Al-Jazeerah History  
	 
	
	
	Archives  
	 
	
	
	Mission & Name   
	 
	
	
	
	Conflict Terminology   
	 
	
	Editorials  
	 
	
	
	
	
	Gaza Holocaust   
	 
	
	Gulf War   
	 
	
	Isdood  
	 
	
	Islam   
	 
	
	News   
	 
	
	
	News Photos 
	  
	 
	
	
	Opinion 
	
	
	Editorials  
	 
	
	
	
	US Foreign Policy (Dr. El-Najjar's Articles)   
	 
	
	www.aljazeerah.info
	  
      
       
      
        
        
     | 
     | 
    
     
         
	Stuart Littlewood views the British government’s unwillingness – as 
	evident from the statements of its ministers in Parliament – to support its 
	citizens' right to go about their lawful business delivering humanitarian 
	aid to besieged Gaza and to protect them from Israeli threats to slaughter 
	them on the high seas.
  It doesn’t look good.
  Our 
	oh-so-moral international community, always poking its democracy-loving nose 
	into any trouble spot that might threaten Western security (whatever that 
	means) and always eager to mobilize its mighty weapons of war, is still 
	reluctant to operate on the cancer it foolishly implanted into the Holy Land 
	63 years ago and which now menaces the world.
  Instead, our heroes 
	encourage it to grow and won’t even protect the “caring services” wishing to 
	sooth the excruciating pain suffered by the Palestinian victims. 
	London-based media centre “not up to the job”
	And right now it’s disappointing to find that the Free Gaza Flotilla’s 
	new international media office in London is not up to the job. It issued its 
	first press release this week. An accompanying note told us that "the 
	steering committee decided it didn't want a unified media strategy" – a 
	fatal mistake, surely, when faced with an aggressive campaign of distortion, 
	disinformation and sabotage mounted by Israel and its
	
	massive stooge network to scupper the sailings. It also mentioned a 
	letter to British Prime Minister David Cameron but didn’t make the text 
	available. And it revealed they still hadn’t written to the Foreign Office – 
	unbelievable,
  The press release announced that a boat packed with 
	Freedom Flotilla activists had sailed along the Thames to Westminster. MP 
	Caroline Lucas went ashore at the Houses of Parliament "to deliver a message 
	of freedom for Palestine" and afterwards "asked [Foreign Secretary] William 
	Hague what the government is doing to support the flotilla to Gaza".
  
	No further details were given. So what exactly was the "message of freedom" 
	delivered to Parliament, and how was it received? And, most important, what 
	did Hague say?
  Back came the reply: "Freedom for Palestine was the 
	message. Ms Lucas posed a question in Parliament. Our press release was 
	about our action and her involvement in it. You can look up Hague's response 
	in Hansard if you're interested but he didn't say anything we 
	wanted to repeat in that press release."
  That’s the sort of attitude 
	that’s guaranteed to bury a release in a news editor’s wastepaper basket. 
	You don’t ask a high-credibility MP like Caroline Lucas to publicly pin down 
	a foreign secretary like Hague who’s a prominent cheer-leader for Israel, 
	and hide the result.
  As for the flotilla's abrupt "Freedom for 
	Palestine" message to Parliament, at the very least the press office could 
	have beefed it up with a list of freedoms taken for granted in Westminster 
	but denied to Palestinians – like freedom of self-determination, freedom to 
	choose their own government, freedom to trade with the outside world, 
	freedom to come and go, freedom to work, freedom to attend university even 
	within their own country let alone abroad, freedom to worship in their holy 
	places, freedom to reunite with their families, freedom to travel for 
	medical care, freedom to fish in their own territorial waters, freedom even 
	to have a good night's sleep. The “packaging” possibilities are endless. 
	
