Joe suggests that we can better understand the Mavi Marmara situation by looking at it through the prism of American criminal law, i.e. the activists = criminals and the IDF = the police. If the police come to arrest you and you resist, there is a decent chance you will be shot. I don’t think this comparison works at all.
Let’s start with jurisdiction. Unlike the police in Joe’s example, the IDF does not have legal authority to interdict ships in international waters. The UN Convention of the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) is pretty damn clear on this:
Article 87, 1. The high seas are open to all States, whether coastal or land-locked. Freedom of the high seas is exercised under the conditions laid down by this Convention and by other rules of international law. It comprises, inter alia, both for coastal and land-locked States:
(a) freedom of navigation;
(b) freedom of overflight;
(c) freedom to lay submarine cables and pipelines, subject to Part VI;
(d) freedom to construct artificial islands and other installations permitted under international law, subject to Part VI;
(e) freedom of fishing, subject to the conditions laid down in section 2;
(f) freedom of scientific research, subject to Parts VI and XIII.
Read more after the jump --->
Let’s start with jurisdiction. Unlike the police in Joe’s example, the IDF does not have legal authority to interdict ships in international waters. The UN Convention of the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) is pretty damn clear on this:
Article 87, 1. The high seas are open to all States, whether coastal or land-locked. Freedom of the high seas is exercised under the conditions laid down by this Convention and by other rules of international law. It comprises, inter alia, both for coastal and land-locked States:
(a) freedom of navigation;
(b) freedom of overflight;
(c) freedom to lay submarine cables and pipelines, subject to Part VI;
(d) freedom to construct artificial islands and other installations permitted under international law, subject to Part VI;
(e) freedom of fishing, subject to the conditions laid down in section 2;
(f) freedom of scientific research, subject to Parts VI and XIII.
Read more after the jump --->
Add Comment
Aren't Humanitarians Non-Violent? 05/31/2010
Really?
Israel’s fault in the attack on the Mavi Marmara is beyond dispute. The IDF should not have sent its troops to board this ship in the middle of the night. Nor did the government exercise proper oversight or planning in the matter. Having made another colossal blunder in the international arena, Prime Minister Netanyahu clearly deserves all the condemnation that he is getting. Yet in the rush to admonish Israel for its aggression, many people have lost sight of the protesters’ fault in the matter.
According to reports, people on the boat attacked the soldiers using switchblades, slingshots, deck chairs, marbles, and metal bars. Two activists then allegedly grabbed handguns from two commandos and began firing. Some Israelis had to jump into the water to escape the melee. In the end, two soldiers suffered gunshot wounds and another was stabbed.
To understand the recklessness of these actions, try to think of it in an American context: If the police show up at your door—even without a warrant—you do not have the right to pull a switchblade or grab a deck chair. If you resist arrest, you will be charged with a crime. When this type of struggle poses a real danger to police officers’ safety, they can and do shoot people.
These principles also apply in international waters. Unless the soldiers began mowing people down as soon as they touched the deck, the protesters should have complied with their demands. A metal pole is never the proper means to solve a dispute with law enforcement—which is what the IDF was in this case. Considering that this ship was full of human rights activists and lawyers, they really ought to have known better.
- Joe
According to reports, people on the boat attacked the soldiers using switchblades, slingshots, deck chairs, marbles, and metal bars. Two activists then allegedly grabbed handguns from two commandos and began firing. Some Israelis had to jump into the water to escape the melee. In the end, two soldiers suffered gunshot wounds and another was stabbed.
To understand the recklessness of these actions, try to think of it in an American context: If the police show up at your door—even without a warrant—you do not have the right to pull a switchblade or grab a deck chair. If you resist arrest, you will be charged with a crime. When this type of struggle poses a real danger to police officers’ safety, they can and do shoot people.
These principles also apply in international waters. Unless the soldiers began mowing people down as soon as they touched the deck, the protesters should have complied with their demands. A metal pole is never the proper means to solve a dispute with law enforcement—which is what the IDF was in this case. Considering that this ship was full of human rights activists and lawyers, they really ought to have known better.
- Joe
More Flotilla Footage 05/31/2010
This is from the Israeli Army. It starts at 10 sec. Israel should never have put these commandos into such an impossible situation.
Attack of the Midget Subs! 05/31/2010
Yes, submarines that weigh less than 150 tons are called “midgets.” It was a North Korean midget sub that sank South Korea’s Cheonan warship.
These submarines are tricky, because they act in shallow water where sonar is unreliable. The Cheonan’s sonar, for instance, missed the North Korean sub.
Guess who else operates midget subs? Iran, including some bought from North Korea.
As Popular Mechanics explains, the US Navy is worried about America's vulnerability to midget submarine attacks and other forms of guerilla-style naval warfare:
Two things heighten the risk of a similar ambush by midget submarines against U.S. ships: the complex sonar picture of shallow water where these small subs can operate, and a post–Cold War decrease in anti-submarine training. "Instead of a large number of Soviet nuclear-powered submarines on the open ocean, advanced conventional submarines operating in the littorals have emerged as the most serious threat to U.S. forwardly deployed forces, military sealift and merchant shipping," Milan Vego, professor of operations at the Joint Military Operations Department at the Naval War College, wrote in a recent piece for Armed Forces Journal. "The emerging threats ... are minisubmarines, swimmer-delivery vehicles, remotely operated vehicles and autonomous underwater vehicles."
These submarines are tricky, because they act in shallow water where sonar is unreliable. The Cheonan’s sonar, for instance, missed the North Korean sub.
Guess who else operates midget subs? Iran, including some bought from North Korea.
As Popular Mechanics explains, the US Navy is worried about America's vulnerability to midget submarine attacks and other forms of guerilla-style naval warfare:
Two things heighten the risk of a similar ambush by midget submarines against U.S. ships: the complex sonar picture of shallow water where these small subs can operate, and a post–Cold War decrease in anti-submarine training. "Instead of a large number of Soviet nuclear-powered submarines on the open ocean, advanced conventional submarines operating in the littorals have emerged as the most serious threat to U.S. forwardly deployed forces, military sealift and merchant shipping," Milan Vego, professor of operations at the Joint Military Operations Department at the Naval War College, wrote in a recent piece for Armed Forces Journal. "The emerging threats ... are minisubmarines, swimmer-delivery vehicles, remotely operated vehicles and autonomous underwater vehicles."
Mavi Marmara Debacle 05/31/2010
The thing that strikes me most about Mavi Marmara debacle is the apparent lack of foresight on the part of the IDF. What exactly did they expect to happen?
If you drop 15 heavily armed commandos on to a ship of 600 activists in the middle of the night, it’s likely they will view it as an attack and fight back. The isolated commandos will likely fire on the activists when attacked and viola, a failure that makes the Tehran hostage rescue look downright competent. This isn’t rocket science; it’s barely crowd control 101. (The videos above and below give a good picture of how chaotic the whole operation was.)
To be absolutely clear, I’m not saying Israel = evil and activists = martyrs or vice versa. We don’t know enough to make those determinations, and anyone who tells you that they do has an agenda.
What is clear is that if the IDF had waited until dawn and boarded the ship with more, less conspicuously armed soldiers, it’s likely things wouldn’t have gone as badly.
- Evan
If you drop 15 heavily armed commandos on to a ship of 600 activists in the middle of the night, it’s likely they will view it as an attack and fight back. The isolated commandos will likely fire on the activists when attacked and viola, a failure that makes the Tehran hostage rescue look downright competent. This isn’t rocket science; it’s barely crowd control 101. (The videos above and below give a good picture of how chaotic the whole operation was.)
To be absolutely clear, I’m not saying Israel = evil and activists = martyrs or vice versa. We don’t know enough to make those determinations, and anyone who tells you that they do has an agenda.
What is clear is that if the IDF had waited until dawn and boarded the ship with more, less conspicuously armed soldiers, it’s likely things wouldn’t have gone as badly.
- Evan
Million Dollar Question 05/31/2010
I've always wondered this...who makes the flags that people burn in these protests? In some cases, it might be not be that difficult to find them, but let's say I wanna have a rally in Tehran and burn some nice Israeli and American flags (and not some lousy imitation ones, I want to have a good photo op!). Where do I find them? Who makes them?
Update: Joe admits that he always keeps a stock of French flags on hand just in case...
Update: Joe admits that he always keeps a stock of French flags on hand just in case...
Black Monday & Egypt 05/31/2010
A lot of questions remain after Israel attacked an aid flotilla headed for Gaza early this morning: Why launch an operation against protesters in darkness at 4:00 am, a time that would maximize chaos? Why not wait until the ships entered territorial waters? Why launch an attack at all, when there were less risky ways to divert the ships? [update: Israel attacked at night to avoid media coverage. That worked out well]
The only thing that is clear is that Israel walked, with hubris, right into a giant trap. And Binyamin Netanyahu is leading one of the most diplomatically incompetent governments in history.
As the world waits to see how Turkey responds, another country to watch is Egypt. Many people (especially outside of the Arab world and Iran) often forget this fact—but the Gaza blockade is a two country affair. Egypt also has a border with Gaza, and by opening the Refah crossing, it could end the blockade any minute that it wants to. Egyptian President Mubarak's support for the blockade is extremely unpopular at home, and it makes him a frequent target of invectives from al-Jazeera, Hezbullah TV (al-Manar), and Iranian government mouthpieces.
But Mubarak also loathes Hamas, which is an offshoot of Mubarak’s main domestic opposition, the Muslim Brotherhood. Let’s see if he can withstand pressure this time. And if Turkey wants to use its opportunity in the spotlight to make the blockade untenable, it should not only condemn Israel but also put heavy pressure on Egypt, which is more likely to crack.
