A. LOEWENSTEIN ONLINE NEWSLETTER

With typical calm, Norman Finkelstein on Israel’s new status and how the world must now act:

Electronic Intifada writes an editorial that challenges some of the myths surrounding the Gaza incident:

Early this morning under the cover of darkness Israeli soldiers stormed the lead ship of the six-vessel Freedom Flotilla aid convoy in international waters and killed and injured dozens of civilians aboard. All the ships were violently seized by Israeli forces, but hours after the attack fate of the passengers aboard the other ships remained unknown.
The Mavi Marmara was carrying around 600 activists when Israeli warships flanked it from all sides as soldiers descended from helicopters onto the ship’s deck. Reports from people on board the ship backed up by live video feeds broadcast on Turkish TV show that Israeli forces used live ammunition against the civilian passengers, some of whom resisted the attack with sticks and other items.
The Freedom Flotilla was organized by a coalition of groups that sought to break the Israeli-led siege on the Gaza Strip that began in 2007. Together, the flotilla carried 700 civilian activists from around 50 countries and over 10,000 tons of aid including food, medicines, medical equipment, reconstruction materials and equipment, as well as various other necessities arbitrarily banned by Israel.
As of 6:00pm Jerusalem time most media were still reporting that up to 20 people had been killed, and many more injured. However, Israel was still withholding the exact numbers and names of the dead and injured. Passengers aboard the ships who had been posting Twitter updates on the Flotilla’s progress had not been heard from since before the attack and efforts to contact passengers by satellite phone were unsuccessful. The Arabic- and English-language networks of Al-Jazeera lost contact with their half dozen staff traveling with the flotilla.
News of the massacre on board the Freedom Flotilla began to emerge around dawn in the eastern Mediterranean first on the live feed from the ship, social media, Turkish television, and Al-Jazeera. Israeli media were placed under strict military censorship, and reported primarily from foreign sources. However, by the morning the Jerusalem Post reported that the Israeli soldiers who boarded the flotilla in international waters were fired upon by passengers. Quoting anonymous military sources, the Jerusalem Post claimed that the flotilla passengers had set-up a “well planned lynch.” (“IDF: Soldiers were met by well-planned lynch in boat raid“)
The Israeli daily Haaretz also reported that the Israeli soldiers were “attacked” when trying to board the flotilla. (“At least 10 activists killed in Israel Navy clashes onboard Gaza aid flotilla“)
This narrative of passengers “attacking” the Israeli soldiers was quickly adopted by the Associated Press and carried across mainstream media sources in the United States, including the Washington Post. (“Israeli army: More than 10 killed on Gaza flotilla“)
Israel’s Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon stated in a Monday morning press conference that the Israeli military was acting in “self-defense.” He claimed that “At least two guns were found” and that the “incident” was still ongoing. Ayalon also claimed that the Flotilla organizers were “well-known” and were supported by and had connections to “international terrorist organizations.”
It is unclear how anyone could credibly adopt an Israeli narrative of “self-defense” when Israel had carried out an unprovoked armed assault on civilian ships in international waters. Surely any right of self-defense would belong to the passengers on the ship. Nevertheless, the Freedom Flotilla organizers had clearly and loudly proclaimed their ships to be unarmed civilian vessels on a humanitarian mission.
The Israeli media strategy appeared to be to maintain censorship of the facts such as the number of dead and injured, the names of the victims and on which ships the injuries occurred, while aggressively putting out its version of events which is based on a dual strategy of implausibly claiming “self-defense” while demonizing the Freedom Flotilla passengers and intimating that they deserved what they got.
As news spread around the world, foreign governments began to react. Greece and Turkey, which had many citizens aboard the Flotilla, immediately recalled their ambassadors from Tel Aviv. Spain strongly condemned the attack. France’s foreign minister Bernard Kouchner expressed “profound shock.” The European Union’s foreign minister Catherine Ashton called for an “enquiry.”
What should be clear is this: no one can claim to be surprised by what the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights correctly termed a “hideous crime.” Israel had been openly threatening a violent attack on the Flotilla for days, but complacency, complicity and inaction, specifically from Western and Arab governments once more sent the message that Israel could act with total impunity.
There is no doubt that Israel’s massacre of 1,400 people, mostly civilians, in Gaza in December 2008/January 2009 was a wake up call for international civil society to begin to adopt boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) against Israel similar to those applied to apartheid-era South Africa.
Yet governments largely have remained complacent and complicit in Israel’s ongoing violence and oppression against Palestinians and increasingly international humanitarian workers and solidarity activists, not only in Gaza, but throughout historic Palestine. We can only imagine that had former Israeli foreign minister Tzipi Livni indeed been arrested for war crimes in Gaza when a judge in London issued a warrant for her arrest, had the international community begun to implement the recommendations of the UN-commissioned Goldstone Report, had there been a much firmer response to Israel’s assassination of a Hamas official in Dubai, it would not have dared to act with such brazenness.
As protest and solidarity actions begin in Palestine and across the world, this is the message they must carry: enough impunity, enough complicity, enough Israeli massacres and apartheid. Justice now.

