…and the EU’s contempt for the safety of its citizens who
bring humanitarian relief to Gaza’s
women and children
by Stuart Littlewood
In 2008 two humanitarian vessels got through to Gaza. In an article
entitled ‘Keeping the Sea-Lane to Gaza
Open’, I wrote…
The success of the ‘Free Gaza’ boats in breaking the siege, and their
safe arrival and departure, was due to the intervention and good offices of the
British Foreign Office…
Before the peace activists set sail, the British government
was asked about “action to ensure the freedom boats’ safe and uninterrupted
passage to Gaza
considering these are international waters and Palestinian territorial waters”.
Any attempt to stop the boats would surely infringe the right to freedom of movement
to and from Gaza, and seriously breach the International Covenant on Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights, to which Israel is a party.
The minister in charge of Middle East affairs Kim Howells…
has now revealed that “FCO officials spoke to Israeli officials in advance of
the trip and Israel allowed
the boats peacefully into Gaza.”
Bravo. Our chaps in London
lift the phone to their chaps in Tel Aviv and – hey presto! – it’s all fixed.
That’s diplomacy…
Yet here we are nearly three years later going through the
same sorry process while ruthless foreign interests still relentlessly expand
their influence by stealth, by subversion and by intimidation to persuade the
rest of the world to let them do as they please in the Middle East and beyond.
In the UK
and the EU we are losing control fast and will soon become abject Zionist
stooges like America.
It will soon be impossible to take back our country without organizing serious
insurrection.
And on the high seas Israeli warships and helicopters
assault and hijack vessels of other nations with impunity in order to maintain
their illegal blockade of Gaza.
The Jerusalem Post reports http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=226170
that the German Left Party has issued a resolution prohibiting its
parliamentary representatives from taking part in the upcoming Gaza Flotilla in an attempt to buy off
criticism that the party is anti-Israel and anti-Semitic. They will not
participate “in Middle East conflict initiatives that call for a one-state
solution for Palestine and Israel and boycotts of Israeli products, as well
this year’s Gaza
Flotilla.”
An expert on left-wing anti-Semitism called Alex Feuerherdt
told the newspaper that “it goes without saying” that participation in the Gaza Flotilla action is a “military attack on Israel”.
Such are the lengths to which the Zionist conspiracy will go
to control the thoughts and actions of ordinary, decent people.
And this is the background against which the Gaza Freedom Flotilla II
sets sail. The conspirators don’t want the boats to reach Gaza because their safe arrival would drive a
coach and horses through the Zionists’ control-freakery. So they shriek and
squawk and threaten dire consequences like last year when they assaulted the Mavi
Marmara with lethal force in international waters, not caring how many they
killed.
This has prompted the following statement by flotilla
organizers to the UN Human Rights Council a few days ago: “We are determined to sail to Gaza. Our cause is just and our means are
transparent. To underline the fact that we do not present an imminent threat to
Israel nor do we aim to contribute to a war effort against Israel, thus
eliminating any claim by Israel to self-defense, we invite the HRC or any other
UN or international agency to come on board and inspect our vessels at their
point of departure, on the high seas, or on their arrival in the Gaza port. We
will – and must – continue to sail until the illegal siege of Gaza is ended and Palestinians have the same
human and national rights those of us sailing enjoy.”
Steering Committee of the International Coalition for Gaza Freedom Flotilla II
One of the organizers in London
tells me that when the British boat’s final passenger list is confirmed, the
Foreign Office in London
will be contacted with the details and asked to “act to ensure the safe passage
of their citizens”.
Did the UK
have a right to mount a general naval blockade of the Republic of Ireland
in response to IRA terror?
Israel is clearly acting illegally by interfering with the
flotilla’s peaceful mission, so what are the chances that Britain and
other countries will provide necessary protection?
A UN fact-finding mission, dealing with the assault on the Mavi
Marmara, has already declared that “no case can be made for the legality of the
interception and the Mission
therefore finds that the interception was illegal.”
As for Israel’s
naval blockade, it 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 action
by Israel’s
military in intercepting the Mavi Marmara on the high seas was “clearly
unlawful” and could not be justified even under Article 51 of the Charter of
the United Nations [the right of self-defense].
And let’s remember that Security Council resolution 1860
(2009) emphasizes “the need to ensure sustained and regular flow of goods and
people through the Gaza crossings” and calls for
“the unimpeded provision and distribution throughout Gaza of humanitarian assistance, including of
food, fuel and medical treatment”.
that the Israeli blockade of the Gaza Strip is illegal under international
law. “Due both to the legal nature of Israel’s relationship to Gaza – that of
occupier – and the impact of the blockade on the civilian population, amounting
to ‘collective punishment’, the blockade cannot be reconciled with the
principles of international law, including international humanitarian law. It
is recalled that the international community, speaking through both the United
Nations and individual States, has repeatedly and emphatically called for an
end to the blockade of the Gaza
Strip.
“The flotilla did not seek to travel to Israel, let alone ‘attack’ Israel.