P.S. For those who aren’t familiar with the history of the region, Gaza was actually part of Egypt until Israel conquered the territory in the 1967 Six-Day War. Many Israelis undoubtedly wish that it was still part of Egypt.
- Jon
The only thing that is clear is that Israel walked, with hubris, right into a giant trap. And Binyamin Netanyahu is leading one of the most diplomatically incompetent governments in history.
As the world waits to see how Turkey responds, another country to watch is Egypt. Many people (especially outside of the Arab world and Iran) often forget this fact—but the Gaza blockade is a two country affair. Egypt also has a border with Gaza, and by opening the Refah crossing, it could end the blockade any minute that it wants to. Egyptian President Mubarak's support for the blockade is extremely unpopular at home, and it makes him a frequent target of invectives from al-Jazeera, Hezbullah TV (al-Manar), and Iranian government mouthpieces.
But Mubarak also loathes Hamas, which is an offshoot of Mubarak’s main domestic opposition, the Muslim Brotherhood. Let’s see if he can withstand pressure this time. And if Turkey wants to use its opportunity in the spotlight to make the blockade untenable, it should not only condemn Israel but also put heavy pressure on Egypt, which is more likely to crack.
P.S. For those who aren’t familiar with the history of the region, Gaza was actually part of Egypt until Israel conquered the territory in the 1967 Six-Day War. Many Israelis undoubtedly wish that it was still part of Egypt.
- Jon
New Custom PBOM Search Engine 05/30/2010
It's at the bottom of the page, check it out. Evan, Joe, and anyone else, let me know if you have a better place to put it, and/or if I should stop googlifying the site.
- Jon
- Jon
The Perfidious Jew and the Barbarous Turk 05/30/2010
The leaders of Dutch Labor. Albayrak is far left, Cohen is second from left.
Teaming up to run Holland? Job Cohen, the former mayor of Amsterdam, and his Dutch Labor Party are apparently surging in the polls for Holland's June 9th parliamentary elections. Number 2 on Labor's list is Nebahat Albayrak, a Turk who moved to Holland as a child. I'm no expert on Dutch politics, which consists of more political parties than an American can handle, but this is a pretty incredible development at time of economic uncertainty in the land of Geert Wilder.
Read the NYTimes's extended piece on the subject here.
Read the NYTimes's extended piece on the subject here.
The Politics of Sisyphus 05/30/2010
Sometimes following politics makes me depressed, especially when it seems that events control men, not vice versa. This is one of those times.
In America, the best and the brightest have spent 5 weeks trying to close a hole in the ocean. Plan A was to put something really heavy on top of the hole. Plan B is to stuff the hole with mud and some golf balls. Plan C? Err, back to Plan A. Helpless. (Surely, this has nothing to do with international affairs. But its absurdity makes it a fitting microcosm of the American mood nevertheless)
In Asia, North Korea sunk South Korea’s Cheonan warship over two months ago. The response? The West, plus S. Korea and Japan, might convince China to pass a big resolution at the UN National Security Council. (Oooh! Scary!)
In the Middle East, America and France have been working tooth and nail to pass UN sanctions against Iran. The putative reason? To stop Iran’s nuclear program. Could a means be more mismatched to a purpose? This is more a confession of impotence than it is a viable strategy.
The list goes on, from the never-ending financial crisis to inertia in Afghanistan. Events, in the West at least, seem to have gotten the better of us. This feeling of powerlessness is not happenstance, however. It is instead born of the West’s excessive ambitiousness in the post-Cold War era, mixed with the unpredictability of an increasingly multipolar international system.
Click "Read More" to Continue------->
In America, the best and the brightest have spent 5 weeks trying to close a hole in the ocean. Plan A was to put something really heavy on top of the hole. Plan B is to stuff the hole with mud and some golf balls. Plan C? Err, back to Plan A. Helpless. (Surely, this has nothing to do with international affairs. But its absurdity makes it a fitting microcosm of the American mood nevertheless)
In Asia, North Korea sunk South Korea’s Cheonan warship over two months ago. The response? The West, plus S. Korea and Japan, might convince China to pass a big resolution at the UN National Security Council. (Oooh! Scary!)
In the Middle East, America and France have been working tooth and nail to pass UN sanctions against Iran. The putative reason? To stop Iran’s nuclear program. Could a means be more mismatched to a purpose? This is more a confession of impotence than it is a viable strategy.
The list goes on, from the never-ending financial crisis to inertia in Afghanistan. Events, in the West at least, seem to have gotten the better of us. This feeling of powerlessness is not happenstance, however. It is instead born of the West’s excessive ambitiousness in the post-Cold War era, mixed with the unpredictability of an increasingly multipolar international system.
Click "Read More" to Continue------->
Loading
