Israeli Boarding of Blockade Busting Ship Was Legal

Fort Liberty ^ | June 1, 2010 | Joe Rock

[2ndDivisionVet]

Israel has been maintaining a blockade of arms and support material to Hamas due to the terrorist organizations continued rocket attacks on Israeli civilians.

“Hamas forces violated the laws of war both by firing rockets deliberately or indiscriminately at Israeli cities and by launching them from populated areas and endangering Gazan civilians,” according to Iain Levine, program director at Human Rights Watch. Under the laws of war, those who willfully authorize or execute deliberate or indiscriminate attacks against civilians are committing war crimes. Hamas has an official policy which states that Israel has no right to exist and does not accept that any act perpetrated on a Jew can be considered wrong.

Iran continues to supply Hamas with rockets and other weapons to murder Israeli citizens — both Jew and Arabs. Israel maintains a naval blockade to reduce those shipments.

As part of this blockage, sailors from the Israeli Navy boarded the Turkish vessel Mavi Marmara. The sailors were expecting peace protesters and were instead ambushed by armed thugs.

Israel’s actions in boarding the ship are in full compliance with International law as set down in paragraphs 5.2.1 and 5.2.10 of the Helsinki Principles on the Law of Maritime Neutrality:

5.2.1 Visit and search As an exception to Principle 5.1.2. paragraph 1 and in accordance with Principle 1.3 (2nd sentence), belligerent warships have a right to visit and search vis-à-vis neutral commercial ships in order to ascertain the character and destination of their cargo. If a ship tries to evade this control or offers resistance, measures of coercion necessary to exercise this right are permissible. This includes the right to divert a ship where visit and search at the place where the ship is encountered are not practical.

5.2.10 Blockade Blockade, i.e. the interdiction of all or certain maritime traffic coming from or going to a port or coast of a belligerent, is a legitimate method of naval warfare. In order to be valid, the blockade must be declared, notified to belligerent and neutral States, effective and applied impartially to ships of all States. A blockade may not bar access to neutral ports or coasts. Neutral vessels believed on reasonable and probable grounds to be breaching a blockade may be stopped and captured. If they, after prior warning, clearly resist capture, they may be attacked.

The “peace protesters” responsible for the bloody attack are currently being held awaiting criminal charges or deportation to their home countries.

[2ndDivisionVet]

Comments?

[2ndDivisionVet]

PING!!

[marron]

This was a deliberate provocation designed to break Israel’s alliance with Turkey. It worked; it will be very difficult for Israel and the Turks to rebuild their former relationship. This was by design.

The Left has allied itself with muslim militarists. They think they can use them as a wrecking ball against the West they hate.

Iran’s proxies are getting ready for war on Israel, and they are working to get the Turks on board. If they can further isolate Israel from the west and from the US, so much the better.

With Obama in the White House, they probably aren’t going to get a better chance than they have right now.

[RightOnTheBorder]

Israel needs to do what is moral and what is necessary to defend itself (as it has done). We no longer live in civilized times where “legal” has any meaning.

[mainsail that]

This was designed to make Turkey the leader of the Muslim world. It worked

[highpockets]

When I can legally take a bible into Saudia Arabia then Israel should allow jihadists onto her shores. Until then allah down the road racists.

[marron]

This was designed to make Turkey the leader of the Muslim world. It worked

I think you're right.

[ExTexasRedhead]

IDF YouTube showing the incident:

http://www.youtube.com/user/idfnadesk

Israeli Navy Interview

http://www.youtube.com/user/idfnadesk#p/a/u/1/C9p5QT91QYs

[tacticalogic]

This was designed to make Turkey the leader of the Muslim world. It worked.

Now the "new leader of the Muslim world" gets to decide if they're going to man up and try to escort the Rachael Corrie through the blockade and get their ass kicked in front of God and everyone, or go home with their tail between their legs.

[mainsail that]

Now the "new leader of the Muslim world" gets to decide if they're going to man up and try to escort the Rachael Corrie through the blockade and get their ass kicked in front of God and everyone, or go home with their tail between their legs.

Easy cowboy, put your keyboard where I can see it and slowly move away. No one is going to war. Israel has an amazing military but no one has knocked the Turkish one either. And even if Israel wins--it's an if given geography and neighbors--they will be crippled economically, as an embargo by the A-rabs and some Muslim nations will certainly follow. These days every penny counts. Last but not least, Turkey is a full member of NATO, so Israel would technically declare war to 27 nations in one shot. Btw, where exactly is God?

[tacticalogic]

Easy cowboy, put your keyboard where I can see it and slowly move away. No one is going to war. Israel has an amazing military but no one has knocked the Turkish one either. And even if Israel wins--it's an if given geography and neighbors--they will be crippled economically, as an embargo by the A-rabs and some Muslim nations will certainly follow. These days every penny counts. Last but not least, Turkey is a full member of NATO, so Israel would technically declare war to 27 nations in one shot. Btw, where exactly is God?

Lighten up, chuckles. Nobody said anything about war. The Israelis can certainly out-maneuver and disable what ever the Turks send without declaring a war. The question is, are the Turks crazy/arrogant/stupid enough to subject themselves to that kind of public humiliation?

