Nothing New For Israel All At Ssea

By Victor Kotsev
June 4, 2010
Courtesy Of "Asia Times Online"

Condemnation poured swiftly on Israel after Monday's botched naval operation, despite protests that its forces had been "ambushed" and assaulted while attempting to enforce the Gaza blockade. Recriminations, conflicting versions of events - the Jewish state has seen it all before.

"The Second Gaza War: Israel lost at sea," columnist Bradley Burston said in the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz. "It already has the makings of a huge international fracas that will make the Goldstone Report look like small potatoes by comparison," Blake Hounshell for Foreign Policy wrote, referring to the United Nations-mandated report created to investigate war crimes during the 2008-2009 conflict in Gaza.

The boarding of the Mavi Marmara by Israeli marines

in international waters left nine pro-Palestinian activists dead and at least 43, including six Israeli commandos, wounded. Most of the dead were from Turkey, the home port for ships that were attempting to deliver humanitarian aid.

"Psychologically, this attack is like 9/11 for Turkey," claimed Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu as his country recalled its ambassador to Israel and summoned a special UN Security Council session to censure the raid, calling Israel's actions "state terrorism". UN secretary general Ban Ki-moon said, "I am shocked by reports of killing of people in boats carrying supply to Gaza. I heard the ships were in international water. That is very bad."

Greece called off a joint air force drill with Israel as the European Union condemned the raid and called for an end to the Gaza blockade. World leaders almost unanimously expressed their shock while demonstrations and riots broke out in many places. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was forced to cancel a White House visit and to return to Israel from Canada to deal with the crisis.

The question of what went wrong quickly took center-stage. From videos and materials released by Israel, it appears that a group of violent activists set upon the commandos when they rappelled from a helicopter onto the lead boat, the Turkish Mavi Marmara. [1]

"They wielded clubs, axes and knives," the commander of the Israeli force, injured in the operation, said in an interview. "I was the second to go down the cable, one of the guys from my group was already down there, and there were a few people on him ... I cocked my weapon when I saw that one was coming towards me with a knife drawn and I fired once. Then another 20 people came at me from all directions and threw me down to the deck below." [2]

Most of the activists have so far remained incommunicado, as they were detained by Israel following the raid, but a few accounts already available appear contradictory. Some, such as a female Arab-Israeli lawmaker who was on board the Mavi Marmara, Hanin Zoabi, denied the protestors used violence. "Not a single passenger ... raised a club," she claimed, quoted by the Guardian. Others, such as Norman Paech, a 72-year-old German activist, gave more nuanced accounts:

The aggression came from the sky, from helicopters from which soldiers came down by ropes. We waited in the fore room and saw them carrying an Israeli soldier who looked to me like he'd had a breakdown. Then the second and third came, but after these three injured soldiers then I saw a lot - maybe 10 - passengers who were severely hurt, injured, covered in blood. They were treated in the salon next to me. One was so badly injured I am sure he must have died soon after. I didn't even consider going upstairs as it was just too dangerous.

In a telephone conversation on Wednesday, Free Gaza organizer Hedy Epstein explained that it was unclear as of yet what had happened, but that the values of the flotilla were entirely non-violent. "We have to commit ourselves to non-violence," she said. Israel had attacked the flotilla, she asserted, and speculated that the long knives shown in Israeli footage might have been "kitchen equipment" used in self-defense.

Israeli analyst Ron Ben-Yishai offers an entirely different account. "Some 100 people infiltrated the peace and humanitarian aid activists making their way to Gaza, with the explicit design to attack Israeli soldiers using cold arms," he writes. "Some among that group are believed to have ties with World jihad groups, mainly al-Qaeda."

For him, a central question is how come Israel walked into the trap and failed to anticipate violent provocation. In a separate article, he opines: "It appears that the error in planning the operation was ... [that] the soldiers thought they will encounter Bilin-style violence; instead, they got Bangkok." Attesting to the surprise of the Israeli military

, according to some accounts it delayed releasing footage from the incident, despite the Foreign Ministry's pleas, because it thought images of commandos being beaten might damage army morale. [3]

All perspectives considered, there is overwhelming evidence that the protesters used substantial force against the Israeli marines. There is also evidence that some passengers had prepared for the violent confrontation. "We are now waiting for one of two good things - either to reach Gaza or achieve martyrdom," said a female participant in the flotilla ahead of the sail, quoted by The Times. Three of the Turkish casualties reportedly told their relatives that they "dreamt of martyrdom" [4] and one Yemenite was allegedly photographed with a dagger in his belt on the journey [5]. There is also indirect evidence that the activists were prone to violence in the form of reports of misbehavior by some after their arrest. [6]

Finally - and this is clearly something that Israeli planning should have accounted for, but didn't - a recent precedent exists for violence on the part of the pro-Palestinian activists. Earlier this year, the Viva Palestina convoy trying to break the blockade by land ran into trouble with Egypt after killing an Egyptian border guard in clashes [7]. According to Epstein, the Free Gaza movement and the Viva Palestina movement "have a friendly relationship".

