Former Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak was spotted at an Istanbul airport this morning (Saturday). Barak was accompanied by his wife and a security guard. The trio was in transit and spent four hours in an airline lounge.

Barak served as defense minister during Operation Cast Lead in 2008-2009 and the 2010 flotilla offensive, in which nine Turkish nationals were killed by Israeli commandos onboard the Mavi Marmara. Both events led to a severe deterioration in Israeli-Turkish relations, which were partly mended recently when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu apologized to Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan for the incident. Negotiations over compensation for the families of the deceased are currently taking place.

Israeli officials, ministers and high ranking officers have avoided Turkey in recent years, also due to legal proceedings against those involved in the attack on the Flotilla.

Ehud Barak didn’t take part in the last Israeli elections and holds no official position in today. It is not clear whether his landing was coordinated with Turkish authorities. In the past, when Israeli officials or senior officers feared arrests during layovers, they preferred to stay on the plane.

Ehud Barak, his wife and a security guard in Istanbul, May 4, 2013 (photo: Roee Ruttenberg)

The Turkel Committee, which was appointed to examine the events surrounding the deadly IDF raid on the Mavi Marmara in 2010 has submitted the second part of its report yesterday. The committee declared that the IDF is capable of investigating alleged crimes perpetrated by soldiers (and policemen under army supervision), but had some major recommendations regarding the army’s procedures.

The bottom line shouldn’t surprise anyone. The Turkel Committee, consisting of conservative Israeli scholars and international observers approved by Israel for their pro-Israeli positions, was an U.S.-Israeli initiative designed to provide a pretext for Israel’s refusal to cooperate with international bodies seeking to probe the raid that left eight Turkish citizens and one American citizen dead. As Roi Maor pointed out after the first part of the report was published, the committee was appointed to establish that fact that the Israeli siege on Gaza and the Maramara raid (an attack on an unarmed vessel in international water) were both indeed legal. And surprise! The report it filed did support this claim (See more here, here, here, here, here).

The second part of the report, submitted yesterday, barely made the news, despite including some interesting articles. With the Marmara affair all but forgotten, it seems that the committee felt free to voice a bit more criticism towards the army’s internal investigation procedures.

Among other things, the committee:

- States that the army’s procedures regarding reports in the case of civilian Palestinian casualties – which the army promised the Supreme Court to follow in 2005 – are simply not implemented. The committee therefore recommends sanctions against commanders who fail to report on civilian casualties.

- Recommends legislation that will deal with war crimes which are not mentioned in the Israeli legal system.

- Recommends that such legislation would establish criminal responsibility on civilian position holders as well, and not just the army’s chain of command.

- Recommends that the military prosecutor will have a set period of time, consisting of several weeks, to determine whether to open criminal investigation regarding the conduct of IDF soldiers and policemen operating under the military’s command (such decision currently take months and years, rendering the entire process meaningless).

- Recommends that internal security interrogations will be taped, documented and supervised.

These are extremely severe recommendations, and in my opinion they support the mounting evidence regarding lack of accountability or even proper investigation regarding crimes against civilians perpetrated by IDF soldiers (see also Amos Harel’s article in Haaretz, “The Turkel committee: A no-confidence vote in the IDF’s internal investigations”). However, the committee’s recommendation have no legal binding status, and their fulfillment depends on the good will of the political system, and later on, Israeli bureaucracy. During a time when Israel finds it harder and harder to justify and defend the military control over millions of Palestinians, it is very unlikely that it will conduct vigorous procedures that would expose criminal acts which are conducted as part of this control.