I used to be agnostic towards J Street, a liberal Zionist lobby, but its Gaza flotilla statement continues its obsession (and misunderstanding) that only Washington can bring peace to the Middle East when in fact it’s primarily due to America that Israel can act as it does:

J Street is deeply shocked and saddened by reports that at least 10 civilians have been killed and dozens more wounded (including Israeli soldiers) this morning as Israel intercepted a naval convoy bringing humanitarian supplies and construction materials to the Gaza Strip.
We express our condolences to the families of those killed and we wish the injured a full and speedy recovery. We hope that leaders on all sides will take immediate steps to ensure that this incident does not escalate into a broader round of violence – in Israel, in Gaza, or in the region.
There will undoubtedly be calls in the coming days for a UN investigation into today’s events. A credible, independent commission appointed by the Israeli government should provide the world with a full and complete report into the causes and circumstances surrounding the day’s events and establish responsibility for the violence and bloodshed.
This shocking outcome of an effort to bring humanitarian relief to the people of Gaza is in part a consequence of the ongoing, counterproductive Israeli blockade of Gaza. J Street has been and continues to be opposed to the blockade – believing that there are better ways to ensure Israel’s security and to prevent weapons smuggling than a complete closure of the Gaza Strip.
We do not know yet what the impact of today’s incident will be on the just-restarted peace process, on Israel’s relations with the international community, or on the health of Arab-Jewish relations within Israel itself.
We do know, however, that today is one more nail in the coffin for hopes of ending the Israeli-Palestinian conflict peacefully and diplomatically and for preserving Israel’s Jewish and democratic character. We urge President Obama and other international and regional leaders to take today’s terrible news as an opportunity to engage even more forcefully in immediate efforts to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Anglican Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu and a group of retired global leaders have joined international leaders in condemning the Israeli forces’ raid on a ship delivering relief supplies to Gaza.
“We as elders condemn Israel utterly for this attack. The actions of the Israelis is inexcusable,” said Tutu.
He was speaking at the conclusion of a meeting of the group formed in 2008 to highlight humanitarian issues. Members include former UN secretary general Kofi Annan and former US president Jimmy Carter.
Reading a statement, Tutu said the Elders wanted an urgent investigation into the “tragic incident” after Israeli forces boarded the Mavi Marmara as it sailed with a flotilla to Gaza.
He said it should draw the world’s attention to the “terrible suffering of Gaza’s 1.5 million people, half of whom are children under the age of 18″.
The Elders considered Israel’s blockage of Gaza illegal collective punishment of its inhabitants and said it was also counterproductive.
“This is because it creates unacceptable suffering, in the process empowering extremists and undermining moderate forces in Gaza”, they said.
On Monday morning Israeli forces boarded one of the ships which was violating Israel’s blockade on certain goods entering the contested area. Israel warned last week that it would arrest those on board.
News reports said that at least 10 people were killed.
The Israeli Defence Force has said that they had tried to intercept the ships to search them, but were then fired on and attacked with knives and clubs.
Ten civilians were killed and four navy staff were among those injured.
The soldiers had been given full backing by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, according to Associated Press.
South Africa’s foreign office said it was trying to establish whether there was a South African on board the ship during the attack, which it said should get the “highest level of international condemnation”.
The Congress of SA Trade Unions called the incident “state sponsored piracy” and urged a boycott of Israeli products, while the SA Municipal Workers’ Union issued a statement on behalf of a large group of civil society organisations calling it a “massacre”.
“The convoy of ships was carrying 750 people from 40 different countries including 35 international politicians, members of parliament, former diplomats, human rights activists, aid workers and journalists and was destined for the Gaza port of Rafah later this afternoon.
“The flotilla carried essential aid material, such as medication, construction material, toys, workbooks, chocolate and pasta to Gaza,” which the organisations said were banned by Israel.
They said South Africa should immediately recall its ambassador to the capital Tel Aviv, expel the Israeli ambassador in South Africa, and sever diplomatic ties with Israel.
The organisations represented in the statement included the Palestine Solidarity Committee and the Muslim Judicial Council.

