Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

dippin · 06-10-2010, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hiredgun

I'm sorry, but I'm afraid that's not quite correct. The enforcement of a blockade in international waters is legal by longstanding precedent.

Q&A: Is Israel's naval blockade of Gaza legal? | Reuters

The ship had certainly declared that it was on the way to Gaza and intended to break the blockade.

So the location of the incident is irrelevant; what's relevant is the legitimacy of the blockade (whether Israel has the right to impose it, whether Gaza counts as a belligerent territory), and of course its utility (whether or not Israel has the right, does this course of action make any sense?)

If the blockade is legitimate, then it doesn't matter where it happened - Israel had a right to board the ships.
If it is illegitimate, then it doesn't matter where it happened - Israel had no right to board the ships.

The "San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea:"

International Humanitarian Law - San Remo Manual 1994

relevant passages:

Quote:

"39. Parties to the conflict shall at all times distinguish between civilians or other protected persons and combatants and between civilian or exempt objects and military objectives.

40. In so far as objects are concerned, military objectives are limited to those objects which by their nature, location, purpose or use make an effective contribution to military action and whose total or partial destruction, capture or neutralization, in the circumstances ruling at the time, offers a definite military advantage.

41. Attacks shall be limited strictly to military objectives. Merchant vessels and civil aircraft are civilian objects unless they are military objectives in accordance with the principles and rules set forth in this document.

42. In addition to any specific prohibitions binding upon the parties to a conflict, it is forbidden to employ methods or means of warfare which:

(a) are of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering; or
(b) are indiscriminate, in that:
(i) they are not, or cannot be, directed against a specific military objective; or
(ii) their effects cannot be limited as required by international law as reflected in this document."

47. The following classes of enemy vessels are exempt from attack:

(a) hospital ships;
(b) small craft used for coastal rescue operations and other medical transports;
(c) vessels granted safe conduct by agreement between the belligerent parties including:
(i) cartel vessels, e.g., vessels designated for and engaged in the transport of prisoners of war;
(ii) vessels engaged in humanitarian missions, including vessels carrying supplies indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, and vessels engaged in relief actions and rescue operations;
(d) vessels engaged in transporting cultural property under special protection;
(e) passenger vessels when engaged only in carrying civilian passengers;
(f) vessels charged with religious, non-military scientifc or philanthropic missions, vessels collecting scientific data of likely military applications are not protected;
(g) small coastal fishing vessels and small boats engaged in local coastal trade, but they are subject to the regulations of a belligerent naval commander operating in the area and to inspection;
(h) vessels designated or adapted exclusively for responding to pollution incidents in the marine environment;
(i) vessels which have surrendered;
(j) life rafts and life boats.

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.

102. The declaration or establishment of a blockade is prohibited if:

(a) it has the sole purpose of starving the civilian population or denying it other objects essential for its survival; or
(b) the damage to the civilian population is, or may be expected to be, excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated from the blockade.

But, most importantly:

"118. In exercising their legal rights in an international armed conflict at sea, belligerent warships and military aircraft have a right to visit and search merchant vessels outside neutral waters where there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that they are subject to capture."

"146. Neutral merchant vessels are subject to capture outside neutral waters if they are engaged in any of the activities referred to in paragraph 67 or if it is determined as a result of visit and search or by other means, that they:

(a) are carrying contraband;
(b) are on a voyage especially undertaken with a view to the transport of individual passengers who are embodied in the armed forces of the enemy;
(c) are operating directly under enemy control, orders, charter, employment or direction;
(d) present irregular or fraudulent documents, lack necessary documents, or destroy, deface or conceal documents;
(e) are violating regulations established by a belligerent within the immediate area of naval operations; or
(f) are breaching or attempting to breach a blockade.

Capture of a neutral merchant vessel is exercised by taking such vessel as prize for adjudication.

147. Goods on board neutral merchant vessels are subject to capture only if they are contraband.

148. Contraband is defined as goods which are ultimately destined for territory under the control of the enemy and which may be susceptible for use in armed conflict."

So, first things first. There is the question of whether this is a conflict recognized by international law, as Gaza is not an independent state. But even if we consider this to be a legitimate conflict, there is the question of the legality of the blockade.

But even if we grant that the blockade is legal (highly doubtful), there is still the matter that the ship was sailing under a neutral flag. As the San Remo document makes clear, neutral ships can only be stopped and searched in non-neutral waters.

And this is all talking about this specific document. This document does not overrule the convention of the high seas, which clearly states that:

Quote:

1. Except where acts of interference derive from powers conferred by treaty, a warship which encounters a
foreign merchant ship on the high seas is not justified in boarding her unless there is reasonable ground for
suspecting:
(a) That the ship is engaged in piracy; or
(b) That the ship is engaged in the slave trade; or
(c) That though flying a foreign flag or refusing to show its flag, the ship is, in reality, of the same nationality
as the warship.