The "Egyptian Failure" - February 2011

The "Egyptian Failure"

The failure of the president of the United States vis-à-vis Egypt should have surprised no one.  President Obama has no experience, unfortunately, he is unable to lead neither in matters of foreign policy nor in domestic issues. Indeed the collapse of his “medical philosophy” is just a prime example, as this policy was assumed as the crown of his presidency thus far.

Indeed, The Egyptian failure is just another item in a long and quite embarrassing list of US failures in Foreign policy, substantiating an assumption that somehow the White House cannot plan a long-term policy that works, or challenge the question “what shall we do if…?’.  Alas, the "Egyptian Failure'' is unique and distinct from other failures.

The 20^th Century witnessed major American failures. The proportion between failure and success is alarming. The First World War was concluded with The US being shut out from the League of Nation [an English invention supported and promoted by The Wilson Administration], when the congress simply refused to adopt the president’s policy. The US President was drugged - during the Versailles Conference by the angry French and imposed on the “The New World” the infamous Versailles agreements, with its impossible terms imposed on the Weimar Republic. A first year History student in collage will confirm that the Versailles Agreement were the first shots of World War 2.  

 Zalli Jaffe

Ambassador Zalman Shuval

Ambassador Zalman Shuval

The historian Paul Kennedy is a brilliant thinker. A great historian, a very bad soothsayer. Both the last chapter of his The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers and his book Preparing for the Twenty First Century did not bring out the best in him. Why? Because Historians should not be fortune tellers.

Historians are in a habit of judging unfairly, as they judge decisions of the past, with the tools available today. Alas, the tools of today, were not available to those making decisions in the past. The historian should judge the decision of the past taking into consideration the available decision making processes and tools at the time the decision was made.

But one criteria should always be remembered. Something that did happened, can happen again, it is not "out of the blue", the assumption is not mere speculation. Something that did not happen, might, but then we must ask, why did it not happen thus far. Usually, the answer is technology. Be it the industrial revolutions commenced in England, the technical revolution that commenced over a quote of a century ago, or the arrival to what Thomas Friedman calls The World is flat.

How do you judge the future? Mostly speculate, as many unknown element will compromise  any assessment made. The collapse of the Soviet Union was anticipated. The results, the total anarchy in the supervision over the non conventional weaponry that resulted thereof, was not.

The Christian Science Monitor pointed out to the following for more than four decades, Syria has been a fiercely secular state. Its majority-Sunni population is ruled by a minority Shiite sect, the Alawites. But the country's majority Sunni population now views Syria's deepening relationship to Shiite Iran with creeping suspicion. "Syrians are speaking of Shiitization," says Redwan Ziade, a political analyst and human rights activist in Damascus.

Zalman Shuval

Such examples are an Unfinished symphony. And so, when speaking about the future, you need to have vast store of wisdom about the past, a sophisticated understanding of how developments accrue, even those of the unexpected, analyse your side's mistake. In other words, be a good student of the past, so the future will be better.

Israel was blessed with great minds. Great philosophers, great doers. Not many had a career in writing, and in doing as did our guest speaker tonight.  One of the leading businessman in Israel who has a distinguished career as a parliamentarian and as a diplomat, as the very proud Israeli Ambassador to Washington, during difficult times, when George Bush The Father occupied  The Oval office, and James Baker, was, the Secretary of State and as adviser to the Prime Ministers.

It was Ambassador Shuval who was encouraging the policy to have the US attack Iraq, sooner rather then later in 2003, he is a man who was not discouraged by hostility even in Washington and stood firm when Israel's interests were at stake. He is a phenomenally well read intellectual – who is addicted to classical music I should add – and he is one individual to whom this institution, The Jerusalem Great Synagogue has an eternal debt.

Ladies and gentleman, if there is anybody who can intelligently analyse the future based on the past, it is Ambassador Zalman Shuval, so "lend him your ears".

Zalli Jaffe

Turkey, A secular country? June 2010

Turkey, A secular country?

The American “Newsweek” is one of the most important magazines in the world; therefore it should be subject to the famous dictum “wise men beware of your words”.

Last week, this very distinguished weekly published a detailed article by his correspondent in Istanbul. The political conclusion of this very distinguished newspaper stands as a subtitle to the article and it reads inter alia “Betrayed by Israel” and rebuffed by the Europeans, the Turks built for themselves a new entity as an independent regional superpower.

