Israel has no right to stop Gaza aid flotillas

[Jefferson23]

Israel cannot be hurt by any imaginary danger the ships pose. Here from Sweden comes a final appeal to those who would block the flotilla: Please, just once, act with prudence, and abide by international law and simple justice.

By Gideon Levy

It's late at night in Sodra, a fashionable suburb south of Stockholm, and it's drinks all around. There's cheese from Italy and Scandinavian fish on the table; and an extremely alert, diverse crowd is gathered around the table. There's a well-known Swedish academic whose field of expertise is the history of religion; a lecturer in economic history; and there's also a young Iraqi who was imprisoned in Saddam Hussein's era in Abu Ghraib prison and who now works in Sweden's supreme court.

The house belongs to a former Israeli, Dror Feiler, and this gathering is the Swedish steering committee for the next Gaza flotilla. It is a historic dwelling: In the 18th century, the house served as a beer hall, and then later functioned as an institution for the mentally ill. Hermann Goering convalesced here, at the insistence of his Swedish wife, after becoming addicted to pain medication when wounded during World War I; Vladimir Ilyich Lenin also stayed here, en route to the Russian revolution (he is said to have purchased his famous cap at a nearby street corner ). Now the musician and artist Feiler lives here; after being deported from Israel last June as a result of the first Gaza flotilla controversy, he is no longer allowed to visit his aging mother on Kibbutz Yad Hanna.

Feiler likes to reminisce about his days serving in the infantry's 50th Battalion, in the late 1960s. He shares his memories with members of the Gaza flotilla. Prof. Mattias Gardell, who also took part in the first flotilla, claims the first two casualties were killed before IDF soldiers boarded the Mavi Marmara last May. They now wonder, in a mood of naive fear, how Israel will relate to them this time. Together with a Swedish-Jewish physician, the daughter of a Holocaust survivor from Hungary who is married to publisher Dan Israel, the group is meeting late at night to plan the next flotilla adventure. Whereas Israelis are wont to describe the flotillas as a Turkish enterprise and a threat, members of this group describe the flotilla as an international, peace-oriented, project.

It's impossible not to be impressed by this determined group. They will convey 500 tons of cement, a mobile hospital and an ambulance on their boat, one of ten planned for the flotilla. They know there are other ways of bringing these items to Gaza, but they want to remind the world of Gaza's fate. That is their right, and perhaps even their duty.

remainder: http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/israel-has-no-right-to-stop-gaza-aid-flotillas-1.368463

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[indepat]

3. And just as Amurika does: protect vital interests, no matter the law, the cost in blood, brains,

limbs, and treasure, and the other niceties the civilized nations of the world expect to be observed. :patriot:

[Dept of Beer]

4. Or the soviets, English, French, Americans...etc.

They're just taking a page from our playbook albeit terribly wrong.

[King_David]

6. What an ugly disgusting post nt

[Jefferson23]

7. You may recall:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=124&topic_id=356376&mesg_id=356401

[King_David]

11. Recall WHAT ???????????

Did I call Jews Nazis?

[aranthus]

2. Nothing to reply to as it's all just emotional blather. n/t

[Bold Lib]

5. According to international law they do. Unless of course you can cite some

legal violation by imposing the blockade.

[Jefferson23]

8. See how the US answers the questions:

snip* MS. NULAND: Are we on flotilla too or are we --

QUESTION: We’re on flotilla. Just to make sure, does the U.S. consider that blockade legal?

MS. NULAND: I think the main point that we were trying to make in the statement was that we’ve got to use the channels that are safe, the channels that are going to guarantee that the aid get where it needs to go to the people it’s intended for, and to discourage, in strongest terms, any actions on the high seas that could result in a conflict.

QUESTION: Right, but again, that doesn’t answer the question of the legality or the – whether the U.S. perceives that blockade as legal or not.

MS. NULAND: I don’t have anything for you on legality here. We can take a stronger look at that if you’d like, but again, the reason that the Secretary spoke to this yesterday when she was asked, the reason that we’ve put out this very fulsome statement that points people in the correct direction, is because we want to avoid the problems of last year, and we do believe that there are good and reliable channels for getting assistance to the people of Gaza.

QUESTION: And just one more. I’m sorry. The people who are putting this together have a rather elaborate website, and they say that – on that that the U.S. should be protecting the rights of American citizens, protecting their safety abroad. So that is the argument that they are making. They’re very disappointed and shocked that the State Department would be warning people off. What do you say to that?

MS. NULAND: It is in the interest of protecting both Americans and other citizens from around the world who might be thinking about engaging in provocative moves like this that we were putting out these warnings so strongly in the same season where we had this problem last year. We don’t want to see a repeat, and we do believe that those who want to aid Gaza can do so and need to do so in the correct manner.

Please.

QUESTION: You kept repeating that they have available to them --

MS. NULAND: Yes.

QUESTION: -- proper channels and so on. What – could you share with us some of these proper channels?

