Recep Tayyip Erdogan hastily grabbed the opportunity offered by the Israeli crime. He cannot act merciful towards the bloodshed of a number of his fellow countrymen. It is a question of dignity for the people of a great state in the region. Neither the people nor the army accepts to be insulted. Erdogan launched the storm so that he can be later entitled to contain it. Erdogan realized the importance of the opportunity, in order to strengthen his stance domestically and justify a more popular position in the region. It is not possible to reserve a great role in the Middle East without opposing the injustice from which the Palestinians suffer. He realized what Jamal Abdul Nasser, Hafez Assad, Khomeini, Saddam Hussein, and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had realized before him. Erdogan's anger had a remarkably successful effect on the Arab street. His picture was raised in many capitals and he became more popular than many of his counterparts. Erdogan caught the right moment. The crime represents an opportunity to launch a campaign for curtailing Israel. Turkey became aware of the importance of this curtailing campaign in light of the past years' experience. The main experience was the sponsorship of the indirect negotiations between Israel and Syria. Ankara considers that Turkey's stability and prosperity are linked in the end to the emergence of a region that lives in the “stability and prosperity” policies, and where Turkey would have a primordial role. This has to pass by the removal of tension triggers, the most important of which is the injustice suffered by Palestinians, which was the incubator for the birth of extremism, extremists, and extremist policies. Ankara considers that the elimination of this injustice will contribute to the rehabilitation of some extremist and live forces to live according to the logic of stability and prosperity. This includes the Islamic forces that are also coming from the cloak of the “brothers”, such as Hamas, and also includes forces coming from other sources, such as Hezbollah. The policy of maturing the “live forces” with the hope of witnessing their integration and participation has clashed in the past years with the existence of an aggressive and shortsighted Israeli policy. Hence, Turkey's conviction with the necessity of curbing the Israeli role has increased, with the aim of pushing the Hebrew State to adopt realistic policies that correspond or are close to the logic of international legitimacy. It is why Erdogan went beyond anger. He used the principles of international legitimacy to practically say that the policies of Netanyahu's government have turned into a burden on Israel itself, the region, and its allies in the west, at the foremost of which is America – which is getting ready to withdraw from Iraq. The aim behind this curbing process is not to extract the “tumor” that Ahmadinejad dreams of eliminating. It is certainly not throwing Israel into the sea like what some supporters of Erdogan's anger dream of doing. The aim is to turn the Israeli public opinion against the blind extremist government, and encourage Barack Obama's administration to exert effective pressures on Israel to curb its reckless and extremist policies and push it to the logic of negotiation and accepting peace and its costs. Iran has tried in recent years to curtail Israel through the missile belt around it. It wanted to shake Israel's deterrence ability and notify Israeli citizens that they are within the reach of Hezbollah and Hamas rockets. Erdogan's weapons are different. He did not launch any missiles. He is attacking Israel with the language of international legitimacy and the requirements for stability and justice in the region. While interpreting the current Turkish assault, one must not forget certain issues. Turkey did not say that it would sever its ties with Israel. It did not say it would leave the ranks of NATO or that it would remove its units that take part in missions in Afghanistan, the Balkans, and South Lebanon. The Turkish attempt to curtail the State of Israel seems to be close in its objectives to the major Arab attempt to curtail Israel: the Arab peace initiative. What the initiative offers Israel is its acceptance as a normal state in the region if it withdraws from the occupied territories in 1967 and allows for the establishment of a Palestinian state whose capital would be East Jerusalem. The Arab attempt also focuses on the logic of international legitimacy. The Turkish perspective is almost the same, and it is what the current curtailing attempt aims for. Putting Erdogan's storm at the service of peace requires an active American role and taking out the current Israeli government. It also requires curbing the emotions on the streets and avoiding to drown the storm in reckless practices.