As reflected by the article Israel’s “betrayals” that contributed to Turkey’s new identity is indeed the attack by Israeli soldiers of the Mavi Marmara boat during the latter’s effort (in participation with other boats) to challenge the Gaza siege. We have studied the very long article and couldn’t find any other reason in the article relating to the Turkish-Israeli relations that brought the Turks to the conclusion that it has been betrayed. “The flotilla”! Nothing else.

Weapons found on board the Mavi Marmara

Some history about Turkey will teach us a lot about hysteria in Turkey. Mustafa Kemal Atatürk (the name Atatürk translated as “Turkey’s Father” a name he adopted only in 1925 when he obligated every Turk to select a family name) gained the most prestigious titles i.e. “Raza”, and “Fasha”. He became the leader of modern Turkey after a long conspiring period. Atatürk commenced his betrayal against Sultan Mehemed VI when nominated by The Sultan to be responsible for Sansum, an area in Anatolia. Indeed the 19^th of May is a national holiday in turkey (commemorating the day in which Atatürk arrived [in 1919] in Sansum). As Atatürk knew well that Sansum will be ‘his beginning’. The original reason for the revolution was not necessarily the Sultanate per se, but as Atatürk saw it, the fact that the Turkish people fell far behind the West and his aim was to lead Turkey to modern civilization. In his book: Iran, Turkey and Americas Future, Stephen Kinzer writes that Turkey’s story (as is Iran’s) teaches that democracy can take roots only during the course of generations. Democratization is not an ‘event’ but a comprehensive approach to life.

And indeed until 20 years ago, Atatürk’s secular democratic thinking was the core principal of modern Turkey. When democracy threatened to go astray, the army - with its secular approach to life - interfered in the democratic process. Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, the Turkish Prime  Minister started delivering some warning messages twenty years ago. Presently when Europe is challenged by severe economical crises, the Turkish Prime Minister is developing business and economic ties both in the Middle East and in Africa. He commenced this initiative in the year 2003 when he came into power. In the outset his political party – The Justice and Development Party (AKP) demonstrated a modern Islamic approach. It supported the US, Europe [Erdoğan conducted the failed efforts to have \turkey join the EEC] and even the relationship with Israel was stabled. Alas, this was due to the fact that the alternative infrastructure was not yet ready, and the failure to have Turkey recognized as an equal member of Europe.

One of the first hints to the change was demonstrated when the Prime Minister refused to adhere to the military’s pressure not to elect a president whose wife was covered with a shroud. This demonstrated the weakening of the army’s political influence. It could not impose its views but sometimes recommend.

Erdoğan is Muslim and his ideology was always Muslim. Erdoğan did not befriend Iran because of the flotilla. The flotilla received support of Erdoğan because of his closeness to Iran. It was Erdoğan who expressed himself and voted against sanctions to be imposed on Iran and his newly found friends in Syria are in accord to his Islamic policies. Erdoğan desires to lead the area and he can only do so under the umbrella of Islam (the Ottoman sultan was always the most important Muslim in the world). Anti-Israeli policy is the entry ticket to the Arab world. Association with Iran and Syria opened the gates to Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in the south of Lebanon, and even with a Muslim brotherhood in Egypt and more.

No. The flotillawas not the cause for the betrayal as claimed by Newsweek; the betrayal – of the Turks-caused the flotilla.

But he who does not remember the past is condemned to repeat it. Prime Minister Erdoğan’s policy is already creating internal tension. Extreme Islam and tourism do not go hand in hand. The army values its relationship with Israel as do many businessmen and secular politicians. If the Prime Minister will not come back to his secular senses (and I hope he does not) he will be ousted either democratically or by the army whose political position is weakening as the Islam is strengthening.

Atatürk introduced secular turkey. For the benefit of turkey it should stay that way. 


Zalli Jaffe.

Letter To Thomas L. Friedman - September 2011

Letter To Thomas L. Friedman, Author of "That Used To Be Us"

At the outset, let me make a short introduction. I am a lawyer in Israel and ,inter alia, am also the vice president of the Jerusalem Great Synagogue (which I hope you will visit on one of your next trips to this country).

