Connect with us

RSS

Why Anti-Israel Flotillas to Gaza Are Illegal Under International Law

A US soldier leaves a cordoned-off area as other troops work on a beached vessel, used for delivering aid to Palestinians via a new US-built pier in Gaza, after it got stuck trying to help another vessel behind it, on the Mediterranean coast in Ashdod, Israel, May 25, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Amir Cohen

Forty anti-Israel activists set sail aboard the ship “Al Awda” with the intention of breaching the blockade around Gaza. Just outside Maltese waters last week, two drones of unknown origin targeted the ship’s generators, causing no injuries but leaving the vessel stranded at sea.

Nearby countries are refusing to allow the Al Awda to dock, and spokespeople for the activists, as well as Greta Thunberg, claim the drone attack to be a violation of international law. It is not.

Why is there a blockade around Gaza?

Hamas, the internationally designated terror organization that rules Gaza, uses foreign supplies, including international aid, to carry out a variety of combat operations, including the October 7, 2023, massacre against Israel, and much of the fighting since that time.

In 2010, an “aid ship” called the Mavi Marmara attempted to break Israel’s blockade on Gaza. Upon boarding, Israeli forces discovered large quantities of weapons and other military equipment, intended for use against Israelis by Gaza’s various terror organizations.

The incident had put Israel in an impossible “Catch-22”: either allow the delivery of weapons to terror organizations, or else suffer international condemnation for attacking a vessel that (falsely) claims the moniker “humanitarian.” It is likely that the Al Awda was hoping for a similar “win-win” scenario: to either successfully supply Hamas, or at the very least, to harm Israel diplomatically in the attempt.

Why did Israel freeze aid to Gaza?

On March 2, 2025, Israel temporarily froze the flow of humanitarian aid into Gaza (as permitted by Article 23 of Geneva Convention IV) because such aid is typically transferred to enemy combatants instead of civilians.

Specifically, Hamas habitually steals international aid, as well as torturing and killing civilians who attempt to take aid for themselves. This reality has been confirmed by multiple international sources, including the United Nations, and has been caught on camera numerous times. Hamas uses aid materials to raise funds for combat, as well as directly in combat operations, such as fueling rockets or using concrete to build terror tunnels where Israeli hostages remain in captivity.

It is not known whether the Al Awda carried weapons, but based on the example of the Mavi Marmara, this must be considered a real and dangerous possibility for any un-inspected vessel. Even if the Al Awda were not carrying weapons, all materials that enter Gaza could very well end up being used by Hamas either to indirectly fund, or to directly carry out, terror activities.

Is a naval blockade legal?

A naval blockade is governed by the San Remo Manual on armed conflicts at sea and, when made pursuant the San Remo rules, is considered a legal act of war. Legal blockades have been used in numerous conflicts, including around Nazi Germany and Japan during World War II, and today around Russia and Iran.

By the same international rules, attempting to break a legal blockade is an act of combat. Specifically, Article 67 of San Remo states (in relevant part) that, “merchant vessels flying the flag of neutral States may not be attacked unless they are believed on reasonable grounds to be…breaching a blockade.”

International law provides a number of mechanisms for legally transferring aid to a blockaded territory, however attempting to break a legal blockade is not one of them.

Being in international waters does not guarantee impunity.

Section 10 of San Remo explicitly states that its rules apply to the “high seas,” which is a legal term often used with respect to international waters.

Therefore, when a ship is en route to a blockaded territory, with the intention of attempting to break the blockade, that ship is already engaged in an act of war under the terms of San Remo.

Anyone who follows naval history knows that battles often take place on the “high seas” and for good reason: if San Remo prohibited countries from striking an invading navy until it reached their shores, then international law would have effectively outlawed self defense. Therefore, even being en route to commit an act of war (such as breaching a legal blockade) opens the invading vessel to legitimate attack.

The crew and passengers of the Al Awda are not civilians.

The Geneva Convention Additional Protocol I defines three categories of persons in a conflict: 1. combatants (Article 43), 2. civilians (Article 50), and 3. any person who has taken part in hostilities but who does not qualify as a legitimate combatant under Article 43 (Article 44).

According to San Remo, activists aboard the Al Awda are taking part in hostilities, and they are therefore “non-civilians,” under international law and are “unlawful combatants” under the laws of numerous countries, including Israel and the United States.

Was the attack on Al Awda legal?

Israel has not taken responsibility for the drone attack on the Al Awda. However, under San Remo and the Geneva Conventions, Israel would be absolutely justified in treating the Al Awda, and all persons aboard, as hostile combatants. Under these circumstances, engaging the Al Awda, including in international waters, would have been absolutely permitted under international law. Merely stranding the vessel is not only permitted, but an enormous act of restraint.

Any shipment of supplies to Gaza, where Hamas controls all such deliveries, places Israeli civilians in direct and significant military danger, even as such shipments fail to help Gaza’s civilians. On the other hand, going after a vessel that claims to be “humanitarian” places Israel in diplomatic danger, even if due only to widespread ignorance of international law.

Therefore, the drone incident on the Al Awda, which took no lives, and cannot be officially traced to any source, combined with the regional refusal to allow the Al Awda safe harbor, has confounded both outcomes. In all likelihood, lives have been directly saved by last week’s events off the Malta coast.

Daniel Pomerantz is the CEO of RealityCheck, an organization dedicated to deepening public conversation through robust research studies and public speaking.

The post Why Anti-Israel Flotillas to Gaza Are Illegal Under International Law first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Post Views: 132
Related Topics:
Continue Reading

RSS

Antisemitic Incidents at Argentina Local Soccer Match Spark Official Investigations, Condemnations

Fans of Argentinian soccer club All Boys marched through the streets before their match against Atlanta soccer club, carrying a coffin draped with an Israeli flag alongside Iranian and Palestinian flags. Photo: Screenshot

Argentinian authorities and soccer officials have launched investigations following antisemitic incidents by Club Atlético All Boys fans during Sunday’s local match against Atlanta.

Atlanta, a soccer team based in the Villa Crespo neighborhood of Buenos Aires, has deep historical ties to Argentina’s Jewish community, which has long been a significant presence in the area.

This latest antisemitic incident took place outside the stadium before the game had even started.

All Boys fans were seen waving Palestinian and Iranian flags, carrying a coffin draped with an Israeli flag, and handing out flyers bearing messages like “Free Palestine” and “Israel and Atlanta are the same crap.”

Then, during the match — which ended in a 0-0 draw — a drone carrying a Palestinian flag flew over the stadium, while some fans reportedly chanted anti-Israel slogans.

Local police confirmed they have issued citations to individuals accused of inciting public disorder and related offenses.

On Monday, the Argentine Football Association (AFA) condemned the incidents as “abhorrent” and confirmed the organization has opened a formal inquiry into the events.

“This is not folklore. This is discrimination,” the statement reads.

Argentina’s Security Minister Patricia Bullrich also announced that a criminal complaint has been filed, citing “acts of violence, expressions of racial and religious hatred, and public intimidation.”

In a post on X, the Delegation of Argentine Israelite Associations (DAIA), the country’s Jewish umbrella organization, condemned the incidents and called on both local authorities and the soccer officials to “take firm action against these acts of hatred.”

“We urge the authorities to take all necessary actions and apply the full force of the law,” the statement reads. “Violence and discrimination must have no place in our society.”

Since the Hamas-led invasion of and massacre across southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, Argentina has experienced a surge in antisemitic incidents and anti-Jewish hate crimes.

According to a recent report by DAIA, Argentina experienced a 15 percent increase in antisemitic activity last year, with 687 anti-Jewish hate crimes recorded — up from 598 incidents in 2023 — marking a significant rise nationwide.

The study indicates that 66 percent of the antisemitic incidents originated in the digital realm, with a significant rise in Nazi symbols and conspiracy theories, but there was also a 34 percent increase in reported physical assaults, with such hate crimes rising in schools and neighborhoods.

The post Antisemitic Incidents at Argentina Local Soccer Match Spark Official Investigations, Condemnations first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Post Views: 8
Continue Reading

RSS

Iranian nuclear program degraded by up to two years, Pentagon says

A satellite image of Iran’s Fordow nuclear facility. Photo: File.

The Pentagon said on Wednesday that US strikes 10 days ago had degraded Iran’s nuclear program by up to two years, suggesting the U.S. military operation likely achieved its goals despite a far more cautious initial assessment that leaked to the public.

Sean Parnell, a Pentagon spokesman, offered the figure at a briefing to reporters, adding that the official estimate was “probably closer to two years.” Parnell did not provide evidence to back up his assessment.