One thing that is not yet fully clear is the sequence of events, but so far a coherent and documented narrative challenging the Israeli version hasn't emerged. Against Israel stands the circumstance that the raid was conducted in international waters and was therefore illegal according to maritime conventions. "As far as I can see, there is no legal basis for boarding these ships," said Robin Churchill, a professor of international law at the University of Dundee in Scotland, quoted by the Huffington Post.

Nevertheless, the larger body of international law is more complex and open to interpretation, and Israel has offered its own legal justifications for its actions. "A blockade may be imposed at sea, including in international waters, so long as it does not bar access to the ports and coasts of neutral states," the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs writes on its web site. "[Hebrew University international law expert] Dr Robbie Sabel noted that there is a long history of embargo activities in international waters," Israeli think-tank IMRA reported. [8]

In turn, the legality of the Gaza blockade in itself is the subject of intense debates. [9] In the absence of a clear normative legal framework, moral arguments such as Israel's need for security and the humanitarian situation in Gaza compete to shape global public opinion and ultimately to determine who is right and who is wrong.

Predictably, Israel has argued that there is no humanitarian crisis in Gaza, that the flotilla was a violent provocation, and that the Israeli naval force acted to protect the country's essential security. "There is no hunger in Gaza and there is no humanitarian crisis ... the organization behind the flotilla is not a humanitarian aid organization," said Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak on Monday, quoted by Yedioth Ahronoth.

Israeli intelligence analysis website Debka offered the following defense of the blockade: "without it, Iranian ships loaded with ballistic missiles would be free to unload their cargoes at Gaza port - with the same ease as their heavy weapons consignments reach Lebanon. Hamas would quickly grow into a second Hezbollah. For Israel, lifting the blockade would be an act of suicide."

The Free Gaza activists, on the other hand, write on their website that "for over four years, Israel has subjected the civilian population of Gaza to an increasingly severe blockade, resulting in a man-made humanitarian catastrophe of epic proportions", [10] and that they themselves are a humanitarian as well as non-violent political movement. "We want to raise international awareness about the prison-like closure of Gaza," they proclaim. Since the detainees are currently being released by Israel, we can soon expect a more coherent position by the organizers concerning the bloodshed.

Aside from what went wrong, another major question is what will be the damage. It is still hard to say precisely, but estimates fall into several categories. While most of the attention of the media has thus far been focused on Israel, we should not overlook a number of other actors with high stakes in the incident.

Some actually benefited. Hamas benefited the most. The bloodshed and the international attention came as a lifeline to the besieged and embattled Islamic movement. Without lifting a finger, Hamas achieved a major propaganda coup against Israel. The blockade was eased a bit, and even Egypt opened Rafah temporarily (thus, even the people in Gaza benefited, albeit less so than their leaders). The movement's political head in Gaza, Ismail Haniyeh, addressed the activists: "You were heroes, whether you reached [Gaza] or not."

Iran also benefited. "A vote on a new UN Iran sanctions resolution will likely be pushed back due to diplomatic fallout from the Israeli raid on the Gaza aid flotilla, among other reasons," reported Politico on Wednesday. "The Obama administration had been planning to bring a new Iran sanctions resolution to a vote at the UN Security Council on Thursday but diplomatic sources said the vote is not likely to take place this week."

It is unclear what Turkey achieved, other than a practically complete break with Israel. "The Turkish government undoubtedly has wanted to move away from [its close historic] relationship [with Israel]," writes US think-tank Stratfor, "but it faced resistance within the Turkish military and among secularists. The new Israeli action makes a break with Israel easy, and indeed almost necessary for Ankara."

Israel found itself in the middle of a massive, and uphill, public relations battle. The Jewish state faces several uncomfortable scenarios. According to Stratfor:

It is vital that the Israelis succeed in portraying the flotilla as an extremist plot ... Internationally, there is little doubt that the incident will generate a firestorm ... Opinion in Europe will likely harden. And public opinion in the United States - by far the most important in the equation - might shift to a "plague-on-both-your-houses" position ... The next steps will involve calls for sanctions against Israel. The Israeli threats against Iran will be seen in a different context, and Israeli portrayal of Iran will hold less sway over the world. And this will cause a political crisis in Israel. If this government survives, then Israel is locked into a course that gives it freedom of action but international isolation. If the government falls, then Israel enters a period of domestic uncertainty. In either case, the flotilla achieved its strategic mission.

While not everybody agrees with these predictions, some of them (such as that Turkey severing relations and Iran benefiting) have already come true. Moreover, other influential analysts, such as David Rothkopf, have reached broadly similar conclusions. [11]

Most importantly, we can infer the extent of the damage Israel faces by just how much Netanyahu is on the defensive. "Israeli officials said all 680 activists held would be released, including two dozen Israel had threatened earlier to prosecute charging they had assaulted its troops," reported Ha'aretz on Tuesday. Israel, moreover, promptly delivered most of the cargo of the boats to Hamas, and took steps to ease the blockade.