I come to the USA frequently, I have respect to its culture, integrity, leadership and people, although I do not always agree with its administration's policies (not always do I agree with the policies of my government - neither do you, I know, I do follow your articles and books), but this is the great advantage of being a citizen of and resident in a democracy.

After reading your latest book, That Used To Be Us, I have decided to take the liberty and write to you, out of respect to your vast store of knowledge, understanding and depth of your writing.

I am writing to you, as I earnestly believe that if you resolve to take action in the hereinafter matter, you would be adhered.

I have resolved to write to you as in a number of places in your book you make reference to the proportion between budgets allocated to universities - you point to the budget of California - 8%; and to prisons - 11%.

I had the unfortunate experience of visiting a client who is in pre-trial custody in California. He is charged with financial misconduct and, I assume, because he is a flight risk, he was not allowed bail until recently. He was moved from one detention center to another and until 2 days ago he was jailed for 13 months, all before trial, thus he is assumed innocent.

Naturally, I do understand the police's need to keep an individual in custody although he is not guilty. flight risks, severely effecting investigations, etc. But as long as he is innocent, the restrictions on his liberty should be confined to the utmost necessities.

The USA is fighting for liberty, democracy and human rights all over the world. American servicemen and servicewomen sacrificed their lives around the globe so other countries will sanctify human rights. Forgive me, Mr. Friedman, the USA forgot its own back yard. And as The Leader of the free world, the USA must serve as an example to others. It embarrassingly does not.

I notice, white crime suspects in detention centers - all before trial - are restricted humanely. They have restricted access to phone, they are to share cells with murder suspects or rape suspects, who rule the cells and the white collar suspect cannot complain, as he is endangering his life if he does, and many a times he is removed to solitary confinement. The inmate can have a shower once every three days, he is to be dressed in the detention center's uniform and the worst of it all, the physical conditions in many of the detention centers are appalling.

Now, if such a man is found not guilty at the end of a trial, he had suffered human indignities to the extreme, without cause. To be honest, listening to the descriptions of the conditions and the environments of the detentions centers I have visited [in California] I was thinking to myself, I would have admitted to the murder of Abraham Lincoln, just to move to a normal prison.

Such atmospheres are dangerous to a democracy. People who cannot challenge such conditions might admit to crimes they did not commit. May I remind you that in democracies, if someone signs a contract under duress he has the right to cancel the agreement. I do not know a more severe duress then this detention center.

There is a reason why someone's liberty is denied before trail. Such denial should be done in dignity and should be restricted. A detainee should not be denied access to anything that does not compromise the real reason for his detention. For example, if he is allowed certain amount of calls a week, he should be allowed unrestricted calls (in any event, all his calls are recorded). He should be in a cell with windows that bring in lights of days, not a minor window. He should be able to shower any time he wants, not once every two or three days. He should be allowed to have his family bring in food, In other words, he should be treated as an innocent detainee, not a convicted criminal.

The detention centers are a great failure in US dignified democracy [as is handcuffing a 85 years old man when he is taken to custody].

Now, this is not a matter for the hard working dedicated wardens and policemen in the detention center [whose courtesy, I have experienced, and was so impressed with]. This is a matter of policy from above. The rules have to be changed. The rules are that a man is innocent until he is found guilty. The rules are that a man cannot be punished until he is found guilty.

America, the leader of democracy, America, who lounged war against

human rights violation in other countries, is acting in this issue like a third world regime.

I am not an American, but I respect the USA. My son and his friends study about the democracy in the USA. I and they, look up to America. Alas, in that respect, "That is us". The "ugly us". "The failure of democratic us". In a previous book you wrote - The World Is Flat - you have explained the ability of shifting work from the USA to other countries [emphasizing India and China]. No, the US human rights is not to be compared to any of these countries. However the humiliations and human restrictions suffered – ‘irrelevantly’ so - by inmates in detention centers in the USA, brings America one step closer to them, instead of bringing them one step closer to America.

As a proud American, as one of the world's leading publicists, I invite you to consider challenging this very black spot in US democracy and call for a change.

