fbpx

Analysis

BICOM Briefing: The Turkel Committee Findings

[ssba]

The Turkel Committee Report can be read here.

Key Points

  • The Turkel Committee, an independent Israeli public commission into the May 2010 flotilla incident in which nine Turkish activists were killed, has found that Israel’s blockade of Gaza is lawful, as was the capture of the flotilla.
  • Two international observers on the commission, Lord David Trimble and Canadian Brigadier General (Ret) Kenneth Watkin, are signatories to the report and described it as independent and rigorous. Two international legal experts who advised the inquiry, including the UK based Professor Michael Schmitt, have endorsed its legal conclusions.
  • The report, the first of two to be issued by the committee, found that the Israeli commandos that boarded the Mavi Marmara ‘acted professionally and in a measured manner in the face of extensive and unanticipated violence.’ They met with force from Turkish Islamist IHH activists which was ‘planned and extremely violent.’

 

What are the key findings of the committee?

  • Israel’s blockade of the Gaza coast is lawful according to the criteria set out by the San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea. This is based on the determination that Israel ended its effective control on Gaza after the 2005 disengagement and the conflict between Israel and Hamas is an international one.
  • Israel imposed the naval blockade on the Gaza Strip for ‘military-security reasons.’ These were to prevent weapons, terrorists, and money from entering the Gaza Strip, and the departure of terrorists and additional threats from the Gaza Strip by sea. It was seen as legitimate by Israel as part of ‘Israel’s overall strategy to prevent a legitimization of the Hamas regime in the Gaza Strip’. It was not imposed in order to restrict humanitarian supplies to the Gaza Strip or to disrupt the commercial relations of the Gaza Strip.
  • The blockade is in compliance with the requirement of proportionality, especially in view of extensive steps taken by Israel to moderate the humanitarian effects of the blockade and the land crossings policy on the population of the Gaza Strip.
  • There is a danger that ‘comprehensive restrictions on goods may not be regarded as proportionate in the long term.’ However, the report noted changes in Israeli policy in the last six months to allow greater freedom of imports and exports from Gaza.
  • The naval blockade does not constitute ‘collective punishment’ of the population in the Gaza Strip. The restrictions were put in place to limit Hamas’ abilities – including its economic ability – to carry out attacks against Israel, rather than to prevent goods reaching the civilian population of the Gaza Strip.
  • IDF forces were justified to capture the vessels of the May 2010 flotilla, since the boats were attempting to breach a naval blockade that was legally imposed.
  • The capture of the ships in international water was legal, since if a ship is purposefully attempting to breach a blockade, it is lawfully subject to capture in international waters.
  • The Israeli soldiers boarding the Mavi Marmara ‘acted professionally and in a measured manner in the face of extensive and unanticipated violence.’ They did not overreact and acted to defend their lives having met with force from Turkish activists from the Islamist IHH movement which was ‘planned and extremely violent’. They continued to distinguish the types of threat posed in different situations and switched back and forth between less-lethal and lethal weapons, even after it had become clear that IHH activists were using firearms.
  • Passengers and crew from the Mavi Marmara declined offers to testify to the inquiry. This included British passengers who expressed interest in testifying. The British passengers failed to respond to an offer made via the British government to hear their testimony by CCTV. The head of the Turkish Islamist IHH movement and the ship’s captain also declined the opportunity to provide evidence to the report.

What happens next?

  • The report, which was commissioned by the Israeli government, has been submitted to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. It will now be transferred to the Palmer Committee, the UN inquiry established by UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon to examine the incident, chaired by former New Zealand Prime Minister Geoffrey Palmer. This committee, which includes an Israeli and a Turkish representative, has already received a Turkish report, blaming the incident on Israel.
  • The second part of the Turkel Committee’s report will be published in another few months. This will assess Israel’s mechanism for investigating allegations of unlawful conduct made against its armed forces.
  • Turkey continues to seek an apology from Israel and compensation for the victims. Israel has refused to apologise, and negotiations between the countries on this issue have so far failed to resolve the dispute.

Further reading