The Free Gaza movement may have "achieved its strategic mission" according to Stratfor (and most other analysts), but things don't look so straightforward to the organizers. If indeed the flotilla was infiltrated by extremists (which is, in fact, somewhat likely, due to the partnership with the Turkish IHH, [12]) they would bear part of the responsibility, and this would mean that they are now at a crossroads. They could either condemn the violence and seek to tighten non-violent discipline next time (as well as to restore the confidence of the part of their supporters who are dogmatically non-violent), or they could decide to embrace certain violent forms of resistance.

Either way, they would need to do some serious soul-searching and to face some very difficult decisions. Serious fragmentation among their supporters may not occur immediately, at least not while the action is happening, but dissenting and disillusioned voices may emerge from among their ranks.

To give an example, this is an excerpt from a speech delivered on October 2, 2008, by Nicaraguan diplomat Miguel d'Escoto Brockmann, then-president of the General Assembly of the UN, in which he refers to the first Free Gaza voyage:

[Mahatma] Gandhi's and [Martin Luther] King's successors in the 21st century have carried out further experiments in the power of non-violent truth to achieve justice and peace in every corner of the world - including, in the last two months, Gaza. The Free Gaza Movement has succeeded in breaking the siege of Gaza by non-violent direct action. After sailing from Cypress, 44 activists from 17 countries landed their two small wooden boats at Gaza Port on August 23, 2008, where a beleaguered people welcomed them ... From the groundbreaking work of Gandhi and King to the ongoing example of the Free Gaza Movement, we can discern the transforming power of non-violence at a crossroads in our history.

Asked for a comment, a leading expert on non-violent social movements requested that his name not be mentioned due to the fact that information about the incident is currently inconclusive, but had this to say:

If the activists did indeed violently attack the soldiers, even if the attack was with non-lethal beating, this was incorrect non-violent practice. Gandhi and Dr Martin Luther King Jr always insisted on disciplined rejection of any form of violence, even in retaliation for savage beatings. This is necessary to maintain the moral high ground and attract political support for the cause of justice. The use of violence by the flotilla activists gave the Israelis the excuse they seek to justify their brutality.

In other words, to go back to the example, if indeed there were extremists among the Free Gaza activists, it will be hard to hear such an impassioned statement of support for them any time soon. Moreover, we would be hearing criticism from among their core supporters. (Nicaragua, nevertheless, expressed strong support by breaking relations with Israel over the incident.)

The peace movement, and especially the moderate-left camp in Israel (not to be confused with the extreme left) will probably take a blow, as it does every time Israel's isolation grows. The peace talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, moreover, may become more difficult. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas already protested strongly the raid, calling it "a massacre".

Egypt (and to a lesser extent Jordan

and the US) has come under intense pressure to steer away from Israel. The Egyptian government is no supporter of the activists, especially given the recent memory of the Viva Palestina convoy. Nevertheless, it issued a condemnation and opened the Rafah crossing for three days.

A final big question that remains is the most difficult to answer specifically: how will this incident affect Middle Eastern politics and the larger course of events. Some analysts, such as Asia Times Online's Simon Thurlow, have argued that it "permanently altered world politics". [13] Others have projected apocalyptic scenarios including, on the wilder-speculations side of the spectrum, a naval confrontation between Israel and Turkey. [14]

Barring a major unforeseen development, however, it seems that the bloodshed will strengthen some grim existing tendencies, but will not set new trends. Israel's isolation is nothing new, and neither is the flurry of condemnations from the international community. It is not Netanyahu's first major diplomatic scandal, and not even the first such this year. Turkey's course away from Israel is not new. Iran's evasion of sanctions is not new. Hamas was pleasantly surprised, but the lifeline the incident offered will not last forever.

Much will depend on the exact facts, which will continue to come out in the next days, and on the outcome of the public relations war, which will continue to unfold. For most of those involved, nevertheless, the impact of the incident will be markedly negative. It is possible that further provocations will ensue on both sides, and with the rise in tensions, the probability of more violence will increase. As Ian Bremmer notes, it will likely be a hot, hot summer. [15]

Notes

1. 'Activists threw stun grenades' Jerusalem Post, June 2, 2010.
2. '20 people threw me from deck' Ynetnews, June 1, 2010.
3. What took so long with flotilla film? Jerusalem Post, June 2, 2010.
4. 3 flotilla fatalities 'dreamt of martyrdom' Ynetnews, June 2, 2010.
5. Gaza flotilla passenger: Ship became lake of blood Ynetnews, June 2, 2010.
6. Flotilla passengers attack immigration officers Ynetnews, June 2, 2010.
7. Egyptian guard dies in clashes over Gaza aid convoy The Guardian, June 2, 2010.
8. Law Expert Dr Robbie Sabel IDF action in international waters legal
9. Gaza sanctions: The legal argument BBC, October 30, 2007.
10. Israel's Disinformation Campaign Against the Gaza Freedom Flotilla
11. The Gaza debacle: Political crisis to follow?
12. Turkish Funds Helped Group Test Blockade The New York Times, June 1, 2010.
13. Israel founders in international waters Asia Times Online, June 2, 2010.
14. Turkey and Israel close to brink June 2, 2010.
15. A hot summer in Israel Foreign Policy, June 1, 2010.

Victor Kotsev is a freelance journalist and political analyst with expertise in the Middle East.

(Copyright 2010 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved.)