Powered by WebAds

Thursday, September 01, 2011

NY Times gets copy of Palmer Report

The New York Times has obtained a copy of the Palmer Report, which it now says will be released on Friday. The Palmer Report investigated the Mavi Marmara incident in May 2010.
A United Nations review has found that Israel’s naval blockade of Gaza is legal and appropriate but that the way its forces boarded a Turkish-based flotilla trying to break that blockade 15 months ago, killing nine passengers, was excessive and unreasonable.

The report, expected to be released c on Friday, also found that when Israeli commandos boarded the main ship they faced “organized and violent resistance from a group of passengers” and were therefore required to use force for their own protection. But the report called the force “excessive and unreasonable,” saying the loss of life was unacceptable and the Israeli military’s later treatment of passengers was abusive.


Turkey is particularly upset by the conclusion that Israel’s naval blockade is in keeping with international law and that its forces have the right to stop Gaza-bound ships in international waters, which is what happened here. That conclusion oversteps the mandate of the four-member panel appointed by the United Nations secretary general and is at odds with other United Nations decisions, Turkey argued.


Israel considers the report to be a rare vindication for it in the United Nations. A Security Council statement at the time assailed the loss of life and Israel suffered widespread international condemnation. It thought that by offering to negotiate an agreement with Turkey that would stop publication, Ankara might soften its position.


The report does recommend that Israel should make “an appropriate statement of regret’ and pay compensation, but the Turks say that formula does not express sufficient remorse.

The United Nations investigation into the events on the Turkish-flagged ship known as the Mavi Marmara, the largest of six vessels that were commandeered by Israeli commandos on May 31, 2010, was headed by Sir Geoffrey Palmer, former prime minister of New Zealand, aided by Álvaro Uribe, former president of Colombia, along with a representative each from Israel and Turkey.

It takes a broadly sympathetic view of Israel’s sea blockade of Gaza.

“Israel faces a real threat to its security from militant groups in Gaza,” the report says in its opening paragraphs. “The naval blockade was imposed as a legitimate security measure in order to prevent weapons from entering Gaza by sea and its implementation complied with the requirements of international law.”

The report is hard on the flotilla, asserting that it “acted recklessly in attempting to breach the naval blockade.” It said that while the majority of the hundreds of people aboard the six vessels had no violent intention, that could not be said of IHH, the Turkish aid group that primarily organized the flotilla. It said, “There exist serious questions about the conduct, true nature and objectives of the flotilla organizers, particularly IHH.”

It also said that the Turkish government tried to persuade the organizers to avoid an encounter with Israeli forces but that “more could have been done.”
To this point, it's pretty much as expected. What's next is incredible.
Regarding the boarding of the ship, the Palmer committee said Israel should have issued warnings closer to the moment of action and should have first turned to nonviolent options.
They've got to be kidding. The second guy on the ship was shot! If you accept that the IDF had the right to board, how do you then say that they should have issued warnings closer to action (they had tried to board from the sea and been repelled). And 'nonviolent options'? What the heck are 'beanbag rounds' and 'paintball guns'?
The report assailed Israel for the way in which the nine were killed and others injured. “Forensic evidence showing that most of the deceased were shot multiple times, including in the back, or at close range has not been adequately accounted for in the material presented by Israel,” it says. The report does, however, acknowledge that once on board the commandos had to defend themselves against violent attack. The report also criticizes Israel’s subsequent treatment of passengers, saying it “included physical mistreatment, harassment and intimidation, unjustified confiscation of belongings and the denial of timely consular assistance.”
If we were Iran - or Turkey for that matter - the rest of the passengers would have been tortured. What was unreasonably confiscated? All the cameras and videos that let us prove our case?
The Turks also concluded that Israeli commandos used live fire before landing, leading to death and injury; the Israelis said they had not. The Palmer committee said it was unable to determine who was right.
The video shows that's a lie.

This is better than most UN reports - but not as good as it should have been. Hope the Turks are happy now.

Labels: , , ,


At 11:29 PM, Blogger Herb Glatter said...

"Turks happy now?" not going to happen with Erdogan and the AKP in power. Expect more trouble from them.

At 12:23 AM, Blogger Sunlight said...

I think Turkey is trying to provoke something that NATO will get involved with - on Turkey's side...

At 2:30 AM, Blogger NormanF said...

I disagree with the conclusion about "excessive force" - Israel expressed its objection to that part of the Palmer Report forcefully. Still, the rest of the report is balanced and is pretty favorable to Israel.

Which is why the anti-Israel crowd won't give it much publicity.


Post a Comment

<< Home