Furthermore, the flotilla did not constitute an act which required an ‘urgent’
response, such that Israel
had to launch a middle-of-the-night armed boarding… Israel could also have
diplomatically engaged Turkey, arranged for a third party to verify there were
no weapons onboard and then peacefully guided the vessel to Gaza.”
Craig Murray was deputy head of the teams which negotiated
the UK’s maritime boundaries with France, Germany, Denmark
(Faeroe Islands) and Ireland.
As Head of the Maritime Section of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, he was
responsible for giving political and legal clearance to Royal Navy boarding
operations in the Persian Gulf following the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, in
enforcement of the UN authorised blockade against Iraqi weapons shipments. He
is therefore an internationally recognized authority on these matters.
Referring to the participation of an American boat in
Flotilla II http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2011/06/illegal-blockades/
, he says: “Right of free passage is guaranteed by the UN Convention on the Law
of the Seas, to which the United
States is a full party. Any incident which
takes place upon a US flagged ship on the High Seas is subject to United States
legal jurisdiction. A ship is entitled to look to its flag state for protection
from attack on the High Seas…
“Israel has declared a blockade on Gaza and justified
previous fatal attacks on neutral civilian vessels on the High Seas in terms of
enforcing that embargo, under the legal cover given by the San Remo Manual of
International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea.”
“There are however fundamental flaws in this line of
argument. It falls completely on one fact alone. San Remo only applies to blockade in times of
armed conflict. Israel
is not currently engaged in an armed conflict, and presumably does not wish to
be. San Remo does not confer any right to impose a permanent blockade outwith
times of armed conflict, and in fact specifically excludes as illegal a general
blockade on an entire population.”
He acknowledges that Israel
suffers from sporadic terrorist attacks from Gaza but this does not come close to reaching
the bar of armed conflict that would trigger the right to impose a naval
blockade. When the UK suffered continued terrorist attack from the Irish
Republican Army, sustaining many more deaths than anything Israel has suffered
in recent years from Gaza, it would have been ridiculous to argue that the UK
had a right to mount a general naval blockade of the Republic of Ireland.
So Israel
doesn’t have a leg to stand on. Therefore “all good men and true” should rally
to support these brave voyagers and ensure their governments back their play.
But here’s a question put by MEP Kyriacos Triantaphyllides
and the answer from the EU Commission
Question: One year after the military action by Israel against a convoy carrying humanitarian
aid supplies to Gaza, during which at least ten
civilians were killed, another humanitarian aid flotilla to Gaza is now being organised, the principal
cargo being supplies of stationery for school pupils. Is the EU and in
particular the Commission aware of the new mission that is being organised and
what is its position on this matter?
Given the participation of EU Member State nationals and the
presence of MEPs, will the EU take any measures to ensure that the personal
safety of its nationals is not endangered?
Answer: After the organisation of a flotilla heading to Gaza in May 2010, the Quartet, of which the EU is a
member, stated that all those wishing to deliver goods to Gaza
should do so through established channels, so that their cargo can be inspected
and transferred via land crossings into Gaza.
It also stated that there was no need for unnecessary confrontations and that
all parties should act responsibly in meeting the needs of the people of Gaza.
In the same spirit, the Chair’s Conclusions of the 13 April
2011 meeting of the Ad Hoc Liaison Committee (AHLC) on donor coordination for
Palestine reiterated a call on all international supporters to make use of the
existing land crossings to channel their support to Gaza, and abstain from
provocations.
The Commission stands by this line. A flotilla is not the
appropriate response to the humanitarian situation in Gaza. At the same time, Israel must
abide by international law when dealing with a possible flotilla. The EU
continues to request the lifting of the blockade on Gaza, including the naval blockade.
EU Member States have the responsibility to protect their
citizens abroad via their consular services. This responsibility covers
assistance for their citizens who might participate in a possible flotilla. As
in May-June 2010, the EU Delegation in Tel Aviv stands ready to function as a
hub for information and to coordinate the efforts of the consular services of
EU Member States.
So there your have it… the treacherous contradictions we
have come to expect from this unelected body, including advice that Member
States have a responsibility to protect their citizens AFTER they’ve been
murdered.
The “established channel” for delivering goods to Gaza is of course the
time-honoured route by sea, which is protected by maritime and international
law and therefore entirely appropriate. There’s nothing “provocative” about it.
The organizers have offered their cargoes for inspection and verification by a
trusted third party to allay Israel’s
fears about weapon supplies. They should not have to dirty their hands dealing
with the belligerent regime that’s cruelly turning the screws on civilians with
an illegal blockade. Anyone suggesting they must do so seeks to legitimize the
blockade, which we all know to be illegal and a crime against humanity.
Members of the Ad Hoc Liaison Committee include the
Palestinian Authority and the Government of Israel, so no wonder it bends over
backwards to accommodate Israel’s criminal action.
_________________________
Stuart Littlewood is author of the book Radio Free
Palestine, which tells the plight of the Palestinians under occupation.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Say what is on your mind, but observe the rules of debate. No foul language is allowed, no matter how anger-evoking the posted article may be.
Thank you,
TruthSeeker