More important, the Turkel report, and the entire legal debate in Israel for that matter, is operating under an unspoken paradox – one which sees the occupation both as an internal and an external issue. Internal, in the sense that these are matters which occur under Israeli sovereignty, so that the international community should have no say in them; and “external”, in the sense that it views the Palestinians as Israel’s enemy in an armed conflict, and therefore not deserving the full protections of the law. Theoretically, the army is the same body which is fighting the Palestinians but is also assigned to protect them and ensure their well-being, as the sovereign in the occupied territories. In practice, the army internalizes the former function and ignores the latter, leaving the Palestinians with no authority over their daily protection (hence the justification for legal intervention on their behalf – if such was ever to take place).

Related:
Chief Flotilla raid investigator gives Israel advice on Hasbara
Israeli flotilla inquiry panel tough on NGOs, easy on IDF
The Gaza Flotilla Inquiry: Afloat in a sea of whitewash

A billboard for the Israeli-Arab party, Balad, in Nazareth, January 2013. Zoabi is a familiar face, though not the party’s head. (photo: GS)

Volunteer from one of the Arab parties canvasing potential voters in Nazareth, Israel, January 2013. Israel’s Arab who do vote usually split their votes among three parties. (photo: GS)

A decade ago three-quarters of Arab-Israelis voted. In the last election, only half did. The majority voted for Arab parties, which are historically excluded – and their voices with it – from coalition-formed governments. Some Arabs end up voting for the Jewish parties, and a few Arabs secure seats on their lists. (Several of the Zionist parties include Arab candidates.)

But the Arab parties themselves are split, most notably into Islamist, communist and nationalist camps. Parliamentarian Hanin Zoabi (Balad) comes from the last group. On Saturday, I caught up with Zoabi as she addressed supporters in Kufar Manda, near Nazareth.

MK Hanin Zoabi addressing supporters in Kufar Manda, Israel, standing behind a Palestinian flag, January 2013. Many Jewish-Israelis question the loyalty that Palestinian citizens of Israel have to the Jewish State. (photo: GS)

Speaking to young Arab voters from a stage draped in a Palestinian flag, I could not help but think of the accusation often made by Israel’s Jewish nationalist camps that these citizens aren’t loyal to the State. For a number of reasons, including most notably her participation in the deadly Gaza-bound flotilla in 2010 – Zoabi is considered to be among the leaders of the “disloyal pack.” But Israel’s Arabs are twice as likely to be unemployed as its Jews, and two-thirds of their children are deemed poor. That’s triple  the rate compared to the country’s Jewish population. So I wondered: how loyal has the State been to them?

Young Palestinian children in Kufar Manda, Israel hold sign supporting Zoabi’s party, January 2013. Compared to Jewish-Israeli children, Arab-Israeli children are three times more likely to be poor. (photo: GS)

To the dismay of some of my Israeli friends, I will admit that I have developed a certain respect for Zoabi. It’s not because I agree with everything she says – I don’t. But I admire someone who challenges the system. All too often, successful politicians are those who use their position of power to impose their will on the weak. That’s cheap and easy. Zoabi is the type of person who speaks out for the silenced in the face of those who silence her. And that, in my opinion, is commendable. And she is perhaps as unpopular among Jewish-Israelis as she is popular among Arab-Israelis (one possibly being a direct consequence of the other).

The following is my interview with MK Zoabi in Kufar Manda, shortly after she addressed her supporters.

MK Hanin Zoabi featured on a campaign post in a busy Nazareth street, January 2013. Though unpopular among many Jewish-Israelis, Zoabi has become an equally popular figure for Arab-Israelis. (photo: GS)

Ruttenberg: Ms. Zoabi, why is it important for Palestinian-Israelis, Arab-Israelis, Palestinian citizens of Israel – whatever the terminology may be – to vote on election day?