How’s this for news judgment and shoddy “journalism”?
Israel kills up to 20 people near Gaza and Australia’s leading evening current affairs program reports the story, then features an Israeli government spokesman, Mark Regev, for 10 minutes explaining the “official” position.
Any thought given to actually speaking to somebody other than the ones who killed the people?

This is how Israel’s leading newspaper is reporting yesterday’s incident at sea. No real sourcing just allegations but certainly frames the peace protesters as terrorists and essentially deserving of being targeted:

Our Navy commandoes fell right into the hands of the Gaza mission members. A few minutes before the takeover attempt aboard the Marmara got underway, the operation commander was told that 20 people were waiting on the deck where a helicopter was to deploy the first team of the elite Flotilla 13 unit. The original plan was to disembark on the top deck, and from there rush to the vessel’s bridge and order the Marmara’s captain to stop. Officials estimated that passengers will show slight resistance, and possibly minor violence; for that reason, the operation’s commander decided to bring the helicopter directly above the top deck. The first rope that soldiers used in order to descend down to the ship was wrested away by activists, most of them Turks, and tied to an antenna with the hopes of bringing the chopper down. However, Flotilla 13 fighters decided to carry on.
Navy commandoes slid down to the vessel one by one, yet then the unexpected occurred: The passengers that awaited them on the deck pulled out bats, clubs, and slingshots with glass marbles, assaulting each soldier as he disembarked. The fighters were nabbed one by one and were beaten up badly, yet they attempted to fight back.
However, to their misfortune, they were only equipped with paintball rifles used to disperse minor protests, such as the ones held in Bilin. The paintballs obviously made no impression on the activists, who kept on beating the troops up and even attempted to wrest away their weapons.
One soldier who came to the aid of a comrade was captured by the rioters and sustained severe blows. The commandoes were equipped with handguns but were told they should only use them in the face of life-threatening situations. When they came down from the chopper, they kept on shouting to each other “don’t shoot, don’t shoot,” even though they sustained numerous blows.The Navy commandoes were prepared to mostly encounter political activists seeking to hold a protest, rather than trained street fighters. The soldiers were told they were to verbally convince activists who offer resistance to give up, and only then use paintballs. They were permitted to use their handguns only under extreme circumstances.
The planned rush towards the vessel’s bridge became impossible, even when a second chopper was brought in with another crew of soldiers. “Throw stun grenades,” shouted Flotilla 13’s commander who monitored the operation. The Navy chief was not too far, on board a speedboat belonging to Flotilla 13, along with forces who attempted to climb into the back of the ship. The forces hurled stun grenades, yet the rioters on the top deck, whose number swelled up to 30 by that time, kept on beating up about 30 commandoes who kept gliding their way one by one from the helicopter. At one point, the attackers nabbed one commando, wrested away his handgun, and threw him down from the top deck to the lower deck, 30 feet below. The soldier sustained a serious head wound and lost his consciousness.
Only after this injury did Flotilla 13 troops ask for permission to use live fire. The commander approved it: You can go ahead and fire. The soldiers pulled out their handguns and started shooting at the rioters’ legs, a move that ultimately neutralized them. Meanwhile, the rioters started to fire back at the commandoes. “I saw the tip of a rifle sticking out of the stairwell,” one commando said. “He fired at us and we fired back. We didn’t see if we hit him. We looked for him later but couldn’t find him.” Two soldiers sustained gunshot wounds to their knee and stomach after rioters apparently fired at them using guns wrested away from troops.
During the commotion, another commando was stabbed with a knife. In a later search aboard the Marmara, soldiers found caches of bats, clubs, knives, and slingshots used by the rioters ahead of the IDF takeover. It appeared the activists were well prepared for a fight.
Some passengers on the ship stood at the back and pounded the soldiers’ hands as they attempted to climb on board. Only after a 30-minute shootout and brutal assaults using clubs and knifes did commandoes manage to reach the bridge and take over the Marmara.
It appears that the error in planning the operation was the estimate that passengers were indeed political activists and members of humanitarian groups who seek a political provocation, but would not resort to brutal violence. The soldiers thought they will encounter Bilin-style violence; instead, they got Bangkok. The forces that disembarked from the helicopters were few; just dozens of troops – not enough to contend with the large group awaiting them.
The second error was that commanders did not address seriously enough the fact that a group of men were expecting the soldiers on the top deck. Had they addressed this more seriously, they may have hurled tear-gas grenades and smoke grenades from the helicopter to create a screen that would have enabled them to carry out their mission, without the fighters falling right into the hands of the rioters, who severely assaulted them.

