‘maybe,’ not with a ‘yes, but’. A simple question that requires a simple answer.”

US and Israeli officials are working on a document dubbed ”the blueprint,” which covers all issues, including Jerusalem, that need to be resolved to let talks go forward.

Mr Netanyahu will try to sell it to his cabinet while the US Middle East envoy, George Mitchell, will take it to Arab and Palestinian officials for approval.

by Henri J. Barkey

The Turkish military, unaccountable to any political authority and long accustomed to operating with impunity, has suddenly come under scrutiny with the revelation that several of its officers have plotted to overthrow the country’s constitutional order. The arrests last week of forty-nine high-ranking former Turkish military officers, including former service chiefs of the navy and air force, as well as a deputy chief of staff, heralds the latest and perhaps final stage in a confrontation between Turkey’s powerful military establishment and society. The roundup, carried out by the judiciary with an unclear degree of involvement by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, will humiliate the military.

Although the two service chiefs and the deputy chief of staff were released, the sight of so many high-ranking officers being hauled in front of judges is unprecedented. It is too early to tell whether these arrests will solidify the attitudes of hard-line officers who are itching to topple the government, or whether the era of coups and other forms of unconstitutional attempts at overthrowing the system is over. All signs do point to the latter; and, in any case, there is still a significant threshold to cross—the expected change in military command in August.

What is clear, however, is that unless Turkey manages to devise a new constitution to replace the one imposed by the military in 1982, it will face increasing instability and likely become prone to erratic foreign-policy behavior.

This crisis is the culmination of profound shifts in Turkish society. The emergence of a conservative and pious business elite, made possible by the economic reforms of the 1980s, lay the groundwork for Erdogan’s Islam-influenced Justice and Development Party (AKP), which rose to power in 2002. For secularist elites, who are wedded to a doctrinaire vision of the Turkish state that does not acknowledge society’s deep religious roots—or the existence of the Kurds, for that matter—AKP’s commanding majority has been viewed with alarm, if not panic.

On one side are the AKP and its allies: some liberal intellectual elites, the conservative business elites and the religious orders. On the other are the forces of the secular state apparatus, composed primarily of the army, the bureaucracy, an important segment of the press establishment, academics, old-line political parties, and of course the judiciary.

Caught between and running scared are the old Western-oriented business elites, represented by TUSIAD, the Turkish Industrialists and Businessmen Association, and some intellectual elites who are not aligned with the AKP. These intellectuals sympathize with the party’s broad goals, but not with its leadership or its Islamist origins.

The military and judiciary have taken it upon themselves to protect Turkish “democracy” by any means. Four times since 1960, the military has intervened to overthrow governments, and the judiciary routinely bans political parties and politicians of which it does not approve.

What is new, however, is the Turks’ increasing resistance to military and judiciary conceptions of politics. The resistance comes from a more diverse population, a strengthening civil society and other forces, the most important of which is Taraf, a small daily newspaper. Taraf’s willingness to publish damaging stories about the armed forces, something mainstream newspapers have always shied away from, has energized individuals in various state offices to leak damaging information.

This is hardly a struggle between angels and demons, but the primary culprit is the military establishment, which has missed the signs of change. Its actions have backfired and further damaged its reputation. The most egregious case of army interference in domestic politics occurred on April 27, 2007, when its chief of staff issued a clumsily written statement on the Turkish Armed Forces website warning against the selection of Abdullah Gül as president of the republic. The army’s opposition derived primarily if not exclusively from the fact that Gül’s wife wore a turban—an unacceptable wardrobe choice, since he would be occupying the position once held by Atatürk, the founder of the secular Turkish republic, in whose name the military acts.

This forced the AKP to call for elections, which it won with an overwhelming mandate, but after which it has not succeeded in enacting reforms. This is in part because the secular state establishment sought revenge by trying to ban the AKP altogether, an attempt that almost succeeded. The AKP has yet to grow into a classical liberal party that embraces openness, freedom of thought and the rule of law. Instead, it has replicated all the ills of Turkish parties past, including one-man domination, the use of government power to squelch the opposition, and the lack of a comprehensive vision that transcends the immediate concerns of its own pious core constituency.

As a result, a new Turkish constitution remains both a distant dream and an absolute necessity. Turkey needs to overhaul its archaic political institutions that have prevented the evolution of dynamic and responsive politics. The resulting paralysis has always been an invitation to greater military involvement.

For the United States, Turkey’s traditional ally, this is a most unappealing scenario. The White House does not want to see Turkey wallow in crises, nor will it countenance a coup by any means. The former might simply be written in the stars—but Washington can be crystal clear that it will not accept the latter.

Henri J. Barkey is a nonresident visiting scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, and a professor of international relations at Lehigh University.

SIMON MANN

WASHINGTON: The US President, Barack Obama, has called for an end to the bitter debate over healthcare reform, committing Democrats to a last-ditch effort to pass laws that are expected to extend health insurance to an additional 30 million Americans.

To do so, Mr Obama confirmed the use of a parliamentary tactic known as reconciliation, but shrugged off Republican charges that its use would amount to an abuse of power.

“The American people want to know if it’s still possible for Washington to look out for their interests and their future,” Mr Obama said during a choreographed media announcement where he was flanked by medical workers wearing white lab coats.

“They are waiting for us to act. They are waiting for us to lead. And as long as I hold this office, I intend to provide that leadership.

“I do not know how this plays politically, but I know it’s right. And so I ask Congress to finish its work and I look forward to signing this reform into law.”

The palpable sense of urgency contained in the President’s announcement has been reflected increasingly in the words of Democratic strategists conscious that 13 months into the Obama presidency, the administration remains focused heavily on its healthcare reform and not on job creation.

With Mr Obama’s popularity sagging, data due for release today is expected to reveal accelerating job losses in February.

Unemployment sits a shade under 10 per cent, but the recession’s impact has hit black and Latino communities particularly hard, with jobless rates of 16.5 per cent and 12.6 per cent.

A further 20 million Americans say they still cannot get enough work.

Marc Morial, the president of the National Urban League, which works for economic self-reliance for African-Americans, said the US needed “a strong, targeted jobs bill … and we need it now”. He described the recent $US15 billion ($16.6 billion) jobs bill, with tax relief for small businesses that take on new workers, as “timid” and “weak”.

A victory on healthcare would finally free up Democrats to throw everything at job creation in the lead-up to November’s midterm elections.

But the course that the Democrats have chosen is complicated. The healthcare bill originally passed by the Senate on Christmas Eve will now be sent to the House of Representatives, where Democrats command a big majority. Once passed by the House, the details of the reform will be fine-tuned in a reconciliation bill that will take in some measures proposed by Republicans while extracting other highly contentious items that favour individual states.

While a reconciliation bill, like all legislation, requires a simple majority for it to be passed, debate on such a bill is limited to just 20 hours in each chamber, negating an attempted filibuster.

While reconciliation has been used more than 20 times since its introduction in 1974, Republicans argue that in this case it is inappropriate.

The Obama administration pointed out that the Bush administration used reconciliation to push through tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans in 2001 and 2003.

A Republican senator, John Thune, said using the tactic for a big revamp of one-sixth of the US economy without any bipartisan support was ”unprecedented”. “It’s not a done deal,” Senator Thune said. He hoped “reasonable Democrats” would join Republicans to kill off the legislation.

First family to fly in … President Obama and his family will visit later this month. Photo: Reuters/Jason Reed

Barack Obama’s trip to Australia this month is in jeopardy as the US President pushes to clinch historic healthcare reform in America, one of his key election pledges.

Mr Obama, with his family, is expected to arrive in Australia on March 22 for a three-day tour after visiting Guam and Indonesia. But some fellow Democrats have expressed concern that the President’s absence will come during the critical final act of his revamp of the healthcare system, which is expected to extend health insurance coverage to an extra 30 million Americans.

