Last May, when a flotilla of ships carrying humanitarian aid to Gaza was attacked by Israeli commandos, killing nine people, the response from the general public was one of mass anger and condemnation of what was correctly perceived as a heinous crime. The Israeli propaganda machine seemed to have been caught on the back foot, and was only able to respond with a series of crude and racist smears: These murdered humanitarian activists were Muslims, so, of course, they were terrorist sympathisers determined to drive the Jews into the sea.Now, once again, a flotilla of ships plans to defy the illegal Israeli blockade of the Gaza strip, and Israel is determined not to suffer another propaganda defeat. Across the world, establishment politicians are lining up to defend Israel in advance of whatever measures the IDF takes to prevent the ships from reaching their destination (already, one of the ships has been sabotaged in a Greek port, while another has been prevented from sailing based on spurious accusations that it isn't seaworthy). US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has already declared her support for Israeli soldiers exercising their "right to defend themselves" against "flotillas that try to provoke action by entering into Israeli waters." (source) One need only remember Operation Cast Lead to understand what the Israeli exercise of their "right to defend themselves" means in practice. Meanwhile, "senior Israeli sources" are claiming that "extremists" on board were planning to "spill the blood" of Israeli soldiers, despite the floatilla's commitment to non-violence. (source) The Israeli ambassador to the UN, Ron Prosor, said that the flotilla aimed to "promote an agenda of provocation" and "warned ahead" that the sail could "only spell trouble". (source)
In Ireland, Labour Councillor Richard Humphreys, parroting the Israeli propaganda line, said: “I fully support the call by Tánaiste Eamonn Gilmore that all sides must avoid the completely unjustified violence associated with the last flotilla. In my personal opinion, the responsibility for that violence rests with the Turkish terrorists who attempted to kill and injure members of the Israeli Defence Forces in front of their colleagues. No defence forces anywhere in the world that are worthy of the name would have responded to that murder attempt with anything less than immediate and potentially lethal force.” The fact that those Israeli soldiers were attempting to illegally seize a ship in international waters seems to be besides the point in Humphreys' "personal opinion". (source)
In short, then, in the eyes of the political establishment, Israel is entitled to enforce its Naval Blockade of Gaza, and anyone who attempts to defy the blockade are trying to "provoke Israel" and presumably deserve what they get, even if that includes being murdered.
But of course, in official doctrine, the right to defend oneself in the face of provocation only works one way. When a group of human rights activists attempts to deliver vital supplies to a besieged people, that is an act of provocation, but when a group of heavily armed commandos attempt to illegally board a ship, no right to defend oneself exists. - the occupants of the ship must simply go along with the instructions of the IDF-pirates, and hope they don't end up being tortured in an Israeli prison. Nor can the blockade itself, declared illegal by the numerous UN resolutions, or the illegal occupation, or the illegal building of settlements in the West Bank, or the theft of Palestinian water resources, or the annexation walls, or the use of white phosphorous, or the regular kidnap of Palestinians, or any of the other crimes of the Israeli State ever be discussed as provocations of the Palestinian people, who have no right to self-defence, non-violent or otherwise.
Update:
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment