Well why wouldn’t they? The battle-ready sailors (and the TV-ready Sayles) have now established (as if it were ever in doubt) that Israel is in a perilous double-bind.
If Israel lets the ships go unchecked and abandons its lawful blockade then it exposes itself to enormous danger. Contrary to the contentions of the meticulously planned “spontaneous protests”, the naval blockade is a critical way by which Israel can ensure that Iranian arms do not flood its neighbour, whilst still allowing genuine humanitarian to reach Gaza. As is now clear, in the case of the five previous “aid ships”, Israel steered the convoy into the port of Ashdod where it was searched and from where aid supplies could be transferred onwards. The ship which was ultimately boarded was offered the same possibility.
On the other hand, if Israel does enforce its blockade and so carries out its obligation as a nation state to protect its own people, the anti-Israel activists know that they will score an enormous international propaganda coup as the Usual Suspects line-up to denigrate Israel without paying any attention to the video evidence (see Matt Sinclair’s earlier post) or to the obvious intuitive point that Israel isn’t just doing this for the hell of it (or to provoke angry facebook updates from “outraged” students determined to boycott all those Jaffa oranges they really should eat more of) but because Israel actually faces an intractable security risk from Gaza, run by an organisation committed by its Charter to the genocide of Jews.
So, there you have it: Israel loses either way. She must either jeopardise her frightened population or find herself subject to unique popular vitriol by “peace activists” and D-list celebrities who never seem to bat an eyelid about what goes on in (for example) Iran, Saudi Arabia, China, North Korea, Burma, Russia - or, ehem, Turkey.
Or have I missed Alexei Sayles’s flotilla of aid to help the Kurds?