Other news here and here.

Unsurprisingly, the Greens have issued the strongest condemnation of Israel’s attack:

The federal government has expressed sorrow at the deaths, and was last night trying to make contact with Australians involved in the Gaza flotilla.
The Greens leader, Bob Brown, described the Israeli raid as ‘’shocking”. The Coalition’s foreign affairs spokeswoman, Julie Bishop, said reports of fatalities were ”deeply disturbing”.
A Department of Foreign Affairs spokesman said: ”We are deeply saddened by loss of life following the incident between the Israeli Navy and a flotilla of vessels carrying aid and protesters attempting to make its way to Gaza from Cyprus.”
Senator Brown said the government ‘’should require an immediate explanation of the deadly intervention”. He added that the Israeli censors’ blockade of information was unacceptable. ”Israel, along with convoy members, will be judged in the court of world opinion,” he said.
Sonja Karkar, co-founder of Australians for Palestine, said the activists supporting the flotilla had been shocked by the response. ”I don’t think anyone in their right mind would think the Israelis would go to these extremes,” she said.
Ms Karkar said she was watching internet streaming when the Israelis boarded.
”I saw no evidence of any resistance,” she said. ”All the people were in their lifejackets.”
The Israeli embassy in Canberra reiterated the statement of the Israel Defence Forces, that naval personnel had encountered live fire and light weaponry including knives and clubs during the interception of the ships.
”As a result of this life-threatening and violent activity, naval forces employed riot dispersal means, including live fire,” the statement said.
Ms Bishop said: ”The Coalition urges all sides to exercise restraint and to take no further action that may endanger lives.”

Salon’s Glenn Greenwald has a pithy Twitter comment:

I wonder what people would be saying if Iran had intercepted a humanitarian ship in int’l waters and killed 15 or so civilians on board.

When the smoke settles, the most likely long-term ramifications of the Israeli attack today are the moves made by Turkey. Zvi Bar’el of Haaretz outlines possible scenarios:

The Turkish government’s political-security cabinet convened Monday morning to assess its options on an official Turkish response to Israel’s attack on the Gaza aid convoy, in which IDF troops killed civilians with live ammunition.
According to Turkish sources, the Ankara government is currently deliberating on a series of steps it may take. But one thing is already clear – relations between Israel and Turkey have already suffered an official, public blow which will affect the nature of those ties from here on out.
Turkey has many options, and every one will affect Israel negatively. Among the available options are a lawsuit against Israel for violating international law and attacking Turkish vessels without provocation, calling on the UN Security Council for an emergency meeting, and engaging Egypt in direct talks in order to convince Cairo to open the Rafah crossing and to officially recognize the Hamas government.
The various political and diplomatic options that stand before Turkey also play well into the hands of Hamas, which has been granted Turkish and international support, and is now demanding of Egypt to quit acting like Israel and open the Rafah crossing with Gaza.
With this move, Hamas hopes to shatter the policy of sanctions Israel has imposed on Gaza. Egypt hoped it would not have to get involved in blocking the Gaza aid convoy and that Israel would take the responsibility exclusively upon itself. But Cairo is now starting to feel the strain, and is beginning to understand that it will need to provide practical answers to the public pressure Turkey and other Arab states are exerting.
Ismail Haniyeh, the Hamas leader in Gaza, knew better than Israel when he predicted that even if the aid convoy did not reach Gaza, Gaza would have won. So while Haniyeh’s political rivals, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and his prime minister Salam Fayad, are engaging in indirect negotiations with Israel, and while the United States is pushing the two parties into direct talks, the Israel Defense Forces is kicking the diplomatic initiative down the drain. How can Abbas and Fayad continue negotiations, even indirect ones, when a flotilla meant to provide humanitarian aid to Gaza gets attacked?
Hamas can now pat itself on the back for another achievement – the resistance it is now advocating is non-violent, and conducted through international organizations, thereby eliminating the need for rocket fire.

Israeli blogger Magnes Zionist on the tone of today’s Israeli radio after the Gaza massacre:

Oy, what will the world say…This is really awful…We had every right to do it…The whole thing is political…those guys are anti-Semites…we did what we had do…oy, what will the world say…boy, did we screw up…but we had to do this…they made us shoot on them….we lost the PR battle, we lost, again, we lost…oy…what could we do?