MK Zoabi: First of all, just 50 percent of the Palestinians in Israel vote. For me, it’s important to vote because it’s our voice, it’s our struggle. I know that the Knesset (the Israeli parliament) is not the tool of struggle; we have also other tools which we must use. For example, demonstrations, to raise awareness, are even more important that being in the Knesset. But in the Knesset, I must first of all struggle against racism, I must represent my people, I must represent the rights of my people. I must say to the Jewish system – to the Israeli system – that I am here, I am a native, this is my homeland, I have rights, I don’t agree with racist policies, I don’t agree with racist laws, I don’t agree to turn[ing] me into a second-class or third-class citizen, or even to treat me as a stranger in my homeland. Because I know that I have only two ways: either to give up my rights or to struggle. I believe that every person that has his will and is well-organized, and who [has] empowered himself, he must just represent his rights and represent his position, and we must do that as natives here.

Ruttenberg: You’ve seen in recent years the number of Palestinian-Israeli voters dropping in their percentages. So you are sort of fighting an uphill battle in encouraging people to go out and vote. Why is that? Why are the numbers falling?

MK Zoabi: I can understand… I do understand why the percentages fell, because the Palestinians lost their confidence in the Israeli tools of democracy. We know that Israel hasn’t been a democracy, never. But they also don’t believe that we can make any difference while we are inside the Knesset. It is also an indication of a lack of confidence in ourselves. It is also an indication of our daily struggle for our food, for our basic services and basic rights. People are also losing their confidence in the system but also losing their confidence in themselves. And my message is not that we must be confident about the willingness of Israel to change. No, this is not my message. My message is that we must be strong enough to struggle, that we must have confidence in ourselves, and that we cannot convince Israel while we are weak, while we are disempowered. We must empower ourselves. And this is one – just one – tool of empowering ourselves.

Ruttenberg: The Arab parties themselves are split. You have three popular parties presenting the Arab vote, which are actually splitting the Arab vote. Is that a problem for you, that there’s not a united Arab front?

MK Zoabi: Yes, for my party, the National Democratic Assembly, we also try to unify between the parties. We know that we lose at least five seats when we run as three separate parties than one unified party. We can be 16 seats according to polls and public opinion. And as a national party, we believe that we must be unified, also in our work – both inside and outside the Knesset. But the communist party – which doesn’t define itself as an Arab party but rather as a Jewish-Arab party, even though 87% of its voters are Arabs – says, yes, I can give up five seats, I can give up 150,000 voters, because this is part of my ideology – to be a Jewish and Arab party.

Ruttenberg: How do you personally feel when Palestinian-Israelis vote for the Zionist parties, or the Jewish parties, or when some of them even run on their lists?

MK Zoabi: I think this is a natural phenomenon. I think every oppressed people sometimes lacks also the confidence… the oppressor succeeded to have the impression and feeling that we are disempowered, that we cannot represent ourselves, that we need strong parties in order to make some changes from [the] inside, and I think this is natural in any society. And this is the strategy which Israel uses in order to re-define our identiy, to adapt us to say that ‘you don’t have the power and ability or power to make any change, because you are a minority, you will still be a minority.’ So maybe, by just agreeing with the Zionist system, maybe by not changing the basic lines of the State, you can reach some benefits here and there and you can make some changes. Of course, we don’t agree with this and we are sure that the only way to have our rights is to struggle for our rights, not to be a part of the system but to challenge the system. If you are a racist, I cannot just agree with your racism and hope that sometime, maybe somehow, you will just give up some of your privileges to me. But now I think the percentage of those who will vote for the Zionist parties will be 20-22 percent. This is also part of our struggle to convince the people that you cannot make changes by adopting the racism, by admiring even those who are racist against you. Again, this is part of the strategy of empowering the people.

Ruttenberg: You’ve become quite a well-known figure, but you are also quite divisive, not just to Jewish-Israelis, but even some Palestinian-Israelis who say that the elected Arab officials often prioritize the national interests of Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza before worrying about the domestic concerns of the Arab population in Israel. How do you respond to that sort of concern?

