![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Flashpoint
May. 31st, 2010 02:16 pmThe more I read about the Israeli boarding of the flotilla and the subsequent killing of at least nine people and the injury of 30-50 more has me disquieted that this could be the fracture point for Israel's future. There's several unclear elements, such as whether or not the Israeli's fired on the ships prior to boarding them, or that they had reason to believe that the supplies included weapons and/or explosives. But really, I don't think either of those things mattered if the positioning is accurate and Israeli took action against the ships in International Waters.
In short, if it was truly in International Waters, Israeli has absolutely no legal cover for the assualt, which would be considered a major act of piracy. Those activists' deaths no longer become an issue of security, instead turning into state sanctioned murder. Add on to that the defiant and utterly tone-deaf offical response, and Israel not only has dealt a huge blow to their relationship with Turkey, but handed an absolutely huge club to their enemies.
Plausible deniability has always been a key part of Israel's national security. They've not only blown the doors wide open with this, but in such a way that directly runs in the face of a lot of major powers. Freedom of the Seas is a pretty touchy subject, especially with the United States and their major fleets. If this represents a defacto change in Israel's policy that they are willing to extend their sanctions to the point of blocking aid outside of their borders and the contested ones on the West Bank, it's going to be very hard to see how that isn't going to ignite a firestorm between them, the US, Turkey and Egypt. The implications with the Suez canal are potentially nightmarish.
The potential repercussions about this are very, very severe, and I have a bad feeling that we're only getting the tip of the iceberg right now.
EDIT: Alright, too many hours trying to find some unfiltered information on this. Couple of things seem to be coming clear. There was a fairly determined activist presence on the main ship, who looked like they were planning to cause a disturbance in the event of a boarding. However, Israel's defense about how their assault team was acting in 'self-defense' is getting increasing scorn and contempt in the global press, and for good reason. You don't land an assault team by helicoptor on a boat full of people hostile to you outside of your own waters and claim you're the injured party. The laws are conflicting, so I don't know yet of Israel's actions are legally clear, but my feeling is that they've mismanaged their response badly. Commitment to the blockage to prevent aiding terrorists would have been a lot more paletable than claiming injury here.
The problem is that increasingly, this whole episode makes no sense. There's been a lot of evidence put forward (and taken with a grain of salt, like pretty much every 'fact' about this case from all sides) that Israel felt prompted to take extreme action due to intel from various sources that there would be child used as human shields and a mass riot involved if stopped. But if that was the case, why send in underequipped, outnumbered and undersupported troops on to the ship? If these are militants willing to risk the lives of children, you can't turn around a say that the reason the troops got mobbed was because you believed it was a group of peaceful activists who would just fold up at the first paintball to the chest.
More and more, this looks like either someone in the IDF screwed up by the numbers, or that different branches of Israeli intelligence was passing along different information, and led to this clusterfuck.
In short, if it was truly in International Waters, Israeli has absolutely no legal cover for the assualt, which would be considered a major act of piracy. Those activists' deaths no longer become an issue of security, instead turning into state sanctioned murder. Add on to that the defiant and utterly tone-deaf offical response, and Israel not only has dealt a huge blow to their relationship with Turkey, but handed an absolutely huge club to their enemies.
Plausible deniability has always been a key part of Israel's national security. They've not only blown the doors wide open with this, but in such a way that directly runs in the face of a lot of major powers. Freedom of the Seas is a pretty touchy subject, especially with the United States and their major fleets. If this represents a defacto change in Israel's policy that they are willing to extend their sanctions to the point of blocking aid outside of their borders and the contested ones on the West Bank, it's going to be very hard to see how that isn't going to ignite a firestorm between them, the US, Turkey and Egypt. The implications with the Suez canal are potentially nightmarish.
The potential repercussions about this are very, very severe, and I have a bad feeling that we're only getting the tip of the iceberg right now.
EDIT: Alright, too many hours trying to find some unfiltered information on this. Couple of things seem to be coming clear. There was a fairly determined activist presence on the main ship, who looked like they were planning to cause a disturbance in the event of a boarding. However, Israel's defense about how their assault team was acting in 'self-defense' is getting increasing scorn and contempt in the global press, and for good reason. You don't land an assault team by helicoptor on a boat full of people hostile to you outside of your own waters and claim you're the injured party. The laws are conflicting, so I don't know yet of Israel's actions are legally clear, but my feeling is that they've mismanaged their response badly. Commitment to the blockage to prevent aiding terrorists would have been a lot more paletable than claiming injury here.
The problem is that increasingly, this whole episode makes no sense. There's been a lot of evidence put forward (and taken with a grain of salt, like pretty much every 'fact' about this case from all sides) that Israel felt prompted to take extreme action due to intel from various sources that there would be child used as human shields and a mass riot involved if stopped. But if that was the case, why send in underequipped, outnumbered and undersupported troops on to the ship? If these are militants willing to risk the lives of children, you can't turn around a say that the reason the troops got mobbed was because you believed it was a group of peaceful activists who would just fold up at the first paintball to the chest.
More and more, this looks like either someone in the IDF screwed up by the numbers, or that different branches of Israeli intelligence was passing along different information, and led to this clusterfuck.
