Humorous how little time Erdogan wasted in making the 'new accord' with Israel seem like a very shallow thing indeed - Israel for the moment is taking his gloating in stride, pretending [I'll call it what it is] that the man's bloviating Islamist grandstanding is not in the end important, while quietly reminding anyone listening that, should the amity fall apart, people will know who to blame for it - and by people we assume they mean Obama and his benighted band of jesters.
Are we to think this was always Netanyahu's plan? He knew simply getting along with Israel would not sit well with Erdogan's grander schemes and that therefore he would impatiently chip away at the accord bit by bit until it was rendered meaningless, allowing then Israel to go to Obama and say "stop trying to tell us how to behave - we understand this land and its people and its twisted politics and its revanchist extremism and its regressive cultural antipathies much better than you".
But I was thinking - let's allow for the nonce that below the dinge of seedy Islamist rhetoric the 'amity' persists in some viably strategic sense - what happens then if the Sunni freedom fighters in Syria prevail but leadership thereof is usurped by extreme elements of that army of Allah and they for whatever reasons turn there enmities toward Israel and the Golan Heights? What does Erdogan do or say then? Or alternatively what happens should the fighting spill over into Lebanon and Hezbollah either deliberately or through some intemperate escalation draws Israel into the fight - Erdogan is no friend of Iran's, but does one seriously believe he'd rush to the defence of Israel in such a situation?
Remember, apparently, of all the world leaders Obama deals with, reports hold that Erdogan is the one he feels closest to, not just personally, but intellectually. Says a lot, that.