MK Zoabi: This is not a concern of the people, I think. This is not an independent thinking of the people themselves. This is Israeli propaganda, [which] these weakened people have adopted. This is lack of political awareness because the Israeli media doesn’t cover, for example, my daily work in the parliament. They don’t cover, for example, that I succeeded in a program which guarantees 3,000 Palestinian women loans to develop businesses. I worked very hard to raise the percentage of Palestinian working women, and one my small successes was to make the Labor Ministry agree to this program. No one… the Israeli media didn’t talk about that. So the Palestinians don’t know about that. Also, there was (a report put out) about the most active MKs (Members of Knesset) who raise issues (regarding) women. And who was the most active MK who raised the issues of women regarding employment, regarding education, regarding violence against women? It was Hanin Zoabi.

Ruttenberg: Of all women?

MK Zoabi: It was (a poll) about all women in general, but of course I concentrated more on Palestinian women. But it was me among the 120 (Knesset members). The Israeli media didn’t say anything, the Israeli media (didn’t) cover it, except for one article in Haaretz’s The Marker. So it’s lack of awareness, lack of information. And again, it is the claims of the Israeli MKs, it’s the claims of the Zionist parties, which some of our people just repeat without thinking or without really following what we are doing in the Knesset. And part of our work is also to raise awareness about how we work inside the Knesset and what we do.

Ruttenberg: Like it or not, you are a citizen of the State of Israel, and you are a member of the Israeli parliament, the Knesset. Are you proud of that?

MK Zoabi: I’m proud that I represent my people. I am proud that in front of incitement – in front of three years of incitement – I didn’t hesitate once, I didn’t change my attitudes, I didn’t adapt my discourse to satisfy the Israelis consensus. (I’m proud of) representing my people with pride, of representing my identity as a native, as a Palestinian. I am proud of that.

MK Haneen Zoabi (photo: Oren Ziv/ Activestills.org)

Israel’s Central Election Committee (CEC) voted today (Wednesday) to disqualify Palestinian Knesset Member Haneen Zoabi from participating in the coming elections. MK Zoabi is the number two candidate on Balad’s Knesset list. The decision is automatically transferred to the Supreme Court, which will hear the appeal next week. Earlier today, Balad announced that if the Supreme Court doesn’t allow Zoabi to run, the entire party will withdraw from the elections.

The decision did not come as a surprise: The CEC is a political body whose members are determined in proportion to the representation of their parties in the Knesset. The current committee therefore has a clear right-wing majority. The decision to ban Zoabi from taking part in the elections was also supported by members of Kadima, widely considered a centrist party. Labor, Meretz, Hadash, Livni’s Hatnua party and the Palestinian parties voted against, and the result was 19-9 in favor of the disqualification.

Interestingly enough, the CEC rejected requests to disqualify Palestinian parties Balad and Ra’am Ta’al from taking part in the elections. In previous elections, both parties were disqualified but the decision was reversed by the Supreme Court.

Still, Balad held a press conference today, in which party leader Dr. Jamal Zahalka made it clear that Balad will not run without Zoabi:

This [move] hurts the entire Arab public. Its purpose is to weaken the political power of the Arab citizens in the Knesset and to strengthen the Israeli right. We fully support MK Zoabi and all her actions, and we emphasize again that if the Supreme Court does not reverse the decision, Balad will not take part in the coming elections.

MK Zoabi, the only Palestinian woman in the Israeli parliament, was singled out by the Israeli right in 2010 due to her participation in the first Gaza flotilla. But despite all the video evidence that the IDF confiscated from passengers on the Mavi Marmara, it failed to prove that MK Zoabi knew or took place in any action against IDF soldiers who stormed the ship (leaving eight Turkish citizens and one American dead). After failing to press criminal charges against Zoabi, coalition members tried to withdraw some of her rights as an MK, and even to physically attack her. At one point, the Knesset speaker had to assign bodyguards to the Arab Knesset member.

