Israel's attack on aid convoy

[Alatar]

I'm surprised not to see this being discussed here. I'm not ready to offer an opinion as yet, but I'd be curious to see what the general feeling is in the US about this.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/10208027.stm

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I have decidedly mixed feelings about it. I think Israel is wrong to be enforcing the blockade, and was wrong to raid the ships. But these people are hardly the "humanitarian aid workers" that they have been painted as, and I can't help but believe that they purposefully sought out a confrontation. I think it is a more complicated situations than people on either side want to acknowledge.

[Túrin Turambar]

I was originally quite critical of Israel over this incident. Still, Hamas has effectively declared war on Israel, and a naval blockade is perfectly legal under international law. And there are other ways of getting humanitarian aid into Gaza – a convoy trying to run the blockade would presumably be carrying weapons. And all of the ships in convoy bar one did peacefully allow IDF soldiers to board them. And finally, the men manning the ships were apparently anti-Israel militants, not aid workers.

Still, I think that Israel has stumbled of late, particularly since the Lebanon War. Nonetheless I don’t see what else that they can do.

[Cerin]

It's crazy how different the stories are coming from either side. It would be helpful to know what the truth is.

[Frelga]

Yes, it would, wouldn't it.

[Alatar]

And we're extremely unlikely to ever know the full truth.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Unfortunately, that is true.

[Nin]

I have very mixed feelings about this: first, I don't feel allowed - being a German - to critisize Israel at all, but then the israelo-palestine conflict is one of the most important preoccupations in the world, and it's hard not to have an opinion on it.

So, here is my opinion, but if anybody feels that a German commenting on Israeli policy is "too much", please tell me son.

Anyway, I understand a lot of the Israeli politics as coming from the feeling of being threatened - and a rightful feeling. Yet, I think that their answer to this threat is a wrong. In this specific case, particularly, but also in general.

The convoi, although humanitarian, was certainly not neutral. Yet, they had journalists and at least one writer (Swedish author Henning Mankel) on board and to attack them was politically stupid and short-sighted. As were other attacks on Gaza or Palestine camps throughout the last months or years. Those errors have taken the sympathy capital which Israel had and transferred it to Palestine - sympathy with the victims... And I do think that in many aspects, the Israeli Politic is a politic of opression which creates hatred and encourages conflict - like in the construction of that wall...

But in the mean time in this region of the globe, Israel is the only functionning democracy and in this sense a state which respects human rights more than any other of the surrounding states. It is an achievement of which Israel can be imho rightfully proud.

I don't think that there is one truth to know: could the persons on that convoi rather be seen as terrorist and a potential threat than humanitarians? Certainly. Did many of them have humanitarian motivations nevertheless? Certainly too. They might have appeared threatening - they were not heavily armed. And they were in international waters, afak. Could Israel feel threatened? Certainly. Did that give them the right to attack that convoy? Certainly not. But they had a reason to order the attack and jedged it sufficient. Most people think otherwise (including myself).

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Nin, while I appreciate your sensitivity, we would not tolerate anyone being intolerant of you expressing your opinion because you are German. Such an attitude would be extremely offensive to me. And that is besides the fact that your opinion about this sad situation is pretty much exactly the same as mine.

[MithLuin]

Still, I think in any event involving Israel, people mostly formed their opinions long ago. Not quite so long ago as WWII, maybe, but still, that's there. Being sensitive to that is probably a good thing.

Though, unless you're a lot older than I think, you weren't even alive during WWII, Nin - so holding the actions of your countrymen against you would hardly be fair. My grandfather was in the US Army Corps of Engineers during WWII (in the Pacific), but his father was born in Germany. So even though I'm an American, I'm still a German-American (in part).

Well, ignoring the 7/8ths of my background that's Irish-American . I have a German last name, though.

I don't think the nation of Israel (or any other country) can claim to be 'beyond reproach' from Germans because of the Nazis. That would mean that Americans couldn't say anything because slavery was legal here 200 years ago, or Rwandans couldn't have opinions on world politics because of the genocide 15 years ago.



Anyway, about the current incident...it seems to me that Israel doesn't really care very much about their international reputation. The decisions they are making seem very...narrowly local. Whether that's just because they don't feel they have the luxury to consider the world stage, or they honestly think it doesn't matter, it is probably going to hurt them in the long run.

[Frelga]

Nin, your opinion is more than welcome on any subject. You are thoughtful, sensitive and intelligent, whatever your citizenship.

Anyway, about the current incident...it seems to me that Israel doesn't really care very much about their international reputation. The decisions they are making seem very...narrowly local. Whether that's just because they don't feel they have the luxury to consider the world stage, or they honestly think it doesn't matter, it is probably going to hurt them in the long run.

Without reference specifically to this incident, I think Israel is finally beginning to realize that caring about their international reputation is not doing them any good. The West has never stood up to condemn the use of terrorist tactics against Israel, which I believe is one of the reasons why certain groups came to see these tactics as effective against the West in general.

It seems to me particularly in the recent decade Israeli government finally concluded that they are damned if they do and damned if they don't, and turned toward military defense rather than diplomatic options. On the whole, this policy seems to have been more successful in providing internal security for Israel. It may not work in the long run but as Nobby Nobbs said in Jingo, in the long run, what does?

That's not to say that this particular situation was handled well. I don't have enough information to have formed an opinion, and getting to the facts of the matter seems nearly impossible.

