Israel Interdicts Suspected Weapon Carrying Ship

The Jerusalem Post reports "IDF boards ship allegedly smuggling arms to Gaza", the IDF being the Israel Defense Force. The ship being identified as a Liberian-flagged ship named HS Beethoven:

Commandos from the navy’s Flotilla 13 unit boarded a cargo ship, the HS Beethoven, in the Mediterranean Sea on Sunday night on suspicion it was trying to smuggle weapons to the Gaza Strip. The ship, which was flying a Liberian flag, was intercepted by Israel Navy vessels approximately 260 km. from Israel’s coast. Commandos boarded the ship with the captain’s consent and began searching cargo containers for arms.

It appears from the body of the article that the headline is misleading. The vessel might be suspected of attempted smuggling of weapons, but it is not "allegedly smuggling" such items until such weapons are found aboard the ship, which it appears, as of the time the report, had not happened, though I suspect that an intelligence source put the alert out on this vessel.

UPDATE: Report now is that no weapons found on vessel. See here.

Publicity Seekers Get Stopped by Israeli Sea Blockade

Dignite/Al Karama off some shore somewhere

After only getting 10% of their 10 boat publicity "flotilla" (that's 1 boat) to sail toward Gaza, international publicity seekers were stunned to find out that Israel means it when it announces that it is continuing to enforce a sea blockade off Gaza as reported in Israeli navy surrounds Gaza-bound French yacht. Even better, the boat seems to be suffering some sort of communication blackout so that international publicity seeking whining cannot be heard or seen live:

Israeli warships on Tuesday surrounded a French yacht carrying pro-Palestinian activists as they neared the coast of Gaza in a bid to breach the Israeli blockade, an organiser told AFP.

Organisers said Israeli navy vessels had surrounded the Dignite/Al Karama in international waters, some 40 nautical miles off the Gaza shoreline, at around 0630 GMT and all communications were cut shortly afterwards.

News that Israel had stopped the ship was roundly denounced by Gaza's Hamas rulers, who decried it as "a new act of Zionist piracy."

"The boat is surrounded by at least three Israeli ships and since 9:06 am (0706 GMT) all the communications have been jammed. We can't get in touch with them by phone or by Internet," French organiser Julien Rivoire told AFP by phone from Paris.

In a separate statement, the organisers urged the French government "to take its responsibilities and to protect the passengers, and to call on Israel not resort to violence."

The Israeli military confirmed it had made contact with the boat, which is carrying 16 people, including three crew members and three journalists.

"The Israel navy is currently in a dialogue with the activists on board the Al Karama in an attempt to dissuade them from continuing on their route into an area under a maritime security blockade," a statement said.

"The Israel navy will allow the organisers and passengers to re-route at any point, prior to the boarding of Israel navy soldiers."

Activists on board the ship were told they will not be allowed to reach Gaza under any circumstances and advised to change course for the Egyptian port of El-Arish, an Israeli military source told AFP.

"They contacted the boat and said: 'We won't let you reach Gaza under any circumstances, but you can head for El-Arish if you want,'" he quoted the naval commandos as saying.

The international political effort and the other efforts (see also here) leading up to the sailing of this one boat and the non-sailing of the other 9 has been interesting to watch. For those of you unfamiliar with the "law" of blockade, read this from the San Remo Manual setting out the appropriate blockade rules for parties to an armed conflict:

