Monday, October 06, 2025
Elder of Ziyon
1. Are these ship interceptions legal under international law?First, we must highlight the fact that the blockade imposed by Israel on the Gaza Strip is totally illicit. It is indeed a unilateral, indiscriminate, punitive action targeting the civil population. This kind of action is a serious violation of International Law.Regarding the competence of a State over the sea, there is a basic principle stipulating that a State is only allowed to take action within the limits of its territorial sea of 12 nautical miles from the coastline [baseline].On the one hand, the flotilla was heading towards Gaza and not Israel. But most importantly, on the other hand, the flotilla’s boats were intercepted at 43 nautical miles from the Gaza shore, which is in International Waters. Israel has, hence, violated International Law norms.According to the Montego Bay Convention on the Law of the Sea, no state has the right to scuttle any other ship, even military ships, non-aggressive, of course, in the High Seas. The Israelis have the right to board foreign ships only in their own territorial waters. This is an application of the sacred principle of the Freedom of Navigation, the seas belonging to all.Israel has violated all the norms of the International Law of the Sea. It scuttled foreign boats in the High Seas, especially since these boats were on peaceful humanitarian missions, and even in territorial waters, they would have had the “right of innocent passage.”
It turns out that even the UN stated, unequivocally, that Israel's 'naval blockade of Gaza was legal - in 2011.
This was in the Palmer Report, discussing the Mavi Marmara incident, which occurred far further from the Gaza shore than the "Sumud Flotilla" - 75 nautical mile away.
The first issue we consider is the legality of the naval blockade imposed by Israel.The Panel notes in this regard that the uncertain legal status of Gaza under international law cannot mean that Israel has no right to self-defence against armed attacks directed toward its territory. The Israeli report to the Panel makes it clear that the naval blockade as a measure of the use of force was adopted for the purpose of defending its territory and population, and the Panel accepts that was the case. It was designed as one way to prevent weapons reaching Gaza by sea and to prevent such attacks to be launched from the sea. Indeed there have been various incidents in which ships carrying weapons were intercepted by the Israeli authorities on their way to Gaza.Israel was entitled to take reasonable steps to prevent the influx of weapons into Gaza. With that objective, Israel established a series of restrictions on vessels entering the waters of Gaza. These measures culminated in the declaration of the naval blockade on 3 January 2009.As a final point, the Panel emphasizes that if necessary, the civilian population in Gaza must be allowed to receive food and other objects essential to its survival. However, it does not follow from this obligation that the naval blockade is per se unlawful or that Israel as the blockading power is required to simply let vessels carrying aid through the blockade. On the contrary, humanitarian missions must respect the security arrangements put in place by Israel. They must seek prior approval from Israel and make the necessary arrangements with it. This includes meeting certain conditions such as permitting Israel to search the humanitarian vessels in question. The Panel notes provision was made for any essential humanitarian supplies on board the vessels to enter Gaza via the adjacent Israeli port of Ashdod, and such an offer was expressly made in relation to the goods carried on the flotilla.The Panel therefore concludes that Israel’s naval blockade was legal.The Panel is satisfied that extensive and genuine efforts were made by Israel to facilitate the delivery of humanitarian supplies from the flotilla to Gaza thus obviating the need to challenge the blockade and thereby avoiding the prospect of violence.For Israel to maintain the blockade it had to be effective, so it must be enforced. That is a clear legal requirement for a blockade. Such enforcement may take place on the high seas and may be conducted by force if a vessel resists. To this point in the analysis no difficulty arises.
This is unequivocal. The naval blockade is legal and Israel has maintained it, as it is required to do for it to remain in effect. It has the right to impose the blockade to stop weapons transfers to Hamas. It has the right to intercept any Gaza-bound boats on the high seas. Anyone who wants to bring aid to Gaza must coordinate with Israel.
The legal logic has not changed in 14 years.
|
"He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024) PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022) |
 |
Buy