“We have degraded their program by one to two years, at least intel assessments inside the Department [of Defense] assess that,” Parnell told a news briefing.

U.S. military bombers carried out strikes against three Iranian nuclear facilities on June 22 using more than a dozen 30,000-pound bunker-buster bombs and more than two dozen Tomahawk land attack cruise missiles.

The evolving U.S. intelligence about the impact of the strikes is being closely watched, after President Donald Trump said almost immediately after they took place that Iran’s program had been obliterated, language echoed by Parnell at Wednesday’s briefing.

Such conclusions often take the U.S. intelligence community weeks or more to determine.

“All of the intelligence that we’ve seen [has] led us to believe that Iran’s — those facilities especially, have been completely obliterated,” Parnell said.

Over the weekend, the head of the UN nuclear watchdog, Rafael Grossi, said that Iran could be producing enriched uranium in a few months, raising doubts about how effective US strikes to destroy Tehran’s nuclear program have been.

Several experts have also cautioned that Iran likely moved a stockpile of near weapons-grade highly enriched uranium out of the deeply buried Fordow site before the strikes and could be hiding it.

But US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said last week he was unaware of intelligence suggesting Iran had moved its highly enriched uranium to shield it from US strikes.

A preliminary assessment last week from the Defense Intelligence Agency suggested that the strikes may have only set back Iran’s nuclear program by months. But Trump administration officials said that assessment was low confidence and had been overtaken by intelligence showing Iran’s nuclear program was severely damaged.

According to Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi, the strikes on the Fordow nuclear site caused severe damage.

“No one exactly knows what has transpired in Fordow. That being said, what we know so far is that the facilities have been seriously and heavily damaged,” Araqchi said in the interview broadcast by CBS News on Tuesday.

The post Iranian nuclear program degraded by up to two years, Pentagon says first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Post Views: 8
Continue Reading

RSS

Switzerland Moves to Close Gaza Humanitarian Foundation’s Geneva Office Over Legal Irregularities

Palestinians carry aid supplies received from the US-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation in the central Gaza Strip, May 29, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Ramadan Abed/File Photo

Switzerland has moved to shut down the Geneva office of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), a US- and Israeli-backed aid group, citing legal irregularities in its establishment.

The GHF began distributing food packages in Gaza in late May, implementing a new aid delivery model aimed at preventing the diversion of supplies by Hamas, as Israel continues its defensive military campaign against the Palestinian terrorist group.

The initiative has drawn criticism from the UN and international organizations, some of which have claimed that Jerusalem is causing starvation in the war-torn enclave.

Israel has vehemently denied such accusations, noting that, until its recently imposed blockade, it had provided significant humanitarian aid in the enclave throughout the war.

Israeli officials have also said much of the aid that flows into Gaza is stolen by Hamas, which uses it for terrorist operations and sells the rest at high prices to Gazan civilians.

With a subsidiary registered in Geneva, the GHF — headquartered in Delaware — reports having delivered over 56 million meals to Palestinians in just one month.

According to a regulatory announcement published Wednesday in the Swiss Official Gazette of Commerce, the Federal Supervisory Authority for Foundations (ESA) may order the dissolution of the GHF if no creditors come forward within the legal 30-day period.

The Trump administration did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the Swiss decision to shut down its Geneva office.

“The GHF confirmed to the ESA that it had never carried out activities in Switzerland … and that it intends to dissolve the Geneva-registered branch,” the ESA said in a statement.

Last week, Geneva authorities gave the GHF a 30-day deadline to address legal shortcomings or risk facing enforcement measures.

Under local laws and regulations, the foundation failed to meet several requirements: it did not appoint a board member authorized to sign documents domiciled in Switzerland, did not have the minimum three board members, lacked a Swiss bank account and valid address, and operated without an auditing body.

The GHF operates independently from UN-backed mechanisms, which Hamas has sought to reinstate, arguing that these vehicles are more neutral.

Israeli and American officials have rejected those calls, saying Hamas previously exploited UN-run systems to siphon aid for its war effort.

The UN has denied those allegations while expressing concerns that the GHF’s approach forces civilians to risk their safety by traveling long distances across active conflict zones to reach food distribution points.

The post Switzerland Moves to Close Gaza Humanitarian Foundation’s Geneva Office Over Legal Irregularities first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Post Views: 39
Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News