Gaza flotilla blind to Hamas

[bigross86]

And how do they do that, aside from the fact that the same international laws that allow Israel to board in international waters forbid her from intentionally leaving people adrift at sea

[Dreadnought]

Sir, all this can be done only after the boat has be secured by the Israelis. But the question is how can Israel take over the ship without any bloodshed as I am assuming that the people in the ship wouldn't be agreeable to surrender their ship. The best option would be to disable the rudder, tow the ship to international waters and set it free there.

Same way the USN chases down fastboats that refuse to stop. Shoot the engine and the engine only. Then tow it to port under the navies control. You do have drone tech to assist with surveilance. Then give it a thorough inspection and fine the hell out of them. You have to put it on them and hit them in the pocketbook for wasting your navies time and efforts of playing babysitter.

This is an old article that I found answered some key questions as too its legalities. Just an opinioned artical mind you. Not swearing by it.



(Reuters) - Israel has said it will continue a naval blockade of the Gaza Strip despite growing global pressure to lift the siege after a navy raid on a Turkish ferry carrying aid killed nine activists this week.

What is the legality of the blockade and did Israel's intervention breach international law? Below are some questions and answers on the issue:

CAN ISRAEL IMPOSE A NAVAL BLOCKADE ON GAZA?

Yes it can, according to the law of blockade which was derived from customary international law and codified in the 1909 Declaration of London. It was updated in 1994 in a legally recognized document called the "San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea."

Under some of the key rules, a blockade must be declared and notified to all belligerents and neutral states, access to neutral ports cannot be blocked, and an area can only be blockaded which is under enemy control.

"On the basis that Hamas is the ruling entity of Gaza and Israel is in the midst of an armed struggle against that ruling entity, the blockade is legal," said Philip Roche, partner in the shipping disputes and risk management team with law firm Norton Rose.

WHAT ARE INTERNATIONAL WATERS?

Under the U.N. Convention of the Law of the Sea a coastal state has a "territorial sea" of 12 nautical miles from the coast over which it is sovereign. Ships of other states are allowed "innocent passage" through such waters.

There is a further 12 nautical mile zone called the "contiguous zone" over which a state may take action to protect itself or its laws.

"However, strictly beyond the 12 nautical miles limit the seas are the "high seas" or international waters," Roche said.

The Israeli navy said on Monday the Gaza bound flotilla was intercepted 120 km (75 miles) west of Israel. The Turkish captain of one of the vessels told an Istanbul news conference after returning home from Israeli detention they were 68 miles outside Israeli territorial waters.

Under the law of a blockade, intercepting a vessel could apply globally so long as a ship is bound for a "belligerent" territory, legal experts say.

CAN ISRAEL USE FORCE WHEN INTERCEPTING SHIPS?

Under international law it can use force when boarding a ship.

"If force is disproportionate it would be a violation of the key tenets of the use of force," said Commander James Kraska, professor of international law at the U.S. Naval War College.

Israeli authorities said marines who boarded the Turkish vessel Mavi Marmara opened fire in self-defense after activists clubbed and stabbed them and snatched some of their weapons.

Legal experts say proportional force does not mean that guns cannot be used by forces when being attacked with knives.

"But there has got to be a relationship between the threat and response," Kraska said.

The use of force may also have other repercussions.

"While the full facts need to emerge from a credible and transparent investigation, from what is known now, it appears that Israel acted within its legal rights," said J. Peter Pham, a strategic adviser to U.S. and European governments.

"However, not every operation that the law permits is necessarily prudent from the strategic point of view."

OPPONENTS HAVE CALLED ISRAEL'S RAID "PIRACY." WAS IT?

No, as under international law it was considered a state action.

"Whether what Israel did is right or wrong, it is not an act of piracy. Piracy deals with private conduct particularly with a pecuniary or financial interest," Kraska said.

HAVE THERE BEEN ANY SHIPPING DISRUPTIONS AFTER THE RAID?

None so far but the International Chamber of Shipping (ICS), an association which represents 75 percent of the world's merchant fleet, has expressed "deep concern" over the boarding by Israeli forces, arguing that merchant ships have a right to safe passage and freedom of navigation in international waters.

"These fundamental principles of international law must always be upheld by all of the world's nations," the ICS said.

For links to the maritime declarations click on: here!OpenDocument

here

(Editing by Noah Barkin)
http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/...65133D20100602

[Doktor]

Now I understand the situation better.

I recall that I read it somewhere when it was for Cuba blockade there was no treaty/agreement/law, I see now there is.

Still don't get one thing. If I am in international waters I thought I should be safe. But instead of worrying one navy could come aboard, search and whatever, now it is all the navies around. Heck, we are landlocked and I am glad I don't have a boat

[bigross86]

Doktor, you're letting your fears run away from you. The thing that gave the IDF and Israel legitimacy to board these ships in international waters was the fact that they openly declared that their main purpose was to run a blockade

[Julie]

Still don't get one thing. If I am in international waters I thought I should be safe. But instead of worrying one navy could come aboard, search and whatever, now it is all the navies around. Heck, we are landlocked and I am glad I don't have a boat

And don't forget about the pirates.....