Here is a video (with English subtitles) showing Knesset Members preventing MK Zoabi from speaking:

Chances are that the Supreme Court will indeed let Zoabi run (I am pretty sure that some of the MKs who voted against her had this in mind). Israeli law actually makes it harder to prevent a specific candidate, rather than an entire party, from running, and the evidence against him or her needs to be very strong. This is not the case with Zoabi. Earlier this week, Attorney General Yehuda Weinstein issued an opinion claiming there is not enough evidence to disqualify Zoabi. It is thus very unlikely that even the current Supreme Court, which is more conservative then previous ones, will take a different position.

In the unlikely event that Zoabi is disqualified, a boycott – at least partial – of the elections by Palestinian citizens of Israel will probably take place. Such a scenario won’t only change the outcome of the vote, but would also be a watershed moment between Arab and Jewish citizens in Israel, the significance of which will be felt long after these elections.

By Aylin Gurzel

FAMAGUSTA – Turkey has tried to broker negotiations between Iran and the West over Iran’s nuclear program. But, with talks repeatedly failing to generate any substantive progress, Turkey’s leaders are beginning to consider how a strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities would affect their country’s interests.

When Turkey’s Justice and Development Party (AKP) came to power in 2002, it sought to improve relations with Iran. To some degree, the two countries began with a blank slate, given that they had largely kept their distance from each other for several centuries. But Turkey’s mediating role in nuclear negotiations fueled suspicion in Iran, complicating Turkey’s efforts to establish a strong bilateral relationship.

But Turkey persisted. After all, it had staked its foreign policy on building relationships with its neighbors, and its leaders believed that their country’s NATO membership and geographical position would help it to assume an influential role in the region.

In order to capitalize on Turkey’s strengths, its government insisted on participating in the nuclear talks – even hosting a session in Istanbul this year. According to Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu, Turkey’s priority was “a stable and secure region within the framework of a new global order.”

But the continued impasse over Iran’s nuclear program has led Turkey to reassess its options. Turkey, which is covered by NATO’s nuclear umbrella, views international efforts to promote nuclear non-proliferation as woefully inadequate. As a result, a debate has been underway in Turkey over whether to pursue the development and acquisition of nuclear weapons. If negotiations remain deadlocked, and proliferation increases in the region, the country might well pursue this course.

Supporters believe that an Iranian nuclear breakout would justify such a move from Turkey. Conservative AKP deputy Ihsan Aslan, for example, has asserted that, given Israel’s nuclear arsenal, Muslim countries should also possess nuclear weapons. A nuclear-weapons program, he has argued, would bolster Turkey’s leadership position in the region.

Meanwhile, opponents contend that a nuclear Iran would only destabilize the Middle East. Former Turkish Ambassador to the United States Faruk Logoğlu has argued that a nuclear Iran would not only threaten the flow of oil, but would also make a regional war more likely.

Despite the high stakes, hopes for an agreement are low, especially given Iran’s increasing estrangement from Turkey. Since the establishment of a NATO missile-tracking radar in Turkey’s Malatya province, Iran has been hurling threats at its neighbor.

Moreover, the two countries are at odds over the crisis in Syria. Iran has provided substantial support to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s regime, while Turkey has advocated military intervention on behalf of opposition forces. And, despite Iranian officials’ claims that they have nothing to do with increased terrorist activities in Turkey by the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, Turkey’s leaders remain unconvinced.

As a result, Turkey’s continued mediation efforts have become strained. Turkish National Intelligence Organization Undersecretary Hakan Fidan recently visited Iran to discuss its nuclear program and the deepening crisis in Syria. Soon after, National Security Council Secretary Saeed Jalili – Iran’s chief nuclear negotiator – headed to Ankara for further talks with Davutoğlu and Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. But, according to Turkish media, Erdoğan gave Jalili the cold shoulder.

Further destabilizing the region are enduring tensions between Turkey and Israel. The dispute over the Mavi Marmara – the Turkish ship that was bringing supplies to Gaza in 2010 when Israeli commandos boarded and seized it, killing nine Turks – remains a source of contention. While trade continues, the two countries’ military relations were halted abruptly.

