Murder on the high seas
By Max J. Castro
majcastro@gmail.com
The deadly Israeli commando attack on an international flotilla of unarmed vessels sailing in international waters and carrying humanitarian aid to the people of Gaza, which killed at least nine people and injured dozens more, is an act of infamy unprecedented even in the light of recent Israeli aggressions against Lebanon and Gaza.
While virtually the entire world expressed shock and outrage at the Israeli actions, at the United Nations, U.S. representatives worked furiously to water down any action by the Security Council, succeeding in preventing the passage of a resolution condemning Israel. Instead, the Security Council issued a “presidential statement” (which unlike a resolution carries no mandate for action) condemning acts that led to the loss of life without specifying who was responsible for those acts, thus leaving an opening for the Israeli narrative that essentially blames flotilla participants for the violence. The statement also called for an “impartial” rather than independent investigation, leaving open the possibility of Israel investigating itself.
Once again, the United States served as the one and only enabler of outrageous Israeli actions. The point is reinforced by President Obama’s pusillanimous statement on the issue, which contained no condemnation of Israel and merely expressed regret at the loss of life and called for a better understanding of all the facts.
On the media front, while international coverage was overwhelmingly negative, the U.S. mainstream media, especially the cable channels, mainly went with the Israeli government spin, almost exclusively featuring U.S apologists for Israel and official representatives of the Israeli government. Coverage was slightly more balanced on CNN International than on the CNN U.S. channel.
But even MSNBC, which is supposed to represent the more liberal side of the U.S. political spectrum, either supported the Israeli position or ignored the whole event. For instance, Hardball’s Chris Mathews said Israel “was getting a bum rap on this one.” Elliot Spitzer, substituting for the regular MSNBC host, framed the issue to demonstrate that Israel was acting in accordance with international law. When Salon’s Glenn Greenwald, (the one guest in endless hours of coverage by the cable networks who presented an alternative to the official Israeli story) attempted to make his points, Spitzer tried (unsuccessfully) to interrupt him. The usually outspoken Keith Olberman (Countdown) was completely mum on the incident while the equally vocal Rachael Madow waited until the forty-second minute of her one-hour show to mention the event. When she did, it was to give a brief summary of the event. However, she implied that had this incident involved any other country other than Israel, she would have given a very different kind of coverage of the event. Was there a red line that even MSNBC’s acerbic hosts were not allowed to cross by the network or by their own fear?
The reaction of the leading newspapers was somewhat more mixed. A July 1 editorial in the New York Times stated: “At this point, it should be clear that the blockade is unjust and against Israel’s long-term security.” The Washington Post editorial took a more pro-Israeli line but still referred the incident as “the flotilla fiasco.” In contrast, The Miami Herald editorial parroted the Israeli line from the very title: “OUR OPINION: Israel was right to stop Gaza flotilla”. The Herald editorial said: “Once again, Israel has been placed in the preposterous position of having to defend itself for defending itself. For that it should never have to apologize.” What is really preposterous is that a lethal commando attack on an unarmed ship carrying humanitarian goods to a besieged population can be construed as an act of legitimate self-defense. In contrast to the Herald’s slavish support for Israeli policy, Aluf Benn, writing in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, wrote: “The attempt to control Gaza from outside, via its residents’ diet and shopping lists, casts a heavy moral stain on Israel and increases its international isolation.”
The fact that an impartial U.N. investigation, led by Richard Goldstone, a respected South African judge and himself a Jew and self described Zionist, concluded that the Israeli blockade of Gaza (which the flotilla was intended to break) amounts to collective punishment and is therefore illegal under international law, was never mentioned in mainstream media coverage. Nor were the facts regarding the humanitarian crisis in Gaza brought on by the illegal Israeli blockade mentioned. In January of this year, 54 members of the U.S. House of Representatives summoned their courage and defied the hard-line Israeli lobby and wrote President Obama asking him to work for an end to the Israeli blockade of Gaza:
“The people of Gaza have suffered enormously since the blockade imposed by Israel and Egypt following Hamas’s coup, and particularly following Operation Cast Lead…. The unabated suffering of Gazan civilians highlights the urgency of reaching a resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and we ask you to press for immediate relief for the citizens of Gaza as an urgent component of your broader Middle East peace efforts…. Despite ad hoc easing of the blockade, there has been no significant improvement in the quantity and scope of goods allowed into Gaza…. The crisis has devastated livelihoods, entrenched a poverty rate of over 70%, increased dependence on erratic international aid, allowed the deterioration of public infrastructure, and led to the marked decline of the accessibility of essential services.”
The Israeli attack on Gaza in 2008-2009 devastated the economy, destroyed homes, killed tens of thousands of trees, and severely disrupted agriculture. The blockade, which an Israeli official said at the outset was intended to “put Gazans on a diet,” has prevented not only the flow of people but also the entry of building materials for reconstruction and sufficient food to prevent widespread malnutrition, especially among children. The alleged purpose of the blockade, to hurt the ruling Hamas party, has only reinforced its hold among the population of Gaza.
The attack by Israel on the flotilla bound for Gaza was an act of piracy, an illegal action intended to enforce an unlawful and inhumane blockade. The fact that a few of the passengers on one of the boats defended themselves with rudimentary weapons in the face of a surprise assault by a heavily armed elite commando unit is no excuse for the use of live ammunition resulting in the deaths of nine passengers and the wounding of tens of others (none of the commandos were killed but a few were injured).
Haneen Zubi, an Israeli Palestinian member of the Israeli parliament who was on the ship that was attacked and was subsequently detained and released by Israeli authorities, charged that the deaths were not accident. At a press conference in Nazareth she stated: “Israel had days to plan this military operation. They wanted many deaths to terrorize us and to send a message that no future aid convoys should try to break the siege of Gaza.” <http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0745327540/counterpunchmaga>
Glenn Greenwald writing on the online site Salon describes the extent to which the Israeli attack was a self-destructive act:
“It hardly seemed possible for Israel — after its brutal devastation of Gaza and its ongoing blockade — to engage in more heinous and repugnant crimes. But by attacking a flotilla in international waters carrying humanitarian aid, and slaughtering at least 10 people, Israel has managed to do exactly that. If Israel’s goal were to provoke as much disgust and contempt for it as possible, it’s hard to imagine how it could be doing a better job.”