[Zinja]

This blockade of international waters/airspace may fall under customary law, at best.

They were stupid enough to go in gun fight with knives and paintball guns but your guys were stupid enough to kill 9 of them

I don't get you: if they go with paintballs they are stupid, if they use live ammo they are stupid still huh?

[Doktor]

The guys on the ships (IHH) was headed to stir trouble with knives and paintball guns, which is stupid imo.

The IDF shot 9 of those dead which is stupid from PR pov.

[Zinja]

The guys on the ships (IHH) was headed to stir trouble with knives and paintball guns, which is stupid imo.

The IDF shot 9 of those dead which is stupid from PR pov.

The IHH had no paint balls, it was the IDF which had paint balls. They turned to live ammo after the first office who rapelled was mobed with metal rod, knife weilding thugs.

[Zinja]

Personally i think israel should send its subs to wait for the ships until they are in the middle of the mediterrenean, creep in silenlty, disable the props and leave the ships dead in the water. Sit back and let their sponsoring countries foot the bills of ferrying the occupants and towing the flotilla back to their home ports.

[Dubitante]

The IHH had no paint balls, it was the IDF which had paint balls. They turned to live ammo after the first office who rapelled was mobed with metal rod, knife weilding thugs.

The independent report concluded that the Israeli assault squad was firing live ammo before they descended onto the ship.

[Dubitante]

And how do they do that, aside from the fact that the same international laws that allow Israel to board in international waters forbid her from intentionally leaving people adrift at sea

Israel has the right to board vessels only in a legal naval blockade, as the blockade has been confirmed illegal by the UN, Israel has no right to halt the vessels.

[zraver]

Israel has the right to board vessels only in a legal naval blockade, as the blockade has been confirmed illegal by the UN, Israel has no right to halt the vessels.

Greetings, I strongly suggest you cite your claims. Many of us here are former military and watched the terrorist attack on the IDF boarding party. The militant terror supporters attacked not the IDF.

Second, the blockade is legal so long as Isreal and Hamas are at war. Isreal's list of banned items might be illegall and amount to collective punishment, but the blockade itself is legal.

Finnally go introduce yourself.... We'll
Do it if you plan on citing your claims. If you dont cite we will assume your a troll. Here at WAB we have designated trolls as chew toys, then we ban them.

If you do cite your claims then welcome. I think you'll find WAB encourages divergent views. Bigross and I for example have a long history arguing about Isreal's behaviour, obligations and crimes in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

So I hope you stick around and help me battle the Israeli propaganda that flies around here....

P.s. Read the rules and the Wabbit Surbival guide.

[Dubitante]

Greetings, I strongly suggest you cite your claims.

Thanks for the welcome, and sure thing. The UN report is here.

The section in question is here:

the Mission is satisfied that the blockade was inflicting disproportionate damage upon the civilian population in the Gaza strip and that as such the interception could not be justified and therefore has to be considered illegal...Furthermore, the closure regime is considered by the Mission to constitute collective punishment of the people living in the Gaza Strip and thus to be illegal and contrary to article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention.

The militant terror supporters attacked not the IDF.

A claim debunked by the independent report.

Second, the blockade is legal so long as Isreal and Hamas are at war. Isreal's list of banned items might be illegall and amount to collective punishment, but the blockade itself is legal.

A claim debunked by the independent report.

So I hope you stick around and help me battle the Israeli propaganda that flies around here....

Happy to. I'm currently researching a PhD that is broadly in Israeli propaganda (although not exclusively) so it's a topic I'm happy with.

[Dreadnought]

I look at it this way, If its denying Hamas arms to attack Israeli civilian neighborhoods then so be. Maybe when the people of Gaza have had enough Hamas might be overthrown. Until then they can still always move out of Gaza and thus out of the blockaded zone. So, I see no foul so long as the people of Gaza still have those options. About the only ones that might be pissed are the Iranians. I wonder why.

[zraver]

Thanks for the welcome, and sure thing. The UN report is here.

The section in question is here:[/qoute]

No, the OHCHR can issue opinions, only the security council or the ICJ/ICC can issue legal rulings. Secondly the LOAC are a primary code, humanitarian law does not supercede it. The highest right of the state is self defence per UNC art 51.

[qoute] claim debunked by the independent report.

Cite please I know what I saw on video and interview.

A claim debunked by the independent report.

See above, you dont understand international law.

Happy to. I'm currently researching a PhD that is broadly in Israeli propaganda (although not exclusively) so it's a topic I'm happy with.

Great dont forget the intro.