An attack on Iran’s facilities would likely bring the two countries onto the same side. But unresolved hostilities with Israel could affect Turkey’s choices.

Turkey’s military is already planning to defend the country against an Iranian attack – a move that may lead Turkey to take a more aggressive stance on Syria. And the Turkish government is preparing for a halt in Iranian oil exports by diversifying its suppliers.

In short, despite Turkish leaders’ efforts to broker an agreement, they seem to be accepting the possibility of an attack on Iran as a last resort. Now their priority is to prepare for that eventuality, so that military conflict will not take Turkey by surprise.

Aylin Gurzel is an assistant professor of international relations at Eastern Mediterranean University. This article first appeared on Project Syndicate.

Activists posted a clip on YouTube on Wednesday showing the Estelle, a ship they recently bought for the journey to the blockaded Gaza Strip. The ship is currently on its way to Oslo after going through maintenance work in Sweden, and it is due to leave for a two-to-three months’ long voyage to Gaza in the coming weeks to protest against the ongoing Israeli siege on the Strip.

In the clip, former Israeli artist Dror Feiler declares that the activists’ goal is to pressure European states into making Israel end the siege, or at least to have them protest against it. “We will go through different harbors on the way, and also use the voyage as a part of the mission, which means to focus on the situation of the people of Gaza and the people of Palestine,” says Feiler. “So it’s not only the last few days, but also the nearly three months of voyage, and all the time the focus is on Gaza and the siege and the people of Palestine and on the passivity of our governments.” Feiler also says that the ship will be carrying a cargo of solidarity and non-violence.

Feiler is an experienced flotilla participant: He was part of the 2011 Flotilla, which ended abruptly when most of the ships were barred from leaving Greek ports due to diplomatic pressure by Israel. Only one ship made it close to the shores of Gaza, and was captured by the Israeli Navy. Feiler also participated in the now infamous Gaza flotilla in which passengers on the Turkish ship Marvi Marmara forcefully resisted the boarding of their ship by Israeli soldiers. Nine participants died in the incident, which also led to a major diplomatic rift between Israel and Turkey.

After the 2010 flotilla, Israel partially lifted the siege on Gaza, allowing much more freedom to import products to the Strip through checkpoints, but continued to block imports of  concrete, iron and gravel. Since 2007 Israel has also stopped all exports from Gaza to Israel and the West Bank, and now allows only a tiny and very limited amount of exports to other countries through Israeli sea ports. Severe restrictions are also placed on residents’ freedom of movement as well as on fishing boats, and there are many reports of navy ships firing in the direction of fishermen and confiscating their boats. You can read more on Israel’s control over Gaza here.

More details on the new flotilla can be found on the organizing group’s website, pictures of the Etelle can be found here, and if you want to follow the ship’s journey for support (or interception) you can check it out here.

Read also:
Flotilla report: So how did the activists die?
Mavi Marmara report shows how Israel investigates itself
4 things Israel doesn’t want you to know about the Gaza blockade
With latest flotilla, IDF celebrates overcoming passive activists

Our brave troops have raided, at dawn, two unarmed ships, filled with dangerous and enthusiastic peace activists, and have managed to carry out the operation without casualties. The operation actually had a name – Ruah Kalah, “Light Wind” – and was overseen by the commander of the Israeli Navy himself, Admiral Ram Rotberg (Hebrew).

Senior brass have told Ynet they were “deeply satisfied” with the results of the operation, though they admit that the success was also derived from “the passivity of the 27 activists.” Which is to say, the IDF is satisfied that when its armed forces met unarmed activists, it managed to carry out a routine mission, as they did not bother to resist. The IDF also notes that the reason there were no casualties is because the lessons of the earlier flotillas were implemented, and the troops were strictly ordered not to use violence against the (again, passive) activists. One assumes that without those orders, and the presence of no less than an admiral on the scene, the passive activists would have suffered some violence. This, to say it mildly, is not very encouraging.