SECTION II : METHODS OF WARFARE
Blockade

93. A blockade shall be declared and notified to all belligerents and neutral States. 94. The declaration shall specify the commencement, duration, location, and extent of the blockade and the period within which vessels of neutral States may leave the blockaded coastline. 95. A blockade must be effective. The question whether a blockade is effective is a question of fact. 96. The force maintaining the blockade may be stationed at a distance determined by military requirements.97. A blockade may be enforced and maintained by a combination of legitimate methods and means of warfare provided this combination does not result in acts inconsistent with the rules set out in this document. 98. Merchant vessels believed on reasonable grounds to be breaching a blockade may be captured. Merchant vessels which, after prior warning, clearly resist capture may be attacked. 99. A blockade must not bar access to the ports and coasts of neutral States. 100. A blockade must be applied impartially to the vessels of all States. 101. The cessation, temporary lifting, re-establishment, extension or other alteration of a blockade must be declared and notified as in paragraphs 93 and 94. 102. The declaration or establishment of a blockade is prohibited if: (a) it has the sole purpose of starving the civilian population or denying it other objects essential for its survival; or(b) the damage to the civilian population is, or may be expected to be, excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated from the blockade. 103. If the civilian population of the blockaded territory is inadequately provided with food and other objects essential for its survival, the blockading party must provide for free passage of such foodstuffs and other essential supplies, subject to: (a) the right to prescribe the technical arrangements, including search, under which such passage is permitted; and(b) the condition that the distribution of such supplies shall be made under the local supervision of a Protecting Power or a humanitarian organization which offers guarantees of impartiality, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross. 104. The blockading belligerent shall allow the passage of medical supplies for the civilian population or for the wounded and sick members of armed forces, subject to the right to prescribe technical arrangements, including search, under which such passage is permitted.

So, the question you have to ask yourself is, "Are Israel and Hamas-governed Gaza in a state of armed conflict?"

The FreeGaza.org side of the sage of the sailing of Dignité :

It is in large part because the Dignité commenced its voyage from a French port and the French government refused to interfere with this civilian human rights initiative that the ship continues its mission. The Dignité and its passengers – from France, Canada, Greece, Sweden, and Tunisa – represent a flotilla that was delayed by acts of sabotage and by an egregious act of complicity by the Greek government with Israel’s human rights violations and policy towards Gaza that the International Committee of the Red Cross determined to be “collective punishment.” But they also represent the steadfastness and determination of the flotilla movement to sail until the blockade is broken. The idea that Freedom Flotilla II could be stopped misunderstands the nature of this non-violent movement and its strength of purpose.

Despite most of the ships being unable to leave Greek ports, the flotilla nonetheless managed to highlight the vicious nature of Israel’s policy towards Gaza. Israeli leaders showed their willingness to use intimidation, lies, economic blackmail, threats of violence, and sabotage to stop boats that Israeli military officials admitted would not be carrying weapons. This clearly demonstrates that Israel’s blockade of Gaza is not based on “security”, but is meant to punish the Palestinian people, denying their freedom and keeping them cut off from the rest of the world.

A blockade by definition is designed to "cut off" an armed adversary from the rest of the world, except as provided by the San Remo Manual.

It should also be noted that Egypt has opened its border to Gaza thus mooting much of the "cut off from the world" argument.

Israel's Blockade of Gaza and the Battle of Media Coverage

So, in another effort to gain media coverage both sympathetic to the population of Gaza and, of course, for themselves, members of Code Pink are apparently setting out on a mission with the intent to demand protection from the U.S. government (meaning the U.S. Navy) as they attempt to force the well-known Israeli sea blockade of Gaza.

Let's start with this - Code Pink stages pro-Gaza rally at State Dept. (highlighting and blue comments are mine):

The American ship Audacity of Hope, part of the Freedom Flotilla II, will depart from Greece with 50 passengers in late June headed for Gaza. In total, the flotilla will include roughly ten boats carrying 1,000 passengers, and will set sail on June 25. They are billing their voyage as a sequel to the Freedom Flotilla, which was intercepted by Israeli authorities on its way to Gaza last May in an incident that resulted in nine deaths.

Code Pink staged a small press conference on Thursday morning outside the State Department's C Street entrance that featured speeches by Code Pink co-founder Medea Benjamin, who will be a passenger on the flotilla, former CIA analyst and passenger Ray McGovern , activist and flotilla passenger Missy Lane, Palestinian-American lawyer Noura Erekat, and Gazan activist Amer Shurrab.[Got to get those names spelled correctly - it's all about them]

This year's flotilla occurs in a drastically altered atmosphere as compared to last year's. The Israelis have eased restrictions on some goods and Egypt has opened up the Rafah Crossing. Regardless, the activists at the State Department stressed that the people of Gaza still live under harsh conditions and need international advocacy.[This trip is totally unnecessary but we still want the publicity]

Benjamin, naturally dressed all in pink, said she is hoping that the American presence aboard the flotilla will lessen the risk of a violent encounter with the Israel Defense Forces, and called on the State Department to express its support. [Oh Bulls***, Ms. Benjamin is really hoping for a media rich "confrontation" with the IDF - otherwise, why bother?]

