I'm not sure about this interpretation of the events. I know that provocations occur... and I grant you that factions seek out public support... but in this case... your provocateurs didn't stand to gain much by baiting for an attack... and they had no way of ensuring Israels overreaction. I do agree that Israel's response was myopic... I would attribute the overzealous response to hubris. There is good reason for the attempt to break the blockade... reports from: the International Committee of the Red Cross... the World Health Organization... Amnesty International... the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East... and... the UN Environmental Program describe a humanitarian crisis caused by the blockade. Considering that as an attempt to appease public scrutiny... the Israeli govt mentioned easing restrictions on soda, juice, jam, spices, shaving cream, potato chips, cookies and candy... the notion that the blockade only prohibits weapons from entering the country is discredited. We have every reason to believe that Turkey's role in the humanitarian efforts was one of concern for the welfare of the Palestinian people. There is no reason to believe that the humanitarian ships envisioned such a lethal response on Israel's part. Israeli commandos could just as easily detained the combative workers aboard without having to execute them. Without having the ability to force Israels action.... the outcome of public scrutiny against Israel couldn't have been presupposed... thus any catalyzing event could not be carried out as it could not be predetermined. Israel's response was of its own making. Unless I have misinterpreted the parties you are suggesting intentionally provoked the event... It doesn't make sense when all things are considered. On the surface it looks plausible... but it seems to me to be an attempt to dismiss Israel's culpability.
The only media spectacle I noticed was the absence of coverage the raid received.
It was an attempt to provoke Israel toward extreme reaction, and Israel took the bait. A violent confrontation wasn't necessary, but the Israelis apparently felt the benefits of a showdown outweighed the political fallout. Now, Israel is further isolated diplomatically, its relationship with a key regional ally (Turkey) has suffered, and the opposition within Israel now has something they can use against the current government.
It was a media spectacle, and it appears to have worked...in the short term. The problem is that very few Arab governments are interested in seeing Gaza become more independent. So while Israel will continue to draw criticism from the Arabs, Europe and other governments around the world, it's unlikely this will translate into any real economic action, and certainly no military action, against Israel. This could end up blowing over in the long run.
The bigger question is what Turkey will do...now, they can use this as grounds for moving away from a close relationship with Israel toward other nations in the region, like Iran, which they've been doing now for some time.
And of course, it will be interesting to see if Israeli public opinion decides that security at the cost of diplomatic isolation is no longer worth pursuing.
Well, I think betting on a hardline reaction from a Netanyahu-led government is a pretty good one. I'm not discrediting Turkey's overall efforts to provide humanitarian aid to the people in Gaza, nor am I defending the blockade. However, the Israelis certainly believed they had good reason to conduct the raid and claim their boarding party was attacked first. The US, Russia, and France have all supported Israel's decision to conduct an internal investigation of this rather than push for an international one, and they've all said it's crucial the international community be able to accept the results. We'll probably know more when the investigation is complete, and I'll grant you that I'm just guessing here....however, I do still think it was an attempt to bait Israel. Militants in Gaza and elsewhere have been doing this for years: make a move to provoke a hardline Israeli government, the government responds with disproportionate force, then Israel looks like a bully in the eyes of the international community. This incident fits that pattern.
The Gaza blockade is a legal way for Israel to protect itself from Hamas being able to supply itself with supplies that allow it to continue attacking Israel. The majority of actual "aid" supplies are allowed to get past the blockade.
It was not an attack on the aid ship. It was a legal boarding of a ship attempting to force its way through the blockade. The attack came from the "crew" of the "aid" ship when they tried to prevent the legal boarding by beating the boarders.
Just as the U.S. blockade of Cuba was legal and justified during the Cuban missile crisis, Israel and Egypt's blockade is legal and justified.
Six billion a year in foreign aid from the US alone...if the US government told the Israelis to talk peace, they would. It's that simple. But, we don't...sad, really. And stupid. Second most foregin aid goes to our stanglehold on Egypt...again, very sad. And nope, it's not for food, it's for military usage.
Okay... this makes more sense now... sort of the same way you bait a car thief by leaving a vehicle unattended for a while and letting the malfeasance occur... I can agree that this scenario is possible. In this case... if this is the case... wouldn't appearances be reality?
Remember, "Aid" means aid to a bunch of terrorists that want nothing less than that every Israeli should die. Maybe that will keep a proper perspective on the whole thing.
I have a response, but FA says my words are not allowed in the reply. I'll talk to Ericson and try to get my thoughts up tomorrow.
...and under the Symington amendment... any aid to IAEA non-compliant states is prohibited.
oops... looks like our answers slipped into a memory hole