But wait, it gets worse. Ynet has “found out” (read: It received a communiqué from the IDF Spokesman, and asked to publish it under the name of the reporter, a common and deplorable practice) that two of the commandos who participated in the intrepid naval engagement against the two ships, a combat which will surely be listed among such notable naval battles like Salamis and Trafalgar, had been wounded during the assault on the Mavi Marmara in May 2010. The commandos, we are told by the IDF Spokesman, consider this recent engagement to constitute the “closing of a circle”.

For more than 40 years, the IDF's main mission was fighting popular resistance. Al Ma'asara, 2010 (Photo: Yossi Gurvitz)

Oy. Now, I realize the IDF has no successes to report lately. I also understand that, by definition, the IDF cannot win: Its main activity since 1967 is the suppression of a popular uprising. This does not make for rousing battle tales. Since 1982, when the IDF last clashed with the Syrian army – and, shall we say, did not emerge from the encounter wreathed in glory – its soldiers saw enemy soldiers only in pictures. And, since no one except Dick Cheney and his menagerie of sycophants takes pride in torture; and since the IDF’s normal battle drill (one platoon + air support facing two Palestinians, most likely semi-armed teenagers, often promoted to “wanted person” status after their demise) will not ignite feelings of pride in anyone but gang members, the IDF has to somehow pump any casualty-less engagement as a great success. After all, when the Chief of Staff publicly says Gilad Schalit is a “hero,” then the naval commandos – an elite unit which once took pride in truly daring raids on enemy ports and fortified positions, and which now serves as glorified checkpoint troops – must be worthy of a medal, or something.

When we keep repeating the old axiom that “the occupation corrupts,” we must bear in mind that it corrupts, first of all, its enforcers. They first become garrison troops, a blunt tool which is ill-suited for any other purpose, but the corruption does not end there. Long years of occupation, the perception that it “fights for its home,” turn it into a potential putschistic element against a government which may decide to end the occupation. The classic example is Algiers, where the army joined the French colonists in terrorist acts against the local population – they were honest enough not to use the bleached term “price tag” – that were intended to break the fragile ceasefire between the French government and the local rebels. In the end, it led an armed mutiny against its elected government.

France had De Gaulle and a long republican tradition on its side; both of them lacking here, it’s not at all clear what will stand between Israel and such a fate.

Two ships, the Canadian “Tahrir” and the Irish “Saoirse” set sail from Turkey on Wednesday, carrying humanitarian aid in an attempt to break Israeli’s blockade on Gaza. The flotilla – dubbed “Freedom Waves” - was carrying 27 international activists and reporters from Al Jazeera and Democracy Now!, which aired a video report from the Tahrir, as the IDF prepared to board:

Before the forces came on board the ships, activists abroad lost communication with the boats in what they described as IDF sabotage. By Friday evening, according to the IDF spokesperson, troops aboard the ships were steering them to the Israel’s Ashdod port. Haaretz reported that the IDF also claimed that it had boarded after first making contact with the ships and informing them that “Gaza is under a maritime security blockade.”

There were no reports of violence following the army’s interception. Earlier, AFP quoted a flotilla spokesperson who said that all ship passengers had pledged not to resist the army, should it launch efforts to stop the flotilla.

According to the “IDFSpokesperson” account on Twitter, “Gaza is under a maritime security blockade according to international law.” The two-boat flotilla known as “Freedom Waves to Gaza,” which the army stopped yesterday from reaching the coastal territory, is, according to the same Twitter feed a “provocatilla.”

Setting aside the issue of whether or not the blockade is legal–and I don’t believe that is–here’s what the IDF fails to mention when it starts issuing statements about the blockade:

1) In August of 2008 and October of the same year, boats manned by activists reached Gaza, breaking the blockade that Israel is now so intent on enforcing.

2) Israel itself selectively breaks the blockade when it needs or wants to. Take, for example, the recent decision to import palm fronds from Gaza for Sukkot.

3) Even though both the Israeli government and the mainstream media claims that the blockade began in 2007, the closure of Gaza was a gradual process that started in 1991. While what we see today is, thus far, the most severe manifestation of this process, Palestinian residents of the Gaza Strip have been subject to collective punishment for two decades.

Pegging the hermetic sealing of the Strip to 2007 offers Israeli officials and those who do hasbara an easy opening to talk about Hamas and Gilad Schalit. But Gilad Schalit is home now. And the blockade has only made Hamas stronger.

Hamas taxes goods coming in through the tunnels from Egypt. While those products aren’t enough and the tunnel economy does not sustain Gaza, what is entering is enough for Hamas to maintain the image of resistance in the face of the Israeli blockade. For example: according to a recent article from the Alternative Information Center, Hamas is using building materials smuggled into Gaza for a new housing project. This won’t be enough and Gaza will remain in a housing crisis. However, such symbolic initiatives can boost the popularity of Hamas.

4) And as for that boogeyman, Hamas? Israel helped create it, encouraging the growth of Islamist groups to counter Fatah. While the Wall Street Journal refers to Israel’s relationships with Islamists as “a catalog of unintended…consequences” in the linked article, I suspect Israel had a divide and conquer strategy. What can’t be argued is that the chilly relations between Hamas and Fatah–and that competing parties rule the Occupied Palestinian Territories–serve Israeli interests.

Not much has been publicized about this latest effort. Organizers told journalists they were hoping to prevent a repeat of thwarted efforts earlier this year. Still, in hopes of documenting any possible confrontation, select international media have been invited to travel with the vessel as it heads to the besieged Gaza Strip.

Speaking last week, Bulent Yildirim, chairman of one of the groups that had been involved in previous flotillas, the Turkish NGO Humanitarian Relief Foundation (IHH), told journalists that the flotilla “will sail, despite an Israeli embargo.” His deputy, Huseyin Oruc, added that representatives from 22 nongovernmental organizations will also be on-board, along with humanitarian aid for the Palestinian residents of Gaza. Despite those comments, however, an IHH official told +972 on Wednesday that the organization had no knowledge of a flotilla readying to set sail in coming days.

IHH’s deputy chairman, Huseyin Oruc (photo: Roee Ruttenberg)

Unconfirmed reports suggested the flotilla might be accompanied by vessels from the Turkish navy, a move that would be perceived as a serious provocation by Israel. The two countries in recent years coordinated extensively on military exercises. But following Israel’s deadly raid on the first flotilla in May 2010, which left nine people dead, relations steadily cooled. The government of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, re-elected this year, insists that Israel publicly apologize for the incident and compensate the families of the victims, a move Israel has repeatedly rejected.

In recent days, following the deadly earthquake which struck southeastern Turkey, Israel offered aid to assist in the rescue efforts. The gesture was accepted by Turkish President Abdullah Gul on a humanitarian basis. It was perceived in Israel that the move could ease tensions between the two military giants. But whatever diplomatic progress it may achieve, if any, will be tested should another confrontation-at-sea occur.

————
**** UPDATED 27 OCTOBER 2011 @ 0730GMT ****

The Free Gaza Movement, a coalition of various groups, has told +972 that no flotilla will sail to Gaza on Sunday, and that for now it has not announced plans for another flotilla. The representative added:

All of the boats belonging to these campaigns and more are scattered around the Mediterranean and will some day sail to Gaza. Hopefully it will be to an open Gaza, as indeed Israel no longer has an excuse for maintaining its criminal blockade — Shalit has been released and rockets are not being fired from Gaza.

This response was received before a number of grad rockets landed in an open area near the southern Israel near the city of Ashdod. The Israeli Air Force responded with at least three strikes on the Strip.