Israel Update for June 2010

As the international convoy of six ships drew ever closer to the Gaza Strip during the second half of May, Israeli leaders issued numerous public pleas for commanders to divert their vessels to the port of Ashdod, some 16 miles north of the Palestinian coastal zone (the bustling port is close enough to have been struck by Iranian-supplied Grad rockets fired by Hamas militiamen in early 2009). There the "humanitarian aid" would be closely inspected to verify that no concealed weapons were included before being trucked to the Gaza Strip for distribution.

As many Israeli and some foreign commentators have noted, the instructions were entirely justified and sound, given that Hamas is in an open state of war with Israel. Along with Iran and other entities like Hizbullah and Al Qaida, the militant Palestinian Muslim group frequently declares that tiny Israel-often equated with the medieval Crusader Kingdom which briefly ruled the Promised land-will sooner or later be completely annihilated (Hamas founder Sheik Yassin predicted Israel would disappear by 2022, a mere 12 years from now). Indeed, this is the central tenet of the group's founding charter, published in 1988.

If such genocidal rhetoric was not often accompanied by actual rocket and terror attacks upon Israeli civilians and soldiers, it might not have justified IDF naval intervention to inspect the cargo of a foreign aid flotilla heading toward the Hamas-ruled zone. But alas, hundreds of Jewish graves (not to mention those of visiting American and European tourists and Thai agricultural workers, along with not a few Arab graves), silently testify otherwise.

Speaking to a group of visiting tourists from the United States, Australia and New Zealand that I gladly hosted during early June in the immediate wake of the clash at sea, I stated that if a tribe of native North Americans had taken over the small state of Delaware in a violent coup launched against a larger, much more moderate native tribe, and then used it to lob rockets upon nearby Washington D.C. and Baltimore, would the American navy allow a flotilla of "aid" ships sent by Cuba and Venezuela to deliver un-inspected cargo to its seaport? Would Australian officials not intervene if similar ships from, let's say, Malaysia were on their way to aid a small Aboriginal group that was regularly shelling the city of Townsend from nearby Magnetic Island? In each of these thankfully far-fetched scenarios, at least the attackers could accurately say they were only "resisting colonial usurpers" who had no ancient ties to the land, unlike Arabs attacking Jews who are once again living in their ancestral biblical homeland.

What Went Down?

Several weeks after the dramatic clash at sea, it is now easier to detail exactly what happened in the pre dawn hours the last day of May. Initial international news accounts unequivocally stated that IDF forces had "attacked and killed" apparently innocent "humanitarian aid" activists on board one of the six flotilla vessel, the Turkish-flagged Mavi Marmara. The reports were mostly based on video shot by a crew on board the flotilla employed by the Qatar-based Al Jazeera Arabic satellite news channel, which is not exactly known for its pro-Israel leanings.

The apparently carefully edited pictures-rapidly screened across the world-failed to show the fact that rappelling IDF soldiers, brandishing paintball guns on their backs and small pistols on their thighs, were quickly ambushed by dozens of mostly Turkish Muslim men wielding heavy metal pipes (which turned out to have largely been cut from the Turkish ship's railings, despite protests from the stunned crew on board), wooden bats, steel chains and knives. After the startled Israelis realized they were not engaging humanitarian activists singing peace songs in the dark, but dozens of seriously armed men (some later linked to various known terror groups) clearly intent on harming them during hand to hand combat, they pulled out their pistols. At least one pistol was quickly seized by the ambushers and used against the soldiers. Nine Turks were killed in the ensuing intense melee. Seven IDF soldiers were wounded, two very seriously.

It took the IDF command a full 12 hours before video of the violent encounter-recorded by Israeli cameramen aboard nearby naval ships and helicopters-was released for international viewing. The delay was heavily criticized by many Israelis who noted that we now live in a global communications community where rapid transmission of important information, especially actual video footage, counts more than ever before.

The IDF video told a very different story than the previously released Arab footage. Mostly shot with night-scope lenses designed to enhance images taken in the dark, the pictures revealed a group of obviously frightened Israeli soldiers under forceful attack by dozens of men on board the Turkish ship. Some are heard shouting in Hebrew through their communications devices that they were facing "live fire" and "heavy weapons," to their apparent astonishment. Indeed, IDF commanders later admitted they were not anticipating such serious "resistance" which is obviously why they sent their troops onto the ship brandishing paintball guns!

In a show of courage that could endanger its future existence, Turkey's largest daily newspaper published graphic photos of the violent encounter nearly ten days after it took place. The large front page pictures showed several bleeding IDF soldiers on board the Mavi Marmara, who the paper admitted had been bludgeoned by Turkish passengers that had apparently pre-planned their violent assaults.

"Throw Them Overboard!"

Israeli investigators closely questioned many passengers aboard the Turkish ship after it was towed into Ashdod port. They determined that at least 40 men connected to the Turkish Muslim "Foundation for Human Rights and Freedoms and Humanitarian Aid" group, (better known as the IHH) were permitted by Turkish officials to pre-board the IHH-chartered vessel. This occurred several hours before other passengers were allowed to embark. Israeli officials say the IHH is strongly linked to the Erdogan government and also connected to the banned Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood group, which the Hamas movement sprang from in 1988. The pre-boarding was revealed by some of the interrogated IHH members. They admitted the men immediately began preparations for their planned ambush, which continued more subtly after the other passengers were allowed on board.

One of the questioned passengers handed over an important video he shot on board the ship before IDF forces rappelled onto the top deck from helicopters hovering above. It showed the IHH leader, Bulent Yildirim, speaking over a bullhorn in his native Turkish, but also in fluent Arabic, to a large band of assembled Muslim men. He encouraged them to be prepared to give their lives in the anticipated confrontation with IDF soldiers, belligerently vowing that "If they board our ship, we will throw them into the sea!" Some Israeli analysts said was not just a pledge to harm or kill boarding IDF soldiers, but also an apparent allusion to the late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat's frequently stated threat that all of Israel's Jews would eventually be hurled into the same Mediterranean Sea.

Responding with loud chants of Allahu Akbar, the Muslim throng was next led by an Egyptian parliament member on board in another vibrant and revealing chant-loudly declaring that "Millions are marching to Gaza!!" Yildirim then encouraged the obviously revved up Muslims to be ready to give their lives as suicide martyrs if the IDF intercepted the ship-another thinly veiled allusion to the planned ambush ahead. He maintained that Israel is "very weak," adding that the men would "gain a victory" whether or not they actually reached Gaza's shores, an apparent reference to the international propaganda coup the ship's passengers would secure by simply confronting the IDF as "innocent aid workers" humbly attempting to carry out a gentle humanitarian mission.