After Yassin

BY ZEYNEP GURCANLI
STAR- Nothing in the Mideast will stay the same after the assassination of Sheik Ahmed Yassin by Israeli forces on the orders of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. The political balances will shift not only in Israel and the Palestinian territories but also in Washington.
As a country which has been surrounded by ‘enemies’ since its very establishment, Israel, beyond any doubt, planned the deadly attack very carefully, going over every single detail with a fine-toothed comb. Sharon must have calculated all the possible domestic and foreign consequences. He is currently weathering intense criticism from his coalition partners. The ultra-rightist wing within the coalition had already been hammering him over his decision to withdraw Israeli forces from Gaza. However, Monday’s attack is quite likely to mute their criticism.
Sharon believes that sooner or later Hamas will fall apart in the wake of losing its spiritual leader, its vows of revenge notwithstanding, as Yassin had united its moderate and extremist factions. Sharon also showed the world that although Israeli forces will withdraw from Gaza, this is no signal he would ever allow the region to be dominated by the Palestinians. Sharon killed two birds with one stone by eliminating a terrorist leader and re-affirming his determination to fight terrorism with a single stroke.
We all know that Sharon has never been satisfied with the Middle East road map. After Yassin’s assassination, Hamas will prepare deadly new attacks to shed more Israeli blood, a development which will cause Sharon trouble in the short term. However, in the long term, the escalation of violence will give Sharon a better hand to escape from the road map he never believed in anyway.
In the US, after Condoleeza Rice’s statement saying that the US administration knew nothing about the Israeli operation, the White House elected to remain silent on the assassination. This silence could be interpreted as tacit approval. However, later State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said that the US was ‘deeply troubled’ by the attack. The incident will ‘escalate tension and harm the efforts to achieve peace,’ he added. Therefore, this development may deepen the divide between the stances of the two key US institutions.
The incident may also make a mark on US-EU relations. The EU reacted harshly to the Israeli attack. Its sharp disapproval shows that even while they try to jumpstart the Mideast peace process, Europe and Washington’s viewpoints are separated by a deep chasm.
What about Turkey? After Sharon’s victory in Israeli elections, the ‘strategic partnership’ between the two countries was replaced by a ‘cautious cooperation.’ However, the assassination of Yassin deepened anti-Israel feelings in Turkey, a stance which is fed by the idea of Muslim brotherhood. The harsh reaction voiced by the prime minister himself might be a harbinger of Ankara suspending relations with Israel. In sum, this incident is a true turning point for the Middle East.