		
			
			
				
					| 
					 UK Foreign Secretary William Hague’s answer to Green 
					Party MP Caroline Lucas’s question in Parliament “reads like 
					the work of Israeli speechwriters and rhymes perfectly with 
					the nonsense he has spouted before.” 
					 | 
				 
			 
			 | 
		 
	 
	Here’s how Hansard (29 June 2011: Column 969) recorded the 
	Lucas-Hague encounter: 
	
		Caroline Lucas [Green 
		Party MP, Pavillion, Brighton]: Earlier today, Palestine solidarity 
		groups, politicians, teachers and others marked the anniversary of the 
		attacks on the Free Gaza flotilla last year by sailing down the river 
		outside Parliament and marking the launch of a new Free Gaza flotilla. 
		As the foreign secretary has previously said that the situation in Gaza 
		is unacceptable and unsustainable, will he tell us what further action 
		he is taking to help get the siege lifted, and will he do everything 
		that he can to get guarantees that this new flotilla will be safe from 
		attack?
  Mr Hague: We have continued to take the action 
		that I set out in the House last year. We have urged Israel greatly to 
		improve access to Gaza. It has taken some steps, but those steps have 
		not been as fruitful as we had hoped when they were set out. Egypt has 
		now opened an important crossing into Gaza, which may also provide some 
		relief. The answer relies on the general lifting of a blockade of Gaza 
		and on a negotiated two-state solution in the Middle East. However, 
		embarking on new flotillas is not the way in which to bring that about. 
		We advise against all travel to Gaza by British nationals, which 
		includes people who may be thinking of boarding a flotilla to go there. 
		We hope that Israel will make only a proportionate response to any such 
		flotilla, but it is, nonetheless, not the way in which to sort out the 
		problems of the Middle East. Such problems require negotiations in good 
		faith by the parties concerned. 
	 
	William Hague parroting Israeli speechwriters
	Actually, Hague's answer is very useful because it reads like the work of 
	Israeli speechwriters and rhymes perfectly with the nonsense he has spouted 
	before. He insists that flotillas are "not the way". Well, what is? The 
	proper way to break a siege, which the UN itself calls “illegal and contrary 
	to Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention”, is surely for the UN to 
	apply sanctions. Failing that, the right thing would be for UN warships to 
	break the siege – or for international civil society to do it escorted by UN 
	warships or by warships belonging to the nation(s) of the flagged 
	humanitarian vessels threatened with attack.
  The proper way for 
	Israel to avoid trouble would be to end its illegal blockade and end its 
	illegal occupation of the rest of Palestine, and not interfere with 
	humanitarians going about their lawful business.
  As for “negotiations 
	in good faith”, does William Hague think he’s talking to idiots? What 
	make-believe world is he living in?
  A year ago, on 2 June 2010 after 
	Israel’s assault on the Mavi Marmara killing nine unarmed humanitarians, 
	including an American, Hague made similarly daft remarks in the House of 
	Commons: 
	
		- "Our clear advice to British nationals is not to travel to Gaza." 
		Music to Israel’s ears, of course, as Hague helped to legitimize the 
		illegal sea blockade and armed assault against unarmed citizens in 
		international waters.
 
		-  
 
		- "We deeply deplore the loss of life…"
 
		-  
 
		- "Their welfare [meaning the British nationals on board] is our 
		top priority."Hague knew of Israel’s intention to go to any 
		lengths, including the use of lethal force, to stop the mercy ships but 
		he took no precautionary action.
 
		-  
 
		- He referred to "individuals who are allegedly involved in 
		violence against Israeli servicemen during the boarding", failing 
		to grasp that the violence was committed by Israeli stormtroopers 
		dropping from helicopters with guns blazing under cover of darkness in 
		international waters.
 
		-  
 
		- "Restrictions on Gaza should be lifted – a view confirmed in 
		United Nations Security Council Resolution 1860." Bravo, he gets 
		that right. But Resolution 1860 goes much further and calls for the 
		sustained reopening of crossing points on the basis of the 2005 
		Agreement on Movement and Access, which provides for
		
			- the reduction of obstacles to movement within the West Bank
 
			- bus and truck convoys between the West Bank and Gaza
 
			- the building of a new seaport in Gaza
 
			- reopening of the airport in Gaza.
 
