Ship to Gaza

Roar Sørensen om Ship to Gaza

When Justice Is on One Side Only

Publicerad: 2010-06-04 21:06, Uppdaterad: 2011-11-02 16:11

The Israeli army killed nine persons during the raid on Marmara. The incident has been called a massacre and "Turkey's 9/11." But does a count of dead bodies decide who is right? Is it at all possible to speak about being right and wrong in this incident? This article answers in the positive.

538 millningar
16 kommentarer
Bokmärk & dela artikelnTipsa om artikeln vie e-post
Facebook
Twitter
dela
skriv ut
Facebook
Twitter

Om författaren

MA i israelsk politikk og samfunn
MA jødisk sivilisasjon
Bodd i Israel i 8 år frem til 2009

There seems to be no end to discussion following the Ship to Gaza incident on Monday. Most voices in the international arena are condemning Israel for having violated international law and having used excessive force against civilians. Arguments are thrown back and forth, but when it comes to interpretations of international law, it all comes down to which interpretation of this law you favor; how you weigh the facts; and which facts you selectively decide to exclude.

But more interesting than discussing the technicalities of international law, is to consider the motivation, behavior, the values, and the moral of the two sides. International law can be, and is, manipulated to serve the big nations and the powerful alliances of states. It can be used in a highly immoral way something the United Nations’ Human Rights Council has proven time after another. How can a council of nations, including some of the worst human rights violators, be trusted to protect human rights? How can this council direct 80% of their country specific resolutions against Israel? Are we to believe that Israel is responsible for 80% of the human rights violations in the world?

It is by now well known that those who attacked the Israeli soldiers on Marmara, were out to kill or get killed while at the same time creating a media show against Israel. There are video recordings showing the attackers singing about killing Jews just prior to the battle on board, and the families of at least three of the victims said the dream of the victims was to become a shaheed (martyr). In other words, hatred, violence, and religious fanaticism dominated.

At the ceremony marking the end of the three-months training camp for Israeli cadets it is common that the officer speaking at the event emphasizes the value of human life by repeating the Jewish maxim “every man is a world of his own.” This is a principle that is instilled in the Jewish people through their Jewish traditions. It is also a dominant value in the Israeli soldiers who are faced with the most practical application of this principle in situations like on Marmara.

The moral standard of the Israeli army is revealed when their operations are compared to those of NATO-forces in Afghanistan. According to international law professor Alan Dershowitz, a US officer in Afghanistan, can approve the killing of a terrorist, even if it includes the killing of up to 30 civilians. If the operation demands killing more than 30 civilians, approval is needed from the White House.

Due to IDF’s focus on preserving innocent lives, the Israeli ratio in real numbers is the opposite: For every civilian, 29 terrorists are killed. Israel critics would say this depends on how you define a terrorist. There is some truth to this, and reasonable people can disagree on the topic, but with such widely different numbers, it impossible to deny the superior moral standard of the IDF.

In spite of the convincing arguments for Israel’s case, there is a tendency among those who side with Israel to always moderate their statements by saying “of course Israel make mistakes as well, Israel is not without blame.” But is this really so? Could there be instances when justice is on one side alone?

The modern western mind would find such a thought abhorrent and primitive – caused either by blind fanaticism or extreme naivety. If Christians would suggest such a thing, they would be considered Israel romantics who are unable, or unwilling, to criticize Israel; unwilling to confront the truth because it runs counter to their idealized view of Israel as “the Chosen People.”

But is it not possible to think objectively, weighing in the many different aspects of a given situation, and still arrive at the conclusion that justice is on one side alone? I would say it is! Let us say a robber attacks an old lady exiting the bank after having withdrawn her pension. He hits her badly, steals her money, and runs away. Is justice on both sides? Can it be claimed that the robber also has “some” justice on his side? There might be some twisted minds that claim the lady exposed the robber for such a temptation that it was impossible for him to let the opportunity pass him by. But every person with common sense knows to refute such a claim. Such claims are nothing but a cover up used in courts to twist the justice system.

True, the lady might have acted stupidly. She should have known better and acted differently. But that does not mean that justice passes to the other side. Justice and truth is on her side, and her side only. In other words, there is no law in operation that says both sides always are to blame. There might be cases where truth and justice is on one side only.

