Conflicting testimonies

However, some analysts maintain that if the Turkel Commission is, indeed, a PR attempt, then it is plausible that the opportunity has been wasted, and the big blow to the already controversial credibility and legitimacy of the Turkel Commission came on Monday, when Netanyahu first took the stand.

In his testimony, the Israeli premier revealed that on May 26 he convened his seven senior ministers for a brainstorming session to discuss the imminent arrival of the Turkish-led flotilla.

"We didn't discuss (the raid's) details, except for the media effect," Netanyahu described. He later explained that "I placed Barak in charge. I had a very important meeting with U.S. President (Barack) Obama."

Though Netanyahu's office clarified later in the day that the prime minister still takes the overall responsibility, local media still portrays Netanyahu as shirking responsibility to Defense Minister Ehud Barak.

Barak, who testified on the following day, gave a different version. The ministers, he claimed, did delve into details of the operation and inquired about possible complications.

"We have an excellent chief of staff, an excellent army and excellent soldiers. The chief of staff said it (the operation) is attainable," Barak said, a testimony leading the Israeli opposition party accused him of attributing the responsibility for the hitches to the military.

Dr. Tamir Sheafer, a Hebrew University of Jerusalem expert on political communication, suggested that the commission is also an individual PR effort of both the prime minister and defense minister.

"Both Netanyahu and Barak think about their own political survival, not about the international community," Sheafer said in an interview with Xinhua. The Turkel Commission will not contribute much "since we have already seen the conflicting testimonies, and the only thing that will be achieved is the fact that Israel is investigating," he added.