by CopperLine » Wed Jun 02, 2010 10:51 pm
Paphitis and others are just plain wrong in their comments on what is permitted/forbidden actions in international waters or 'high seas'. Without a shadow of doubt the Israeli action constitutes a prima facie act of piracy, and piracy is a ius cogens prohibition i.e, in the history and development of international law it doesn't get any more basic or any more universally acknowledged as a crime.
It is forbidden in law to attack a ship on the high seas. Where this has been done between marine/navies it is a prima facie act of war. Where this is carried out against a merchant vessel it is a prima facie act of piracy. Motive does not come into it.
(Paphitis is also quite mistaken about what the Australian navy is doing refugees on the high seas).
What states do within territorial waters is another matter. Israel could have - contrary what people, including Netanyahu, have said - chosen to act once the ships were within territorial waters. But Israel chose international piracy over a legal impounding of a vessel within territorial waters.
What of warnings to the flotilla ? It appears from all the press releases etc that no warnings or cautions were issued immediately prior to the assault by masked armed men in the dead of night. And even if there was, why would a ship's captain, responsible in law for the safety of the crew and passengers, give way to a demand on the high seas ? Such a demand is, by definition, also without legal force.
I fail to see in whose interests (certainly not Israel's) it is to attempt to legitimate piracy. Paphitis and co. should simply ask themselves the question as to whether what they defend - the 'right' of any party to take so-called 'pre-emptive action' on the high seas - as a principle can be generalised or universalised ? (Iran doesn't like to see Saudi registered ships in the Gulf - attack them. Russian oil companies don't like to see Canadian oil rigs in the Arctic - attack them. Japanese whalers don't like to see greenpeace ships in whaling grouns - attack them..... and so on). It can't because what you get is ..... piracy, exactly what four hundred plus years of international law has been developing to abolish.
Will Israel get away with this piracy ? Probably. Has Israel mounted a massive PR campaign to explain how chalk is really cheese ? Yes. Will an enquiry, international or otherwise, result in anything significant to constrain Israel's increasing barbarism ? No. Is Israel more secure as a result of this latest stupidity ? No.