When it comes to the Ships to Gaza flotilla and the Marmara incident where nine persons were killed, the case is similar. Israel did not expect the attacks that their soldiers were exposed to. Spokesmen for the flotilla had in advance declared their peaceful intentions and that they would only exercise peaceful opposition, civil disobedience. This is also what happened on five of the boats; there were no violence, no injured people and no one got killed. But when Israeli soldiers landed on Marmara, they were attacked by mobs with knives, clubs, and pistols and exposed to attempts of lynching. This came as a total surprise. In order to save their own lives against a mob intent on killing them, the soldiers opened fire and nine persons were killed.

There are those who like to play “the number game” in situations like this: More people were killed on one side, this means the other side acted immorally. With this kind of logic, you end up in an impossible situation where the perpetrator lays down the rules for how you can defend yourself. This becomes all the more complicated when the perpetrator despise international law and is willing to sacrifice his own civilians by placing them on the front line. Let us say the old lady in the story above tries to defend her self with a stick. She causes the robber to trip, he hits his head against a rock, and dies. Is justice now on both sides? Of course not!

The number game is a simplistic solution to a complicated issue. It is sad to see this argument being used in an arrogant way in an attempt to teach morals to the Israeli army all the while one is making judgments based on a small fraction of the evidence. The terrorists are fully aware of the European sensitivity to the number game, and they scrupulously abuse it to appeal to Europeans’ moral consciousness.

If we look at the Marmara incident in isolation, it is likely that the IDF did make mistakes. These were innocent mistakes that were almost impossible to avoid. Most importantly, the passengers on board were not those suffering from the mistakes. The main result was that Israel’s own soldiers were placed in life danger. Due to a lack of intelligence, the soldiers were not prepared for the attack that was awaiting them and it almost led to the death of several of them. The death of the nine persons, on the other hand, cannot be blamed on the Israeli soldiers. These persons consciously and willingly placed themselves in a position of danger.

The soldiers had no intention of killing anyone. Their mission was to take over the ship and lead it to Ashdod. This was clearly communicated beforehand to the commander of Marmara. It is therefore completely incorrect to claim that the Israeli soldiers “attacked” the ship and the people on board just “defended” themselves. Such claims are put forward in order justify the lynching attempts on the soldiers. How come on the five other boats the message from the Israeli marine was clearly understood? Passengers on these boats did not feel the need to “defend” themselves against the “attackers” – Because there never was an attack!

There are those who say that the Israeli blockade of Gaza is illegal, and to fight the Israeli soldiers is therefore legitimate. To this there are several answers: If fighting a supposed illegitimate blockade is the goal, why pretend to perform a humanitarian mission? Why use the cover of humanitarian aid to hide one’s true intention to kill Israeli soldiers? There are other ways to fight the blockade; diplomacy or normal warfare. This middle way of terrorism is immoral, illegitimate, and cowardly. It is a vicious attempt to use lies in order to defame Israel and manipulate the media and public opinion.

Moreover, those opposed to the blockade need to answer one major question? Do they back the Hamas’ policy concerning Israel? If so, their supposed care for human rights is nothing but a disguise used to forward another agenda of some sort. Support for Hamas, means support for terrorism, the murdering of children, the targeting of schools with rockets, and the bombing of buses. Israel’s blockade is intended to prevent this, and the way to end the blockade is to get rid of the cause for it; Hamas. We are still waiting to hear a peace activist and human rights defender explaining this dilemma. Most of them avoid the issue all together. It seems as if their hatred for Israel is so intense that it justifies the support for Hamas.

In short: Israel did what it had to do in the case of Marmara. Israel did what every nation would and should have done in similar circumstances; protect its population from harm. Opening the blockade would inevitably lead to an influx of weapon to Hamas, and Israel does not feel itself obligated to provide Hamas with the means for killing Jews. Responsibility for the death of the nine persons must be put solely on the organizers of the flotilla. In this case justice is on one side only. Israelis can be proud of their army.

