Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Gaza flotilla and the maritime blockade of Gaza - Legal background
IMRA ^ | 5-31-10

Posted on 05/31/2010 3:06:20 PM PDT by SJackson

The Gaza flotilla and the maritime blockade of Gaza - Legal background from the Foreign Ministry [Israel]

Ministry of Foreign Affairs 31 May 2010 - distributed May 31, 2010 5:18 PM

A maritime blockade is in effect off the coast of Gaza. It has been imposed, as Israel is currently in a state of armed conflict with the Hamas regime that controls Gaza.

1. A maritime blockade is in effect off the coast of Gaza. Such blockade has been imposed, as Israel is currently in a state of armed conflict with the Hamas regime that controls Gaza, which has repeatedly bombed civilian targets in Israel with weapons that have been smuggled into Gaza via the sea.

2. Maritime blockades are a legitimate and recognized measure under international law that may be implemented as part of an armed conflict at sea.

3. 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.

4. The naval manuals of several western countries, including the US and England recognize the maritime blockade as an effective naval measure and set forth the various criteria that make a blockade valid, including the requirement of give due notice of the existence of the blockade.

5. In this vein, it should be noted that Israel publicized the existence of the blockade and the precise coordinates of such by means of the accepted international professional maritime channels. Israel also provided appropriate notification to the affected governments and to the organizers of the Gaza protest flotilla. Moreover, in real time, the ships participating in the protest flotilla were warned repeatedly that a maritime blockade is in effect.

6. Here, it should be noted that under customary law, knowledge of the blockade may be presumed once a blockade has been declared and appropriate notification has been granted, as above.

7. Under international maritime law, when a maritime blockade is in effect, no boats can enter the blockaded area. That includes both civilian and enemy vessels.

8. A state may take action to enforce a blockade. Any vessel that violates or attempts to violate a maritime blockade may be captured or even attacked under international law. The US Commander's Handbook on the Law of Naval Operations sets forth that a vessel is considered to be in attempt to breach a blockade from the time the vessel leaves its port with the intention of evading the blockade.

9. Here we should note that the protesters indicated their clear intention to violate the blockade by means of written and oral statements. Moreover, the route of these vessels indicated their clear intention to violate the blockade in violation of international law.

10. Given the protesters explicit intention to violate the naval blockade, Israel exercised its right under international law to enforce the blockade. It should be noted that prior to undertaking enforcement measures, explicit warnings were relayed directly to the captains of the vessels, expressing Israel's intent to exercise its right to enforce the blockade.

11. Israel had attempted to take control of the vessels participating in the flotilla by peaceful means and in an orderly fashion in order to enforce the blockade. Given the large number of vessels participating in the flotilla, an operational decision was made to undertake measures to enforce the blockade a certain distance from the area of the blockade.

12. Israeli personnel attempting to enforce the blockade were met with violence by the protesters and acted in self defense to fend off such attacks.

San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea, 12 June 1994 , my bold

SECTION V : NEUTRAL MERCHANT VESSELS AND CIVIL AIRCRAFT

Neutral merchant vessels

67. Merchant vessels flying the flag of neutral States may not be attacked unless they:

(a) are believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband or breaching a blockade, and after prior warning they intentionally and clearly refuse to stop, or intentionally and clearly resist visit, search or capture;

(b) engage in belligerent acts on behalf of the enemy;

(c) act as auxiliaries to the enemy s armed forces;

(d) are incorporated into or assist the enemy s intelligence system;

(e) sail under convoy of enemy warships or military aircraft; or

(f) otherwise make an effective contribution to the enemy s military action, e.g., by carrying military materials, and it is not feasible for the attacking forces to first place passengers and crew in a place of safety. Unless circumstances do not permit, they are to be given a warning, so that they can re-route, off-load, or take other precautions.

68. Any attack on these vessels is subject to the basic rules in paragraphs 38-46.

69. The mere fact that a neutral merchant vessel is armed provides no grounds for attacking it.


TOPICS: Israel; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: blockade; gaza; idf; israel; terrorflotilla; turkey; turkies; turkishterrorists
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-26 last
To: SJackson

A blockade is an act of war. As such, one should be careful.


21 posted on 05/31/2010 5:18:40 PM PDT by Citizen Tom Paine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

Thank you very much for posting this information.


22 posted on 05/31/2010 5:21:30 PM PDT by camp_steveo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

GOD BLESS ISRAEL and all who are rightous that stand with Israel!. Israeli Flag Pictures, Images and Photos
23 posted on 05/31/2010 5:29:26 PM PDT by ncfool (The new USSA - United Socialst States of AmeriKa. Welcome to Obummers world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Israel better be careful with point no. 1: “Israel is currently in a state of armed conflict with the Hamas regime that controls Gaza.” International law recognizes reciprocal rights during armed conflict. If Israel seeks to justify their actions in international waters by claiming to be in armed conflict with Hamas then this would also justify military actions by Hamas as a party in armed conflict with Israel; it is a two edged sword. Historically Lincoln got in trouble diplomatically when he at first declared a blockade of southern ports. This was legally an act of war and would have justified the Confederacy as a legitimate combatant internationally. To forestall this the blockade had to be redefined as simply the closing of the southern ports by the Federal government. But this put limitations on the actions that the United States could take upon the high seas.
24 posted on 05/31/2010 7:05:54 PM PDT by Petrosius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Petrosius
No different than al Qaida's legitimate right to attack the US. International law hasn't caught up with terrorism, in the old days they were called spies and pirates, and summarily hung.

What would Hamas' "legitimate" right to kill Israeli civilians be based upon, the fact that Israel protects it's population? The unfortunate fact of the matter is that when it comes to international "law", we're out in Alice in Wonderland country.

25 posted on 05/31/2010 8:01:18 PM PDT by SJackson (Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel and it must remain undivided, Barack Hussein Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Citizen Tom Paine
A blockade is an act of war. As such, one should be careful.

It is, Israel makes no bones about being in an armed struggle with Hamas, who rules Gaza illegitimately. Heck, the USA trains and arms "Fatah loyal" palestinians to combat Hamas in the West Bank, and presumably to retake Gaza. Yes, it's all a charade.

26 posted on 05/31/2010 8:03:30 PM PDT by SJackson (Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel and it must remain undivided, Barack Hussein Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-26 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson