Yediot Aharonot analyzes that "Last week Israel attempted to break the dead-end in its relations with Turkey. The highest level of
Jerusalem\’s political echelon last week welcomed a group of Turkish journalists in Israel as guests of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. From Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman, the message was clear: Israel wants to normalize relations with Turkey. But that is not such a simple task. The following series of events is an excellent example of the difficulties on the path: On the 23rd of July the Prime Minister of Israel said: \’In a region governed by instability, Israel and Turkey are two relatively stable countries. I believe in our joint interest.\’ The following day, July 24th, Turkish Prime Minister Recip Tayip Erdoğan hosted in his official residence for the first Iftar meal Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal and a group of Palestinian prisoners who were transferred to Turkey as part of the Shalit deal. How are we supposed to understand that?" The author opines that "Israel should not accord too much importa! nce to Mashaal\’s Ankara visit. It would seem that Turkey has a much bigger problem if it thinks that Hamas will be its guide in the sinking Syrian quagmire. The events in Syria and Kurdish aspirations are not dependent on Israel, such that the relations between it and Turkey are not expected to improve in the foreseeable future. It can only be hoped that they will not deteriorate further."
Ma\’ariv relates to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu\’s statement yesterday, which immediately made headlines and waves in the electronic media: "\’The political echelon decides, the military echelon carries out, only I will determine whether to attack Iran.\’ We, like a heard of sheep, were mesmerized and enthralled by this empty spin. Netanyahu\’s only aim was to change the media agenda. Let them talk about Iran and not VAT. He is strong on Iran (in the meantime only in words). He is a bit weak when it comes to [economic] edicts, VAT and income tax. Therefore a quick switch has to be made. Was there anything new or interesting in what Netanyahu said? Not really. It is the political echelon who decides, this everyone knows. There is no argument. Such are democracies, and no Chief-of-Staff will remain in the room when the Cabinet votes. I haven\’t yet decided whether to attack, Netanyahu added, and here too he was inaccurate.! 60; Unlike the American President, who is also the Commander-in-Chief, and can approve on his own (although a declaration of war must be approved by congress), in Israel an attack on Iran (which means war) must receive, at least, the approval of the Cabinet. Therefore, Mr. Netanyahu, it is not \’I\’, it is \’We\’."
Yisrael Hayom maintains that "The myth concerning Obama\’s hostility towards Israel is exaggerated. In all things concerning security cooperation, Obama hasn\’t fallen in his support for Israel from any other president. In the key diplomatic test, the Palestinian attempt to advance an imposed settlement to the dispute in the UN Assembly, Obama stood at the forefront of the move to foil the initiative and drew with him the entire free world." The author says that "We must remember that support for Israel has been shared by [American] presidents from both parties, and also that the hostile presidents were from both parties – Carter the democrat and Bush (sr.) the republican."
Haaretz discusses the government’s decision to reduce the state budget by NIS 14 billion in an effort to combat the country’s worsening economic situation, and stresses that “Israel has gotten into this situation because over the last few years, the government has been generous to the citizenry.” The editor notes: “In the midst of a global financial crisis, increasing its budget deficit would be the most dangerous thing Israel could do,” and opines that “A large deficit could well drag the country into the global crisis.”
The Jerusalem Post welcomes the ‘Open Skies’ aviation agreement signed between Israel and the EU last Monday (30 July). The editor believes the agreement has promise because it will “increase competition among airlines, sharply reduce air fares and boost European tourism to Israel,” but nevertheless warns that “it must be implemented with caution, to minimize the harmful effects it could have on the local airline industry.”
[Tulin Daloglu, Ben Caspit and Ori Hitner wrote today’s articles in Yediot Aharonot, Ma\’ariv and Yisrael Hayom, respectively.]