Roar Sørensen (8 artiklar)

Anmäl

Trackback URL: http://www.newsmill.se/trackback/23318

16 kommentarer Logga in för att kommentera
I kommentarsfältet har kommentatorn juridiskt ansvar för sina inlägg.

det är ju inte sådär jättekonstigt om man betänker vem som bestämmer vem som är terrorist och inte.

för övrigt helt vansinnig logik. Jo det spelar visst roll att det dör många många palestinier för varje israel. Människor har nämligen samma värde. Är det det din långa text försöker argumentera emot?

Permalänk | Anmäl #1 default persson, 2010-06-04, 23:53

Dessa eviga apologeter. När ska människor lära sig att bara för att ena sidan är dum innebär det inte automatiskt att den andra är god.

Permalänk | Anmäl #2 Klas, 2010-06-05, 00:25

Sorry but the over all logic is completely flawed. Essentially too many assumption, and no proof for the rest.

So are we too believe then that you would condone an invasion of Denmark by Sweden, Sweden killing every dane, because the "evil" danes made resistance?

Which countries has in the past, including this year, acted as such as that the aggressor tried to blame the victim and only because international political trouble seemed to ensue? Try it for the last 20-30 years, and the only two countries people in the "western world" try their hardest to defend is US and Israel, and they usually do so believing they have no preconceived notions and the likes. Right?! lol. Russia in Chechnya, any supporters? How 'bout Afghanistan? Or going back to Vietnam? Korea back in the day? Why do people rather support India rather than Pakistan? One can argue that Pakistan is a more proper democracy than India, but still most see only India.

We can go on country for country, but lets face some countries have more emotional value than others. How many rationalized Thailand's governments actions recently? Or the red's side? Giving cr-p all about everybody else but him or her self's past, present, and future vacation plans!

So sure justice is only on one side, problem is, going by Israeli logic, both sides are right since they both claim to be right. And all the "non-believers" can go f em selves.

Permalänk | Anmäl #3 ST, 2010-06-05, 00:33

The silly logic in this article must mean that:

If a "robber" uses an innocent child as a shield, i got the right to shoot the child and the robber, in order to protect the property that i believe was given to me by my god.
The fact that the child is the only innocent party, and thus the most righteous owner of this property, doesn't matter, since i've decided on my own that my god has granted me this right.

Permalänk | Anmäl #4 Oscar Olsson, 2010-06-05, 02:36

Flotilla Choir presents: We Con the World

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOGG_osOoVg&feature=player_embedded

Permalänk | Anmäl #5 no2islam, 2010-06-05, 06:32

Från artikeln:
>>There are video recordings showing the attackers singing about killing Jews just prior to the battle on board, and the families of at least three of the victims said the dream of the victims was to become a shaheed (martyr). In other words, hatred, violence, and religious fanaticism dominated.

Jag antar ovanstående är trovärdigt -- eftersom kommentarerna (ST etc) som skulle velat säga emot bara fördömde istället. :-)

Så för mitt arkiv av länkar, är det någon som har youtube-videon där de sjöng -- och media-referenser (helst NY Times eller andra trovärdiga medier) där de diskuterar fanaticismen etc?

Permalänk | Anmäl #6 Bernt, 2010-06-05, 07:11

If they had wanted to kill israeli soldiers they could have done so. They got hold of their weapons and obviously did not kill anyone. They throwed the weapons overboard. So please don´t decide what their intentions were without asking them or investigating what realy happend. It is not for you to be god. I am sorry. It isn´t.

Permalänk | Anmäl #7 Kristian Fredriksson, 2010-06-05, 15:01

Bernt,
Här är länken:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3L7OV414Kk&feature=player_embedded

Permalänk | Anmäl #9 Adam Letzter, 2010-06-05, 22:12

Roar Sörenssen eller Livets Ord kollega ska inte få anmäla mina inlägg, som vad jag kan se inte på något sätt var inkorrekta. Detta även om han inte gillar det jag skriver. Sverige är en demokrati och därför är det viktigt att veta vad artikelförfattare har för ideologiskt utgångsläge när de skriver. Att tro att det är OK att diktera kontroversiella åsikter utan att räkna med att bemöta kritik är något som hörde hemma i Sovjetunionen. Om Roar inte håller med om vad jag skriver kan han bemöta mig här direkt.

Vad jag reagerar på är Sörenssens försvar av en stat som begår terrorist handlingar. Detta ska inte Sörenssen få göra utan att bemöta kritik. Detta är en grundbult i ett demokratiskt samhälle.

Roar Sörenssen tillhör Livets Ord och har varit Livets Ords representant i Israel: http://www.livetsord.se/default.aspx?idStructure=9973 Vad jag känner till tror Livets Ord på Jesu uppståndelse och Armageddon. Om inte detta stämmer kan Roar besvara mig direkt här i denna tråd.

Sist försvarade Roar staten Israels brott genom att hävda att det inte är ett moraliskt dilemma att stöda Israel. Detta trots att staten Israel hade genomfört Operation Cast Lead med 1400 civila palestinier dödade, varav 400 barn. Många offer brändes med vit fosfor gas. Om detta skriver Roar ingenting. Min slutsats är därför som jag skrev tidigare med utgåntspunkt av Sörenssens argumenation, att Sörenssen anser att det är OK att behandla palestinier som icke människor.

Permalänk | Anmäl #10 Terry K, 2010-06-06, 14:04

Hei Terry!
La meg bare först si at jeg ikke forstår din kommentar om å anmelde dine inlegg. Dette er ukjent for meg.

Når jeg leser dine kommentarer andre steder, er de preget av generaliseringer, fölelsesladede utrykk og forhastede konklusjoner. Jeg har derfor vanskelig for å se at det nytter å argumentere med deg - du har allerede gjort deg opp din mening og tenker ikke la argumenter og fakta påvirke deg.

Men for at du ikke skal kjenne at jeg forsöker å fjerne meg fra en seriös debatt, så legger jeg inn et par observasjoner.

Jeg er selvsagt totalt uenig med deg når du sier at Israel er en terroriststat. I så fall skulle de aldri sluppet inn sine egne soldater i Gaza. De kunne ordnet med den saken fra luften uten å risikere sine egne soldaters liv. Slik oppförer terrorister seg!

Dessuten, hvilken terroriststat tillater landets Höyesterett å dömme sine ledere? Israel har både militäre og sivile domstoler med myndighet til å gripe inn om det begås overgrep i krigföringen. I tillegg har Israel en meget aktiv og innflytelsesrik opposisjon. Om du har noe som helst kjennskap til Israel, så vil du vite at heftige debatter om alle sensitive saker er et kjennemerke i det landet. På grunn av slike "checks and balances" er det umulig for Israel å väre, eller å bli, en terroriststat.

De höye dödstallene i Operation Cast Lead skyldes nesten utelukkende Hamas' strategi med å plassere sivile personer i skuddlinjen som levende skjold. Dette er höyst tragisk.

Det föles derimot unödvendig og uverdig å måtte forsvare meg mot beskyldningen at jeg synes det er "OK att behandla palestinier som icke människor." Selvsagt er det ikke slik. Disse menneskene har like stor rett på et liv i verdighet og trygghet som alle andre. For å gjöre det hele soleklart: Et palestinsk-arabisk liv er like mye verd som et jödisk liv - om det nå fantes noen tvil om dette. Din påstand om mine holdninger her er et forsök på å score billige poeng ved å demonisere motstanderen - i dette tilfellet meg.

Men det som du Terry og alle andre som så sterkt kritiserer Israel må svare for er om dette også gjelder andre veien: Er et jödisk liv like mye verd som et arabisk liv?

Om så er tilfelle, hvorfor stötter du en terror-enhet som Hamas, som har det utrykkelige målet å tilintetgjöre staten Israel og som forsöker å gjennomföre denne politikken med å bevisst rette sine raketter og bomber mot sivile mål?

Permalänk | Anmäl #11 Roar Sørensen, 2010-06-06, 18:01

#7 I dont know Christian. All you have is their word. All I see the "peace activists" literary throwing in the video is a human being. Maybe they meant they threw the guns WITH the humans?

Permalänk | Anmäl #12 Thomas Hefner, 2010-06-06, 20:44

7# So they claim they simply threw the guns overboard. What is significant with that statement is that they admit they took the guns away from the soldiers. Because it is consistent with what the soldiers said. I think its most likely they statement of a single or a few activists that they also threw the guns overboard. Lets not forget they were quite unorganized. So maybe he believes all guns were thrown overboard, but sure enough one or several acitivists who grabbed a gun might have done otherwise. How unreasonable is it not then that an activist who got a hold of a soldiers gun fired it at the direction of the soldiers? And then that the soldiers answered the fire in self-defence? There witnesses from both side of the story corroborating that the activits got hold of guns. There are different versions of how they were used, but I find it hard to swallow that the same "peace activists" who would use iron bars to beat on a human being whose on the ground would somehow have a moral issue with firing a live gun at that same person.

Permalänk | Anmäl #13 Thomas Hefner, 2010-06-06, 20:51

#13 Thomas Hefner

At least there were no israeli soldier that got killed that I know of. Perhaps these murderous turkish activists didn´t know what to do with the guns then. They where obviously pretty close to the soldiers and could have killed them if they wanted. They were probably stupid.

Permalänk | Anmäl #14 Kristian Fredriksson, 2010-06-06, 23:26

Thanks Roar for your excellent article! Much needed to balance the massive antiisraeli press in countries like Sweden.

Permalänk | Anmäl #15 Björn Nyans Andersson, 2010-06-07, 14:33

#9 Adam Letzter

Tackar.

Permalänk | Anmäl #16 Bernt, 2010-06-07, 18:53

Hej Roar,

Du skriver att jag generaliserar och har gjort upp min mening. Samtidigt skriver inte du vad det är för generaliseringar jag har gjort.

Till skillnad från dig har jag respekterat fakta och inte hängivit mig till ideologiskt baserade argument som sionister och kristna fundamentalister gör för att hitta på ursäkter för Israels statsterrorism.

Först verkar det inte som att du vet vad terrorism är för något.

Terrorism innebär enligt definition våld mot civila och civil infrastrutkur för att uppnå politiska mål.

Med detta är det uppenbart att Israel bedriver statsterrorism. Den israeliska terrorismen är mycket värre än Hamas terrorism, då Hamas endast har hemmagjorda qassam raketer. 7 Israeler har omkommit av dessa raketer sedan år 2000.

Sedan är det dokumenterat och erkänt av världssamfundet att Israel dödade ca 1400 civila palestinier under Operation Cast Lead. Av dessa var det ca 400 barn. Endast lögnare hävdar något annat. Menar du att det skulle vara bättre om bara 1000 dog?

Israel har sedan Operation Cast Lead dödat 83 palestinier i Gaza (B't Selem). Hur många israeler har under tiden dödats av Hamas? Jag tror inte en enda.

Om du anser att det inte är ett moraliskt dilemma att stöda Israel, är en logisk följd att du anser att Operation Cast Lead inte var ett moraliskt dilemma. Detta innebär att du anser att mord på civila palestinier i tusental inte är något moraliskt dilemma. Vilket bör tyda på att du anser att det är OK att behandla palestinier som icke människor.

Om du anser att det inte är ett moraliskt dilemma att använda vit fosfor gas som har en temperatur på 800 celsius gentemot civila konfronterar du ett allvarligt moraliskt dilemma. Denna gas brände många palestinier under Operation Cast Lead.

Sedan är det känt vad Jehovas Vittnen har för förhållning till denna konflikt. En person på Ulf Ekmans blogg kallar judarna för det utvalda folket: http://ulfekman.nu/2010/06/01/skeppen-till-gaza/#comment-11491

Om detta är en åsikt hos Livets Ord, tyder det på att palestinier enligt detta synsätt är mindre värda.

Ni kristna fundamentalister tror också på Jesu uppståndelse i Israel och Armageddon. Ni har blandat politik och religion på ett sätt som är osunt.

En artikel om detta: http://www.aftonbladet.se/ledare/ledarkronika/helleklein/article189587.ab

Permalänk | Anmäl #17 Terry K, 2010-06-16, 16:56

Ship to Gaza

86 artiklar 59 bloggar

Skriv i ämnet! Länka till blogg

Revolutionsgardet, Irans elitstyrkor, deklarerade på söndagen att man står redo att militärt assistera fartyg som söker bryta Israels blockad av Gaza. Samtidigt skickar Iran två hjälpfartyg till Gaza.