		 
		 
		- Eight months earlier, the European Council had repeated the EU’s 
		call for “an immediate, sustained and unconditional opening of crossings 
		for the flow of humanitarian aid, commercial goods and persons to and 
		from Gaza” and for “full implementation of the Agreement on Movement and 
		Access”. So, where is all that?
 
		-  
 
		- "We will … continue to press the Israeli government to lift the 
		closure of Gaza, and plan early discussions ... about what more can be 
		done to ensure an unfettered flow of aid." Has unfettered flow 
		happened? Of course not. And it won’t happen without naval escorts 
		and/or sanctions. If Hague doesn't understand this he hasn’t been paying 
		attention.
 
	 
	Hague was challenged by Sir Gerald Kaufman, the straight-talking Jewish 
	MP, who pointed out that any one of the 37 UK citizens might have been 
	killed when the Israelis “committed a war crime of piracy in international 
	waters, kidnapping and murder – and all in pursuit of upholding an illegal 
	blockade on Gaza that amounts to collective punishment…” He asked Hague for 
	his assurance that further steps would be taken if the Israelis failed to 
	comply with the modest request that had been made.
  But Hague 
	sidestepped, saying: "It is our strong advice to British nationals, as it 
	has been in the past and will be in the future, not to travel to Gaza – let 
	me make that absolutely clear – as they would be going into a dangerous 
	situation, but it is absolutely wrong to maintain the blockade".
  
	Jeremy Corbyn asked if it wasn’t time for sanctions such as revoking the 
	EU-Israel trade agreement. Hague replied that he did not think imposing 
	sanctions was the right policy – but gave no reason. So, no consequences. 
	 Frank Dobson suggested that Britain and the other European members of 
	NATO should give naval protection if another flotilla were to set off for 
	Gaza, with the Royal Navy reverting to its traditional role of protecting 
	the freedom of the seas. Hague dismissed this too.
  The government 
	chicken coop happily clucked its approval as Hague handed the Israelis total 
	victory. As expected,a year later and there has been no improvement. Israel 
	is making the same murderous threats against the latest flotilla. And Hague 
	is making the same stupid remarks. 
	"Reckless to travel to Gaza”
	
		
			
			
				
					| 
					 “...instead of keeping the seaways open, it seems the 
					British government has colluded with Israel to put part of 
					the Holy Land off-limits to British pilgrims, humanitarians 
					and businesspeople, and has implicated itself in the 
					collective punishment Israel continues to inflict on the 
					Palestinian citizens of Gaza.” 
					 | 
				 
			 
			 | 
		 
	 
	A year before that, in July 2009, I received a letter from the office of 
	Britain's then foreign secretary, David Miliband, in reply to questions 
	about Israel's hijacking of the mercy ship Spirit of Humanity on the high 
	seas and the outrageous treatment of six peace-loving British citizens, 
	including the skipper. They were en route to Gaza, not Israel, had their 
	gear stolen or damaged and were thrown into Israeli jails. The letter said: 
	"All those on board, including six British nationals, were handed over to 
	Israeli immigration officials. British consular officials had good access to 
	the British detainees and established that they were treated well.”
  
	That’s not what the peaceful seafarers were saying. They were assaulted, put 
	in fear of their lives and deprived of their liberty for a full week – a 
	long time in a stinking Israeli jail – for committing no offence.
  The 
	letter continued: 
	
		The foreign secretary said 
		in the House of Commons on 30 June [2009] that it was vital that all 
		states respect international law, including the law of the sea… We 
		regularly remind the Israeli government of its obligations under 
		international law on a variety of issues, including with respect to 
		humanitarian access to Gaza as well as Israel's control of Gazan waters… 
	 
	
		Our Travel Advice makes 
		clear that we advise against all travel to Gaza, including its offshore 
		waters; that it is reckless to travel to Gaza at this time... 
	 