What do I as an Israeli, care? America and its values are as important to me as they are to an American.

sincerely yours,

Zalli Jaffe

Pride Parade

Pride Parade

There are a number of ways to challenge difficulties facing society. Some will simply ignore the existence of a problem. Others, might try to analyze and seek for an intellectual or practical solution to the problem. A third group will try to use the problem as a means to promote their own selfishness or narrow interest. I do not know too many subjects that are as disputed and in which both parties to the dispute cause themselves grave harm as the challenge of the Israeli society with the issue of homosexuals.

Let us first address the opinion of the religious community. In the past, as in the present, members of the associated with the Shas political party attacked the homosexual community and tried to promote "special treatment" to every "pervert". The then minister of health refused to address the real problem of the homosexual community. Now, the observance of the Sabbath is itemized in the bible more frequently than homosexuality. According to the Talmud, Shabbat represents the whole bible, and its importance is also emphasizes by the fact that it it’s the fifth commandment. Notwithstanding the above, the religious political leaders, sit together openly with those who desecrate the holiness of the Shabbat. They demonstrate leniency and courtesy to these people, as they should. Homosexuality is not the severest felony in the bible, and its position does not equal that of the keeping of the Shabbat. Thus, the attitude of the religious community to the issue of homosexuality should not be violent and rude as the attitude of the religious community to those who keep the Sabbath is not neither violent nor rude.

Pride Parade Amsterdam

On the other hand, the reason for the religious community's attitude to the homosexuals in Israel, is due to the homosexuals attitude toward themselves. They have converted a serious and challenging issue to simple pornography as will be testified by the "Pride Parade" in Tel Aviv, in Amsterdam and in other places. (It should be recorded that Israeli participants in the gay parade in Amsterdam were the most daring in their dress or more precise, undress) and pornography does not deserve a serious approach, but utter contempt as it desecrates the human as a human. It should not attract support but condemnation. It does not deserve consideration but utter blockage. It benefits none but destroys the basics of society as it did in Greece and Rome.

I have listened to the commitment given by the organizers of the Pride Parade in Jerusalem according to which the parade in Jerusalem will be modest and not reflect the parades in Tel Aviv. I appreciate this consideration, alas, it cannot suffice. There is a stigma adopted by the members of that community. They were the organizers of the marches in Tel Aviv, they were sending their representatives to the gay parades around the world, and it was an advocate by the name of Nati Shaked, whose recent success had nothing to do with his profession, but by him becoming the world "Mr. Gay". His pictures in the world press speak for themselves. These parades, are nothing but cheap pornography, and the covering of pornography with modesty, cannot do. The list of the famous people in history who were homosexuals is a distinguished one. Whether the accusations are correct, or not. Alexander the Great, the King of Macedonia, Fredrick the Great from Prussia, Francis Bacon, or Oscar Wilde, (who spent time in jail for his tendencies) the scientist Isaac Newton, the historian, Anthony Blant and even Leonard Bernstein, the conductor. Some of the people were fighting society, some were boycotted by it.

So we have advanced. Today when the homosexual community seeks recognition by society, when the homosexual wishes society to recognize him as one of it, the representative of the Israeli homosexual community, march in the gay parade in Amsterdam, they – and only they – dress with pink belts, and only pink belts thus preventing me from addressing them with the dignity they require. Every human being, deserves respect as such. Even the homosexual. Every member of a minority. But if the homosexual really seeks for society to challenge the problems he faces society should demand he treat himself with dignity.

In the latter part of the sixties, the western hemisphere covered itself with the spirit of "free love". The origin of the Woodstock festival. Demonstrations of love were everywhere. Everything was permitted, and in Plato's Euphoria, all made love to all. And although the reference was lust between man and woman, I would have objected with all my strength to "a free love march" in Jerusalem. As I would not want to see, strippers march in Jerusalem justified by the claim that Jerusalem is the capital city of all. My objections to the gay parade in Jerusalem is not rooted in the tendencies of its participants, but by the fact that they have converted the parade to prostitution. And a capital city has to retain its dignity. The Pride Parade that in the past took place in Jerusalem, or the one in Tel Aviv is not an intellectual challenge. It is not a demonstration of seriousness, but pornography. Those marching adopted the name, "the Pride Parade" but nothing is more humiliating more insulting, event to those homosexuals who wish to live as a mainstream member of society. The essence of the parade is nothing but lust. The question is difficult, the challenge is not simple. Part of the reaction of the religious community is rooted in this atmosphere. A parade which is lust a cheap imitation to Athens and Rome ignoring the result of the aftermath of these two cities.