Mr Obama will address a joint sitting of both houses of Parliament on March 23, the government confirmed yesterday.

”The United States is our most important friend and ally,” the leader of the house, Anthony Albanese, said in Canberra. ”President Obama will be a very welcome guest in our country.” Mr Albanese also announced that the Indonesian President, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, would address a joint sitting next Wednesday.

Mr Obama said yesterday that Democrats would use a parliamentary tactic known as reconciliation to thwart Republican attempts to block the reforms.

”It’s his judgment call,” the Democrat congressman Elijah Cummings told the Bloomberg news agency. ”But it would be a good sign if perhaps the trip were postponed until we get healthcare done … Moments like this don’t come often. We’re at a crucial time.”

In Canberra, the US ambassador’s children are preparing to play host to the Obamas.

”My kids are practising their Wii skills so they can go one-on-one with Sasha and Malia,” Jeffrey Bleich said.

It was ”not accidental ”, Mr Bleich told the Herald in Sydney yesterday, that Mr Obama was visiting Australia earlier in his term than any other US president. ”The US has no better friend in the world than Australia and this is one way of demonstrating it in a very concrete fashion.”

He said the visit would reinforce a partnership already in great working order and there were no plans to ask Australia to provide more troops for Afghanistan at this time.

”All the big issues we are working on, we are working with Australia. I think the meetings between the President and Prime Minister will be about those big global issues – Afghanistan, counter-terrorism, counterinsurgency, climate change, nuclear non-proliferation, broader regional free trade, scientific and technological exchange.”

He expects China’s expanding role to be on the leaders’ agenda, but Mr Bleich played down the prospect of any role for the Mandarin-speaking Prime Minister Kevin Rudd as a conduit between the world’s two biggest economies. ”At the end of the day, it’s a bilateral relationship, and it has to be done bilaterally. That is how hard issues are addressed and how hard issues are resolved,” Mr Bleich said.

Some have portrayed China’s blocking actions at the Copenhagen climate change conference and refusal to back sanctions against Iran’s nuclear ambitions as signs of a more assertive foreign policy. Mr Bleich said he would not call China’s evolving interaction more assertive, but rather a reflection of a more mature relationship, and it was normal there was some friction.

with Ari Sharp

A gunman coolly drew a weapon from his pocket and opened fire at the teeming subway entrance to the Pentagon complex on Thursday evening, wounding two police officers before being shot and critically wounded, officials said.

Authorities said all three were taken to a hospital.

Richard Keevill, chief of Pentagon police, said the two officers suffered grazing wounds that were not life-threatening.

The suspect, believed to be a US citizen, walked up to a security checkpoint at the Pentagon in an apparent attempt to get inside the Defence Department headquarters, at about 6.40pm (1040 AEDT today).

“He just reached in his pocket, pulled out a gun and started shooting,” Keevill said. “He walked up very cool. He had no real emotion on his face.”

The Pentagon officers returned fire with semiautomatic weapons. “His (the suspect’s) injury is pretty critical,” Keevill said.

The rush-hour assault happened outside a massively fortified building that nevertheless is near busy crowds of transit riders.

The subway station is immediately adjacent to the Pentagon building. Since a redesign following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack on the Pentagon, riders can no longer disembark directly into the building. Riders take a long escalator ride to the surface from the underground station, then pass through a security check outside the doors of the building, where further security awaits.

In the immediate aftermath, all Pentagon entrances were secured, then all were reopened except one from the subway, said Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman.

A Pentagon official working late in the building said people inside first heard of the shooting on television. They were later told the building was locked down and to stay in place. The huge five-sided building is crisscrossed by 10 main corridors.

Then at around 7.30pm (1140 AEDT), they heard an announcement on the public address system that they could leave through Corridor 3 – one widely used to get access to one of the parking lots.

“We really don’t know anything, just that we can leave now through that corridor,” one official said on condition of anonymity because he wasn’t authorised to speak about the incident.

AP