[N.E. Brigand]

I find this essay by Leon Wieseltier at The New Republic to be the best commentary yet on the mess (many of the reader-responses that follow the essay are also quite good). His despondent conclusion:

And yet the screw must be turned again: the anti-Israeli virulence of Henning Mankell and his maritime comrades does not make Israel’s assault on the Mavi Marmara more just or more wise. Now the Israeli government may find it impossible not to modify or even to lift the blockade of Gaza—an outcome that no decent person can decry, as long as Hamas does not exploit the respite to acquire weapons or what it needs to make them, and the past is not encouraging in this regard. Netanyahu will do what he can to get past the mess, hoping that the approach of the midterm elections in the United States will rescue him from the pressure, and the deadening hand of the status quo will be back. And Israel will be known to more and more people—in a wounding misrepresentation—mainly for cruelty.

[Alatar]

It gets interesting. Considering Ireland's stance on neutrality this is a pretty big deal.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/fro ... 21126.html

[Voronwë the Faithful]

That's encouraging, so far as it goes. Thanks for sharing it, Al.

[N.E. Brigand]

One thing that confuses me, though presumably it is not germane to the main topic: if the ship is Irish, why is it registered in Cambodia? Was it built there? Formerly based there? I've vaguely heard of this with regards to cruise ships, as well, and gather that it has something to do with the ships' owners not wishing to abide by the inspection standards required by their nominal countries.

[Lidless]

It's called a flag of convenience, and around half of all cargo / passenger ships use it. It's a bit like choosing whichever country you like as your residence for tax/legal purposes even if you spend all your time in another. If only it applied to humans.

Each country has its advantages and disadvantages regarding standards, inspections and initial / annual fees. There is also high complexity on operating costs - both in their 'own port' and around the world. A ship registered in the EU for example pays less docking fees in the EU than one outside the EU, but inspections and standards tend to be higher and more costly.

Basically a ship owner works out from what the ship will be doing (for example docking frequency / location) which is the cheapest flag of convenience.

Even Bolivia supplies the service. Look it up on a map and you'll see something interesting.

[N.E. Brigand]

Thanks, Lidless. I now see that Mongolia likewise offers this.

[Ghân-buri-Ghân]

The 22 September 2010 United Nations Human Rights Council's report, A/HRC/15/21, can be found here.

The Summary of the report states

This report was prepared by the fact-finding mission established by the Human Rights Council in resolution A/HRC/RES/14/1 of 2 June 2010 to investigate violations of international law, including international humanitarian law and human rights law, resulting from the interception by Israeli forces of the humanitarian aid flotilla bound for Gaza on 31 May 2010 during which nine people were killed and many others injured.
The report sets out background information relating to the interception of the flotilla as well as the applicable international law.
The fact-finding mission conducted interviews with more than 100 witnesses in Geneva, London, Istanbul and Amman. On the basis of this testimony and other information received, the Mission was able to reconstruct a picture of the circumstances surrounding the interception on 31 May 2010 and its aftermath. The report presents a factual description of the events leading up to the interception, the interception of each of the six ships in the flotilla as well as a seventh ship subsequently intercepted on 6 June 2010, the deaths of nine passengers and wounding of many others and the detention of passengers in Israel and their deportation.
The report contains a legal analysis of facts as determined by the Mission with a view to determining whether violations of international law, including international humanitarian and human rights law, took place.
The fact-finding mission concluded that a series of violations of international law, including international humanitarian and human rights law, were committed by the Israeli forces during the interception of the flotilla and during the detention of passengers.

[Ghân-buri-Ghân]

Another boat attempting to break the blockade of Gaza, this time solely organized by Jewish groups worldwide set sail from Cyprus yesterday (Sunday) at 13:32 local time.

A boat carrying aid for Gaza’s population and organized by Jewish groups worldwide has set sail from Cyprus today at 13:32 local time
The boat, Irene, is sailing under a British flag and is carrying nine passengers and crew, including Jews from the US, the UK, Germany and Israel as well as an Israeli journalist.
The boat’s cargo includes symbolic aid in the form of children’s toys and musical instruments, textbooks, fishing nets for Gaza’s fishing communities and prosthetic limbs for orthopaedic medical care in Gaza’s hospitals.
The receiving organization in Gaza is The Palestinian International Campaign to end the siege on Gaza, directed by Dr. Eyad Sarraj and Amjad Shawa, Director of PNGO
The boat will attempt to reach the coast of Gaza and unload its aid cargo in a nonviolent, symbolic act of solidarity and protest – and call for the siege to be lifted to enable free passage of goods and people to and from the Gaza Strip.
The boat will fly multicolored peace flags carrying the names of dozens of Jews who have expressed their support for this action, as a symbol of the widespread support for the boat by Jews worldwide.
Speaking from London, a member of the organizing group, Richard Kuper of Jews for Justice for Palestinians, said today that the Jewish Boat to Gaza is a symbolic act of protest against the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories and the siege of Gaza, and a message of solidarity to Palestinians and Israelis who seek peace and justice.
‘Israeli government policies are not supported by all Jews,’ said Kuper. ‘We call on all governments and people around the world to speak and act against the occupation and the siege.’
Regarding the threat of interception by the Israeli navy, Kuper said ‘This is a nonviolent action. We aim to reach Gaza, but our activists will not engage in any physical confrontation and will therefore not present the Israelis with any reason or excuse to use physical force or assault them.’
Passenger Reuven Moskovitz, 82, said that his life’s mission has been to turn foes into friends. “We are two peoples, but we have one future”, he said.

[Inanna]

very interesting, thanks Ghân-buri-Ghân