Zalli Jaffe

Iran Dear - August 2015

Iran Dear

The US history of foreign policy is not the greatest page of glory. Just a short list of the most important failures will confirm that. The political arrangements with the USSR following the Second World War, and the development of The Cold War. The invasion of Hungry, Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam Afghanistan, Iraq.

Now, the 44th president of the United States knows better. Or does he? Francis Fukuyama explained in his Political Order and Political Decay that "one cannot build a steel plant in a country in which there is no market for steel, no supply of competent managers or workers, no infrastructure to move products to markets, and no legal system to protect the rights of the plant's investors". Generalizing this view, you must address each and every situation, and each and every nation and country, taking into consideration the unique geographical, religious, political and philosophical circumstances associated with it. The U.S. failed in Iraq and Afghanistan because it wanted these nations to implement Democracy "our way", to adopt Western values. This just did not work. Hungary converted to democracy because it did have some experience between the wars. Russians did not see "a free day" for a thousand years (the Czarist regimes were followed by a civil war, than communism). Who in Russia could have implemented democracy over night? The result? "Putinism" and the renewal of the Cold War.

Not long ago, the United States and its Western allies, tried to negotiate economical support in exchange for the Kim dynasty’s stopping the developments of nuclear bombs. North Korea fooled the U.S. Three times. It did get financial support, it continued developing its non-conventional arsenal, and the U.S could do nothing about it but negotiate again, just to be fooled again. In 1990 North Korea threatened to turn Seoul into "a sea of fire" and concessions to it were made. In 1994 an "Agreed Framework" was signed in Genève in exchange of freezing all nuclear program. The North got what Andrei Lankov - in his book The Real North Korea- called "hefty payment". KEDO was formed. Yet, foreign monitors in 2004 were restricted even in monitoring the distribution of food [supplied by them] to the North Koreans. In 2002 while Assistant Secretary of State James Kelly was in Pyongyang, it was found that the North Koreans were cheating on promises not to develop nuclear arsenals. In 2009 North Korea admitted of developing Highly Enrich Uranium. Nobody took it seriously when unilaterally The North Korean withdrew from the Non Proliferation Treaty. It was George Bush who at last realized what happened when he defined Kim Jong Il as "pigmy" and his country as part of the "axis of evil". But for many years the North was supported by the US while cheating it in major scales.

The former director of the U.S. Department of Energy Nuclear site in Loos Alamos was invited to visit North Korea's nuclear facilities, a modern and large facility. As Lankov concludes "this once again demonstrated that North Korea had been lying all those years. Hardly anybody was surprised by such discovery, however.

The President of the United States trusts the Iranians so much, that in the new treaty - Annex 3 clause 10D - the West undertakes to help protect Iranian nuclear facilities against attack. So let us see. If Khamenei and his cronies try to implement what they promise day and night in the ears of everybody who wants to hear that Israel is to be annihilated, and Israel will try to damage Iran's nuclear capabilities, will the U.S. Help Iran against Israel? Or against Saudi Arabia? In the infamous Munich Agreement of September 1938, guarantees were offered to the potential future Victims. Today, the protection is given to the Offender, the villain.

Now, president Obama believes Ali Khamenei who issued a Fatwa against the development of nuclear capabilities, (The president forgot that this fatwa was amended, prohibiting the use of nuclear weapons, not the development of same), or to the undertakings of President Hassan Rouhani not to develop atomic bomb. President Obama does not know of Al-Takkeya - the Islamic Principle of holy deception? Khamenei does not think that Islamic Bomb is a religious mission? And if Iran cheats and the other signatories to the treaty wish to inspect sites? No immediacy is allowed. A 21 days advance notice is required. Moreover, Iran might say no. If it does, the other signatories might JOINTLY resolve to veto Iran's "no". Indeed, let us see. Russia? Who will never allow sanctions against Iran again? May be China? Or now that the sanctions are lifted and trillions of Dollars will be invested in Iran (So it can continue support international terrorism - it is not in variance with the agreement) governments will not be influenced by business? Was it not petroleum that prevented US aircraft's carrying military aid to Israel to land in Europe during the October 1973 war? 

Ali Khamenei & President Barack Obama

Did Iran by now not already cheat The President? Why were Security Councils resolutions 1737 or 1747 against Iran needed? Was it not because Iran was lying to the world? However, the White House knows better. Notwithstanding SABA’s 2011 conclusion that Iran is developing nuclear capabilities, in August 2012, a formal statement by the White House denied it.

Iran will act exactly like North Korea. The president will lift the sanction and give 21 days’ advance notice on any inspection. President Barack Obama thus guarantees Iran’s nuclear capabilities. Iran, the worlds greatest sponsor of terror; Iran, the only country in the world that calls for annihilation of another country - a fact not mentioned in the agreement - will be able to develop an instrument that can destroy cities in Europe, USA and The Middle East. All thanks to the president of "The Great Satan".

In an interview to "Meet the Press", British Prime Minister David Cameron said "be in no doubt, we are committed to working with you (US- ZJ) to destroy  the caliphate (ISIS - ZJ) in both countries (Syria and Iraq - ZJ)”. ISIS will not destroy the world. But all are determine to destroy it. Iran might destroy countries and civilizations by advancing non-conventional terror. But nobody talks about destroying its nuclear capabilities. 

In a recent interview regarding the Iran deal, with Thomas Freedman of the New York Times, President Obama stated "we are not naive". Yes you are, Mr. President. You are. Very dangerously so.

Zalli Jaffe

הדיקטטור ממזרח וזה ממערב - דצמבר 2016

הדיקטטור ממזרח וזה ממערב 1939-2015

אחת ההחמצות המאכזבות ביותר שכותב שורות אלו מצא ב״תולדות כתיבת הביוגרפיה במאה העשרים״ היה ספר זיכרונותיו של אנדרי גרומיקו, שנכתב לאחר שפרש מתפקידו כנשיא ברית המועצות. גרומיקו שהיה  - כמעט ואמרתי - שר החוץ הנצחי של ברית המועצות, יכול היה לכתוב את ספר תולדות המאה העשרים החשוב ביותר. ״Mr. Nyet״ [״מר לא״] כפי שנהגו לקרוא לו במערב בשנות הארבעים - שרת אצל צמרת השלטון בתפקיד זה או אחר, החל מימי סטאלין [את תפקידיו הבכירים בצמרת משרד החוץ הסובייטי החל בשנת 1939] ובתפקיד הקומיסר לענייני חוץ, משנת 1957 ועד 1985, שאז נבעט למעלת תפקיד נשיא ברית המועצות לתקופה של שלוש שנים.

למרות ברכתו של הנרי קיסינג׳ר שכתב מבוא לספר הזיכרונות הלזה, אין הספר כי אם ״פרבדה״ במיטבו, כאשר ההסכם בין גרמניה וברית המועצות שנחתם ביום 22 יוני, 1941, ושהיווה את ״מסמך הפתיחה״ של מלחמת העולם השנייה מככב בספר באופן מביך, ואפילו מביך מאוד.

ההסכם שחתמו יואכים פון ריבנטרופ שר החוץ הגרמני [שהיה לפני כן, דווקא שגריר ארצו בלונדון], וויאצ׳לאב מולוטוב, שר החוץ הסובייטי, שזכה לשם ״הסכם ריבנטרופ מולוטוב״, נחתם במוסקבה תחת עינו הפקוחה של יוסף סטאלין. ההסכם ״הפגיש״ רצונות של שני אישים, לכאורה, הרחוקים זה מזה כמזרח ממערב. אדולף היטלר כינה את סטאלין - כמו את כל הסלבים - ״תת אדם״. אך משום מה, ״החשדן מכל אדם״ שהשמיד אף את צמרת הצבא האדום עוד לפני המלחמה, על מנת שאיש בל ירים ראש, האמין בו ברודן ממערב ולא שעה לאזהרות אנשי המודיעין על ההתקפה שנתרגשה על רוסיה ערב ״מבצע ברברוסה״.

אנדרי גרומיקו

מה היה המחנה המשותף להיטלר וסטלין שהביא לחתימת ההסכם? מחד, שנאת האחר. הפולנים, כמובן, אבל סטלין סמך על היטלר יותר מאשר על רוזוולט, או צ׳מברליין, ובודאי צ׳רצ׳ל [שהליידי אסטור וברנארד שאו, הבטיחו לו - לסטלין -  שהוא ״גמור״ עוד בשנת 1933, כפי שמעיד ההיסטוריון ווילייאם מנצ׳סטר]. ושיגעון העצמה לשלוט על כמה שיותר. ההסכם לזה הביא לאסון שממדיו בלתי נתפסים.