	So, instead of keeping the seaways open, it seems the British government 
	has colluded with Israel to put part of the Holy Land off-limits to British 
	pilgrims, humanitarians and businesspeople, and has implicated itself in the 
	collective punishment Israel continues to inflict on the Palestinian 
	citizens of Gaza.
  Fast-forward to this week and Middle East minister 
	Alistair Burt echoing his boss William Hague after visiting the Gaza Strip. 
	He told the 
	Jewish Chrinicle that he was opposed to the latest flotilla and that 
	the action by pro-Palestinian campaigners was a political gesture and a 
	challenge to Israel's authority. "There are better ways to do this in 
	humanitarian terms, and better ways politically."
  What are these 
	"better ways"? Everyone would love to know.
  And what exactly is 
	Israel's "authority" over who comes and goes in international waters, or who 
	enters or leaves Palestinian territory?
  Burt also said: "I am here to 
	encourage the Israeli government and the Palestinians to get back around the 
	table." Hasn’t he heard? Everyone’s done with time-wasting “negotiations”. 
	The path to justice and peace is already set down in law and UN resolutions. 
	It's time to pursue that path and enforce those laws. 
	Is anyone safe in the international community’s hands?
	
		
			
			
				
					| 
					 “...I don’t believe a single member of our international 
					community has promised to protect the brave men and women of 
					the flotilla while in international waters from the vile 
					threats of the regime that committed wholesale murder 
					against the last flotilla..” 
					 | 
				 
			 
			 | 
		 
	 
	In case you're wondering, Burt used to be an officer of the Conservative 
	Friends of Israel, Hague has been a signed-up Friend of Israel since he was 
	a teenager, and Prime Minister David Cameron also counts himself a Friend of 
	Israel and says he’s a Zionist.
  This unpleasant trio of supporters of 
	Israel’s psychopathic regime are just the UK tip of a sinister and menacing 
	Western-world iceberg. Nothing should surprise us about the behaviour of the 
	rest of the so-called international community.
  The international 
	community was happy to slap cruel sanctions on Iraq’s women and children for 
	12 years before bombing the hell out of them. The international community 
	has been happy to bomb the hell out of women and children in Afghanistan for 
	nearly 10 years. The international community is current bombing the hell out 
	of women and children in Libya and, I hear, using DU (depleted uranium) 
	ordnance for good measure.
  The international community stood happily 
	by and watched Israel unleash its Operation Cast Lead blitzkrieg 
	against Gaza’s trapped civilians, killing 1,400, maiming countless more and 
	wrecking their infrastructure. Not a single aircraft carrier, destroyer, 
	Tornado jet or Apache helicopter was deployed in their defence, nor has 
	there been any move in the UN to sanction against Israel for its continuing 
	blockade of Gaza. Nor have there been any consequences for Israel’s 
	interception of the Mavi Marmara on the high seas, which the UN says was 
	"clearly unlawful". Even the International Criminal Court drags its feet. 
	Meanwhile, the international community has taken sanctions against Iran and 
	can’t wait to bomb the hell out of the Islamic Republic’s women and 
	children.
  "There is no greater priority, no more important 
	responsibility than the safety of all our citizens..." So said one of our 
	previous prime ministers and no doubt many other heads of state.
  
	Somebody please correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t believe a single member 
	of our international community has promised to protect the brave men and 
	women of the flotilla while in international waters from the vile threats of 
	the regime that committed wholesale murder against the last flotilla. 
	Indeed, the international community seems prepared to let Israel carry on 
	with its dirty work, its defiance of all laws and codes and its crimes 
	against humanity.
  In the UK Cameron, Hague and Burt would do well to 
	remind themselves what it is they are paid and sworn to do – whether it is 
	to protect British citizens going about their peaceful and lawful business 
	on the high seas, or to further the lawless ambitions of a criminal foreign 
	regime that’s contemptuous of human values.
  The British public know 
	the answer. If Israel harms a hair on the head of any Britisher aboard this 
	flotilla, or shows disrespect, Messrs Burt, Hague and Cameron may get the 
	roasting they so richly deserve.
  I wouldn’t mind betting that the 
	same fate awaits Obama and Clinton if any American citizen is harmed this 
	time. 
	  
       
       
       | 
     | 
     
      
      
      
      
     |