"We, as Americans, who are going on the boat that is a U.S. flag ship, that is carrying U.S. passengers...this is the time for our State Department to come forward and say ‘we recognize our responsibility to U.S. citizens and we will put pressure on the Israeli government to make sure that no harm comes to our citizens,'" she said.[Last time I looked, the U.S. government has virtually no responsibility to do anything for citizens who are stupid enough to put themselves in harm's way intentionally or bail them out once they are deep into it. I'd be more impressed if the "flotilla" was sailing into Somali pirate waters to protest the treatment of women in Somalia. More impressed, but not any more inclined to suggest that the U.S. government do a damn thing about it.]

Just a reminder, it's my view that Israel has a perfectly legal right to blockade Gaza under the conditions that exist between the Gazans and Israel.

In support of my view, I offer some information on blockades from part of an earlier post:

There is that the magic word "blockade."

As you may recall, Israel has interdicted ships attempting to carry supplies into Gaza. As noted in an earlier post, this seems to be a legal blockade of Gaza. There is an interesting piece by a Israeli legal scholar Ruth Lapidoth, The Legal Basis of Israel's Naval Blockade of Gaza, which lays out the argument that the blockade of Gaza is perfectly legal under international law.The piece cites the San Remo Manual as setting out the appropriate rules for parties to an armed conflict:

SECTION II : METHODS OF WARFARE
Blockade
93. A blockade shall be declared and notified to all belligerents and neutral States. 94. The declaration shall specify the commencement, duration, location, and extent of the blockade and the period within which vessels of neutral States may leave the blockaded coastline. 95. A blockade must be effective. The question whether a blockade is effective is a question of fact. 96. The force maintaining the blockade may be stationed at a distance determined by military requirements.97. A blockade may be enforced and maintained by a combination of legitimate methods and means of warfare provided this combination does not result in acts inconsistent with the rules set out in this document. 98. Merchant vessels believed on reasonable grounds to be breaching a blockade may be captured. Merchant vessels which, after prior warning, clearly resist capture may be attacked. 99. A blockade must not bar access to the ports and coasts of neutral States. 100. A blockade must be applied impartially to the vessels of all States. 101. The cessation, temporary lifting, re-establishment, extension or other alteration of a blockade must be declared and notified as in paragraphs 93 and 94. 102. The declaration or establishment of a blockade is prohibited if: (a) it has the sole purpose of starving the civilian population or denying it other objects essential for its survival; or(b) the damage to the civilian population is, or may be expected to be, excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated from the blockade. 103. If the civilian population of the blockaded territory is inadequately provided with food and other objects essential for its survival, the blockading party must provide for free passage of such foodstuffs and other essential supplies, subject to: (a) the right to prescribe the technical arrangements, including search, under which such passage is permitted; and(b) the condition that the distribution of such supplies shall be made under the local supervision of a Protecting Power or a humanitarian organization which offers guarantees of impartiality, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross. 104. The blockading belligerent shall allow the passage of medical supplies for the civilian population or for the wounded and sick members of armed forces, subject to the right to prescribe technical arrangements, including search, under which such passage is permitted.

Professor Lapidoth finds that these rules applied to a blockade of Gaza.

Iranian arms ship bound for Gaza sunk?

An interesting report, if true: Egyptian paper: Iranian arms ship bound for Gaza destroyed off Sudan:

An Iranian vessel laden with weapons bound for the Gaza Strip was torpedoed off the coast of Sudan last week, allegedly by Israeli or American forces operating in the area, the Egyptian newspaper El-Aosboa reported yesterday.

Anonymous sources in Khartoum told the newspaper that an unidentified warship bombed the Iranian vessel as it prepared to dock in Sudan before transferring its load for shipment to the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip.

The sources said they suspect U.S. or Israeli involvement in the attack, but neither Washington nor Jerusalem have released a statement on the matter. The Israel Air Force is suspected of attacking a convoy of Iranian arms that passed through Sudan en route to Gaza in January, according to foreign news reports released in March.

Bombed or torpedoed? Don't trust first reports.

A prior "Iranian arms ship" saga and here.