MS. NULAND: Well, the Rafah Crossing, as you know, is open again, and we have seen an uptick in the humanitarian aid that is going through there. There are also channels through Israel, and we’ve been relatively encouraged that the flow of humanitarian aid into Gaza through these appropriate channels is improving.

QUESTION: But the Rafah Crossing was only recently opened. I mean, until then, it was completely closed. So that’s one issue. And another: Could you clarify for us whether, in fact, the Gaza waters or crossing through the Gaza waters, is that legal or illegal under the Laws of the Seas and so on? Could you clarify that, please?

MS. NULAND: I think that’s the same question that Jill was asking. And I will admit to you I’m not a Law of the Sea expert here, but let me take the question.

QUESTION: Okay. And a quick follow-up on the Quartet: You said that it was a good meeting. Now what constitutes a good meeting? How was the, let’s say, the meeting today different or improved the situation from, let’s say, 24 hours ago?

MS. NULAND: Well, as you saw and as we’ve been discussing here for the course of the last week, David Hale has been involved very intensively with the parties, with the regional states. For the members of the Quartet, I think it was a chance to compare notes on diplomacy that we’ve been doing, on diplomacy that other members of the Quartet have been doing in our shared effort to get these parties back to the table. So, from that perspective, there was a lot to discuss and then to take stock of where to go next.

Please.

QUESTION: Can I do a follow-up on the flotilla?

MS. NULAND: Please, yeah.

QUESTION: My understanding is that there were a number of the Americans who planned to participate and went into your – I believe in your Embassy in Athens and sought some advice. Can you tell us what the message to them in person was today?

MS. NULAND: I’m sure that the message to them in person was identical to the statement that we’ve put out today, that we would ask them to use established and reliable channels and to refrain from action that could lead to the kind of difficulty that we saw last year.

QUESTION: When you say that you want – you don’t want a repeat of last year, you want people to refrain from action that could lead to the kind of difficulty that you saw last year, does that only apply to the flotilla organizers or does that also apply to Israel?

MS. NULAND: We’ve been urging all sides, whether it’s the NGOs or whether it’s governments involved, that we not have a repeat of what happened last year.

QUESTION: Right. Well --

MS. NULAND: And I think this speaks to the fact that the neighboring states that – to Gaza have worked hard to establish legitimate mechanisms, efficient mechanisms to get aid in so that people have a way to do this other than to risk provocative action.

Please, Jill.

QUESTION: Another subject?

MS. NULAND: Anybody – anything else on this? Lachlan?

QUESTION: Just one more on this. Yeah. I don’t think you said it, but people at the State Department have said Israel has a right to defend itself against these flotillas. What exactly would it be defending against, though? That’s what’s not clear to me.

MS. NULAND: Like all states, Israel has a right of national self-defense. Again, I don’t want to get into where the boat might be and Law of the Sea and all this kind of stuff. We are simply saying this is the wrong way to get aid to Gaza. The correct way to get aid to Gaza is through the established mechanisms which are improving, which are open, and which can get aid to the people that it’s intended for.

QUESTION: But it’s just humanitarian aid, so I don’t see why it would be – Israel would have to defend itself if it’s just humanitarian aid coming in.

MS. NULAND: It’s the matter of all states to provide coastal defense, but I’m – again, I’m not going to get into the Law of the Sea issues here. We’re simply trying to make the point that we want this done in a way that not only is going to get the aid where it’s intended, but is going to ensure that we don’t have dangerous incidents.

QUESTION: In general, would you say that the Administration, the U.S. Government, is – would advise anyone against provocative acts?

MS. NULAND: I think that’s a fair point.

QUESTION: It is. Okay. So you don’t see, when the Secretary comes out in support of women who want to drive in Saudi Arabia, deliberately violating Saudi laws and regulations, that – her support of that is – doesn’t mean that you’re not – I mean, I don’t understand where you – if you’re coming out against all provocative acts, it seems to me that that’s a pretty provocative act, and yet she’s supporting that.

MS. NULAND: The Secretary was supporting the right of not only Saudi women, women around the world, to live as men do. She wasn’t encouraging any particular course of action one way or the other. She was simply making a strong public statement of empathy and support for the campaign that these women are on to have these laws changed.

QUESTION: Okay. So a provocative act in support of the Palestinians in Gaza is not okay, though?

MS. NULAND: I don’t think we are supporting provocative acts of any kind. I think you can’t equate these two issues. The Secretary was simply speaking to the aspirations of Saudi women to have the laws of their country changed. She wasn’t encouraging any particular course of action for that.

QUESTION: Okay. Let me try and put it a different way, then. You believe that because there are established – already established means, the Israeli port where things are inspected and the Rafah Crossing, that in this case, being provocative is unnecessary and unwise because it’s just not needed; there are other ways to do it? Is that – that’s the bottom line?