[mainsail that]

Lighten up, chuckles. Nobody said anything about war. The Israelis can certainly out-maneuver and disable what ever the Turks send without declaring a war. The question is, are the Turks crazy/arrogant/stupid enough to subject themselves to that kind of public humiliation?

Maybe and maybe not. But we're just speculating, and in that scenario the Arabs would send their armies towards Israel to make it much easier for the Turks. Lousy armies but still will tie quite a few troops.

Turks will not start a war, they won everything and then some, both in the West and East, with just 4 Islamist Turks dead. You may want to read this, Israel attacked in international waters a NATO flagged ship, automatically declaring war to NATO (if Turkey wants it). No one cares that Israel declared an embargo on their own:

"I must be plain - nobody wants or expects military action against Israel. But there is an uneasy recognition that in theory that ought to be on the table, and that NATO is obliged to do something robust to defend Turkey.

Mutual military support of each other is the entire raison d'etre of NATO. You must also remember that to the NATO military the freedom of the high seas guaranteed by the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea is a vital alliance interest which officers have been conditioned to uphold their whole career.

That is why Turkey was extremely shrewd in reacting immediately to the Israeli attack by calling an emergency NATO meeting. It is why, after the appalling US reaction to the attack with its refusal to name Israel, President Obama has now made a point of phoning President Erdogan to condole. http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2010/06/the_445pm_link_3.html "

Here's what the NATO secretary said:
"'I offer sincere condolences to the families of all victims and condemn the acts which have led to this tragedy.

'As a matter of urgency, I also request the immediate release of the detained civilians and ships held by Israel."

It isn't exactly a joke, NATO is 28 nations, not just USA. if Turks ask for help for an attack by a non-member US would lose all the credibility if it failed to act. Remember, Israel isn't a NATO member, Turkey is.

[tacticalogic]

Maybe and maybe not. But we're just speculating, and in that scenario the Arabs would send their armies towards Israel to make it much easier for the Turks. Lousy armies but still will tie quite a few troops.

In this scenario, they'd have to have them already staged and ready to go now. The Rachael Corrie is already enroute. However this is going to play out, it's going to be soon.

[mainsail that]

That ship is Irish flagged, but it may not matter.

I would love to see a simulation of a nasty Turkey vs Israel war: US will not let Israel perish, meaning NATO is gone but others might see a duty to uphold the NATO treaty of defense with Turkey. If US joins, what about Russia and China? I can picture Jihadists all over the world sabotaging 'the enemy' bases, economy and everything in sight. A complete embargo or Israel and billions flowing to buy rockets for the Hamas and Hezbollah nuts to buy thousands of missiles to launch at Israel. Short of Israel nuking Gaza, Syria and Lebanon, Iranian made missiles will rain down from there. A total b*tch, especially since Israel is really tiny.

And that's without the Turks firing a shot. Israel will arm the Kurds, but will they take the bait? Because of all these possible consequences, nothing serious will happen. Let's not forget that we have troops in Middle East, Afghanistan and we'd be the #1 enemy (no that they love us now, but it can get much worst)

But if I were a Turkish leader, and decided to react, I would just embrago Israel. Let them make the next move. Turkish Navy is way more powerful and has some 14 German subs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish_Navy

Just looked at the map more carefully, Turks are just 200 miles away.

[NavyCanDo]

Legal without a doubt:

67. Merchant vessels flying the flag of neutral States may not be attacked unless they:

(a) are believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband or BREACHING A BLOCKADE, and after prior warning they intentionally and clearly refuse to stop, or intentionally and clearly resist visit, search or capture;
(b) engage in belligerent acts on behalf of the enemy;
(c) act as auxiliaries to the enemy s armed forces;
(d) are incorporated into or assist the enemy s intelligence system;
(e) sail under convoy of enemy warships or military aircraft; or
(f) otherwise make an effective contribution to the enemy s military action, e.g., by carrying military materials, and it is not feasible for the attacking forces to first place passengers and crew in a place of safety. Unless circumstances do not permit, they are to be given a warning, so that they can re-route, off-load, or take other precautions.

More here:

http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/385ec082b509e76c41256739003e636d/7694fe2016f347e1c125641f002d49ce

[mainsail that]

NavyCanDo,
looks like you’re a lawyer. One question: what makes a blockade really legal? Suppose China starts a conflict with someone and blocks the China sea, or Iran closes Hormuz. Do we, as USA have to obey it?

[NavyCanDo]

“One question: what makes a blockade really legal? Suppose China starts a conflict with someone and blocks the China sea, or Iran closes Hormuz. Do we, as USA have to obey it?”

Are you implying Israel started the conflict? I hope that's not what you meant. Literally thousands of rockets have been launched from Gaza into Israel. They have the legal right to set up the blockade to prevent a restocking of those rockets. If a country, and country, chooses to run that blockade they do so at their own peril.

As for blocking the China Sea or the Straight of Hormuz that is a whole different story because those shipping lanes are shared by many countries and it won't be aloud under any international law. But if China went to war with a country, lets say Japan, then they under international law have a legal right to block entry into Japan's ports.

[NavyCanDo]

Our very own Civil War would of ended much differently if not for the Naval blockade of the Southern ports. We can all agree on that.
If Israel is not aloud to verify ships entering Gaza carry no rockets or missiles, how differently do you think that would change their future?