MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the Israeli military operation against the humanitarian flotilla and the Gaza blockade

14.6.2010

to wind up the debate on the statement by the Vice-President of the Commission/ High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy
pursuant to Rule 110(2) of the Rules of Procedure

Michał Tomasz Kamiński, Charles Tannock, Adam Bielan, Ryszard Czarnecki, Tomasz Piotr Poręba, Paweł Robert Kowal, Mirosław Piotrowski on behalf of the ECR Group

B7‑0386/2010

European Parliament resolution on the Israeli military operation against the humanitarian flotilla and the Gaza blockade

The European Parliament,

–   having regard to its previous resolutions on the Middle East,

–   having regard to the Council conclusions on the Middle East Peace Process adopted on 8 December 2009,

–   having regard to Rule 110(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

A. whereas on Monday, 31 May 2010 IDF naval forces intercepted a flotilla of six ships seeking to break the maritime blockade on Gaza,

B.  whereas in the days preceding the interception Israeli officials had made efforts to encourage the flotilla to deliver all of its cargo at the Israeli port of Ashdod where it would be inspected to ensure that the cargo did not include weapons or other materials that were banned under the terms of the blockade, whilst all genuine humanitarian aid would be transported over land directly to Gaza under the observation of humanitarian aid workers,

C. whereas EU Member State governments have consistently advised to avoid any forceful attempts to break the Israeli blockade on Gaza, which has been imposed in response to continuing rocket attacks on Israeli civilian populations orchestrated by Hamas,

D. whereas Israel has stated clearly that it would respond militarily to attempts to break the blockade; whereas specific warnings were given to the ships participating in the flotilla stating that they would be only allowed to land in the port of Ashdod and transfer their aid across the established land crossings; whereas prior to undertaking the enforcement measures, explicit warnings had been given to the captains of the vessels, expressing Israel’s intent to exercise its right to enforce the blockade; whereas these warnings were met by silence and the vessel maintained its path to the Gaza coast,

E.  whereas the flotilla incident is yet another example of the tragedy of the continuing futile conflict between Hamas which controls the Gaza strip, its radical Islamist allies and the state of Israel,

F.  whereas, although the convoy was carrying much needed humanitarian aid, according to the statements of the IHH organisers its main purpose was not to deliver aid but to break the maritime siege; whereas the primary intention of the flotilla was to make a political statement in an attempt to gain propaganda capital,

G. whereas there is considerable evidence that Israel acted legitimately and legally under international maritime law; whereas the maritime blockade off the coast of Gaza has been imposed because Israel is in a state of armed conflict with the Hamas regime that controls Gaza; whereas maritime blockades are recognised as a legitimate measure under international law and may be imposed at sea, including in international waters, so long as it does not bar access to the ports and coasts of neutral states; whereas under maritime law a state may take action to enforce a blockade and any vessel that violates or attempts to violate a maritime blockade may be captured or even attacked under international law,

H. whereas the peaceful non-lethal means implemented by the team of Israeli commandos appeared to be effective on five of the six boats, but the Israeli personnel were met with violence by the protesters on the final and largest boat, the Mavi Marmara, and were forced to act in self-defence to the escalating attacks; whereas one soldier was stabbed and two were shot, apparently with firearms taken from the soldiers,

I.   whereas the ship involved in the incident was the property of Insani Yardim Vakfi, an Islamic aid organisation based in Turkey or IHH in Germany which is regarded as “extremist supporters of terror” by Israel and which has been accused of being sympathetic to militant Islamist movements,

J.   whereas the Gaza strip has a long border with Egypt that could be opened to deliver humanitarian aid into the area,

K. whereas Hamas have ignored all previous UN Security Council resolutions calling to stop terrorist acts against Israel; whereas Hamas smuggles thousands of Iranian rockets, missiles and other weapons into Gaza in order to fire on Israel's cities,

1.  Deeply regrets the loss of life which resulted from the Israeli military interception of a flotilla of ships led by the Turkish Islamic humanitarian organisation Insani Yardim Vakfi, or IHH, in Germany;

2.  Calls on Israel to ensure that humanitarian aid continues to reach the civilian population in Gaza;

3.  Underlines that Israel is under legal obligation to respond proportionately and with restraint according to its international legal obligations under maritime law regarding maritime blockades;

4.  Calls for a credible, impartial and independent investigation into these events and the creation of a commission whose work would be open and transparent; calls on the IDF to undertake a full investigation to ensure that sufficient measures were in place to avoid injuries and in particular fatalities; calls on the Israeli government to fully investigate the incident and hold any IDF forces shown to have used unjustified or excessive force to account and legal due process;

5.  Understands Israel’s genuine concerns that allowing boats to reach the coast of Gaza without security checks could create a corridor used to transfer weapons to Hamas;

6.  Underlines that Hamas is a banned EU terrorist organization which refuses to recognise the existence of Israel, and continues to pose a security threat to thousands of innocent Israeli civilians;

7.  Condemns the carrying of children by IHH on board the flotilla in the knowledge the pre-planned action could result in violent confrontation putting innocent lives at risk; deplores the fact that Hamas turned away aid transported after the incident by Israel from flotilla ships, which was to be distributed to the residents of Gaza;

8.  Calls on Hamas to take immediate and concrete steps towards the Quartet principles, to unconditionally release Gilad Shalit, who has been held in captivity for four years, and to end its interference with the operations of non-governmental organisations and UN agencies in Gaza;

9.  Encourages Egypt to play a greater role in sharing the responsibility of ensuring aid to Gaza;

10. Supports Israel’s right to defend its security and enforce the naval blockade;

11. Believes that Hamas is responsible for the harsh conditions inside Gaza;

12. Underlines the importance of the flow of humanitarian assistance to the people of Gaza while protecting Israel's legitimate security interests;

13. Believes that a long-term solution to this conflict is a two-state solution that will bring about a viable and sovereign Palestinian state alongside a secure Israel that is recognised by all its neighbours;

14. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Vice‑President of the Commission/ High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the Member States, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, the UN Secretary-General, the Quartet, the Quartet envoy to the Middle East, the Euro-Mediterranean Parliamentary Assembly, the Israeli Government and Parliament, the President of the Palestinian Authority and the Palestinian Legislative Council.