MS. NULAND: That’s certainly the case, and we don’t want further incidents. It’s not in anybody’s interest.

QUESTION: Is the regular blockade a provocative act?

MS. NULAND: I think we’ve gone as far as we’re going to go on this subject.

QUESTION: I’ll ask again. Is the naval blockade a provocative action?

MS. NULAND: We would consider it provocative and it would be dangerous to have a repeat of the situation that we saw last year.

QUESTION: But the current existing blockade, the naval blockade of Gaza, is that provocative action or is it not?

MS. NULAND: As I said, we believe that there are legitimate and efficient ways to get assistance into Gaza and that those mechanisms are working and that we’re seeing, as a result of them, an improvement in the humanitarian situation.

Jill, are we moving on now? Yeah. Thanks. Please, go ahead.

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2011/06/167070.htm

[oberliner]

9. Ms. Nuland was quite ill-informed and ill-prepared for these questions - what an awful job

When the questioner asks her about the "proper channels" to bring aid into Gaza she mentions the Rafah crossing?

That was just a ridiculously stupid answer.

Israel has said repeatedly that all the ships are welcome to dock in Israel and unload their cargo which Israel will inspect and then transfer over to Gaza.

This is the same thing they said (and did) during the last flotilla.

Rafah/Egypt need not have anything to do with - why on earth she would bring that up I have no idea.

Her response should have been that they can unload the cargo in Israel and it will be transferred to Gaza from there.

She could have also stated that Israel has lifted the vast majority of restrictions on good entering Gaza - could've listed off all the different items that are no longer prohibited.

The point of the flotilla is not delivering humanitarian aid to Gaza. The organizers have said so repeatedly (as does the OP you posted).

The US boat, for instance, is carrying no humanitarian aid of any kind.

[Jefferson23]

10. oberliner, she was avoiding the legality question, among other things.

*Like all states, Israel has a right of national self-defense. Again, I don’t want to get into where the boat might be and Law of the Sea and all this kind of stuff. We are simply saying this is the wrong way to get aid to Gaza. The correct way to get aid to Gaza is through the established mechanisms which are improving, which are open, and which can get aid to the people that it’s intended for.

[oberliner]

12. I believe that neither the United States nor Israel has ratified the Law of the Sea

I don't believe Turkey has either for what that is worth.

[JackRiddler]

16. "...we've put out this very fulsome statement..." - I'll say!

[Jefferson23]

17. lol, I know..what a piece of work. n/t

[oberliner]

13. From the IDF: How to Deliver Goods to the Gaza Strip

Steps for Transferring Goods and Materials into the Gaza Strip

1. To make a donation to Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, contact one of the humanitarian organizations (the United Nations Relief and Works Agency and the International Committee of the Red Cross are the main organizations who regularly operate in the Gaza Strip). Contact details and further information can be found on their websites.

2. Humanitarian organizations operating in Gaza submit all formal requests to the International Organizations Branch of the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT), an Israeli governmental body which coordinates civilian policy including humanitarian issues, infrastructure projects, and economic projects.

3. The COGAT’s donations officer, part of the International Organizations Branch, is responsible for approving and coordinating the transfer of all donations. UNRWA, the Red Cross and other major organizations typically receive immediate approval.

4. Requests for dual-use items must undergo a project review.

5. Per submitted requests, Israel transfers thousands of tons in goods and materials into Gaza on a weekly basis via the Kerem Shalom land crossing.

http://idfspokesperson.com/2011/06/27/how-to-deliver-to-goods-to-gaza/

[Jefferson23]

14. Yea, they should back off, the IDF has their back. n/t

[hack89]

15. Here are the rules for blockades

Key points:

1. Can happen in international waters
2. Must publish a list of contraband items
3. Can attack blockade runners if they resist but cannot sink ship unless they rescue crew.

According to the San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea, 12 June 1994,<10> a blockade is a legal method of warfare at sea, but is governed by rules. The blockading nation must publish a list of contraband. The manual describes what can never be contraband. Outside this list, the blockading nation is free to select anything as contraband. The blockading nation typically establish a blockaded area of water, but any ship can be inspected as soon as it is established that it is attempting to break the blockade. This inspection can occur inside the blockaded area or in international waters, but never inside the territorial waters of a neutral nation. A neutral ship must obey a request to stop for inspection from the blockading nation. If the situation so demands, the blockading nation can request that the ship divert to a known place or harbour for inspection. If the ship does not stop, then the ship is subject to capture. If people aboard the ship are resisting capture, they can be attacked. It is still not allowed to sink the ship, unless provision is made for rescueing the crew. Leaving the crew in liferafts / lifeboats does not constitute rescue. If a neutral ship is captured, any member of the crew, resisting capture can be treated as prisoners-of-war, while the remainder of the crew should be released. A neutral nation may choose to send a convoy accompanied by warships. The warship can provide guarantees that the convoy does not contain contraband. in which case, the blockading nation does not have any right of inspection.