וההיסטוריה חוזרת על עצמה, ואין פוצה פה ומצפצף. ואמנם כן, לא הרי סטלין כהרי ולדימיר פוטין. אבל כליהם של השניים הם אותם כלים, והמטרות של שניהם הן אותן מטרות. פוטין ״בוגר״ שרות הביון החשאי KGB [הוא שימש כראש נציגות הארגון במזרח ברלין] מבקש ״להחזיר עטרה ליושנה״. האמריקאים אינם מבינים את זה [הם באמת לא מבינים הרבה במדיניות חוץ], אבל רוסיה תחת פוטין כבר מזמן החלה במלחמה הקרה. את מקומה של וייטנאם תופסת היום סוריה, אבל זה רק עניין של ״סמנטיקה״. האלימות הצבאית באוקראינה ובגרוזיה, הקדמת טילים לכיוון גבול פולין, כל אלה מעלים זיכרונות אפלים.  

מהצד השני ניצב לו ״היפוכו״ של פוטין. בעוד פוטין הנו אתאיסט, רג׳פ טאיפ ארדואן אמור לייצג חלק קיצוני באסלאם. שניהם דיקטטורים, שניהם תוקפים באלימות אנשי תקשורת [הם מחזיקים ב״שיא״ מספר העיתונאים היושבים במאסר או חוסלו פיזית]. אבל מצאו מחנה משותף. שנאת המערב [ובמיוחד ארצות הברית] והרצון ״להחזיר עטרה ליושנה״. זה, את האימפריה הסובייטית, וזה את ההשפעה העותמאנית. שניהם אחוזי שיגעון גדלות ושניהם סותרים האחד את השני.

ביקורו השבוע של נשיא תורכיה אצל נשיא רוסיה. הביקור הראשון לאחר ניסיון ההפיכה בתורכיה - אומר הרבה. ארדואן לא ביקר באף אחת מדינות נט״ו [תורכיה חברה בארגון], לא באחת ממדינות השוק האירופאי המשותף [בעבר תורכיה התחננה לחברות בארגון ולא זכתה] או בגרמניה בעלת המיעוט התורכי הרחב]. רוסיה! האם אנו בדרך להסכם חדש כדוגמת ההסכם שקדם למלחמת העולם השנייה? לא, איני חושב שרוסיה ותורכיה יסבכו את העולם במלחמת עולם שלישית [הטרור האסלאמי עושה את זה היטב] אבל המטרות שהביאו להסכם ההוא אינן שונות ממערכת היחסים המתגבשת בהווה. ארדואן ופוטין מבקשות לחלק אזורי השפעה ושליטה.

והמערב רק צריך להיזכר, או לחזור על אותן טעויות.

זלי יפה.

מכתב למעריב, י"א תשרי, תשנ"ח

לכבוד,

מכתבים למערכת,

מעריב,

בראיון אצל "שיחת ועידה" הודה היועץ המשפטי לממשלה לשעבר כי השיקול להעמיד לדין את שר המשפטים [כתוארו אז] הפרופסור יעקב נאמן הייתה העתירה שהוגשה לבית המשפט העליון לעניין כהונתו של השר.

צא ולמד, מעיד היועץ המשפטי למשלה לשעבר, כי "הרחוב" מכתיב את שקולי נוהגו. לא נוהגו הפסול של יעקב נאמן עמד לנגד עיני היועץ אלא העובדה שמאן דהוא הגיש עתירה לבג"צ.

לו האמין היועץ כי - כפי שאמר - ניתן היה לקבל החלטה אחרת מאשר להורות על ההליכים נגד נאמן, היה על היועץ המשפטי לממשלה  לקבל החלטה לגופו של עניין ולהתמודד נגד העותרים אצל כותלי בית המשפט העליון.  בהגישו את ההליכים נגד נאמן בשל קיומה של עתירה, הודה בן יאיר כי הרחוב הכתיב את שיקוליו. היש לך שיקול פסול ומעוות הימנו?

זלי יפה

ירושלים.