Portside

The Global Sumud Flotilla is already on the move. More than 50 vessels, the largest civilian aid convoy ever assembled for Gaza, have set sail from ports across Europe.

Part of the flotilla has already docked in Tunisia, where it was welcomed by thousands of supporters, before heading to join the rest of the fleet. It is scheduled to set sail from Sidi Bou Said port on 10 September, following weather and logistical delays.

It would not be an exaggeration to call this the boldest humanitarian civil society mission in recent history, destined to take its place alongside some of the most prominent non-violent civil disobedience actions, such as Gandhi's Salt March.

The flotilla brings together people from 44 countries and a wide range of backgrounds. Among them are activists, artists, doctors, politicians and journalists - including climate activist Greta Thunberg - united by an urgent goal: to deliver essential humanitarian aid to Palestinians in Gaza, who have been deliberately deprived of the means of survival for nearly two years.

Hundreds of thousands of children are starving, and those who attempt to access the meagre supply of livestock risk being shot while waiting in queues.

In the absence of state action, the Global Sumud Flotilla seeks not only to deliver aid and open a humanitarian corridor, but also to assert the unlawfulness of Israel's blockade and the legitimacy of breaking it.

Unlawful blockade

The unlawfulness of the blockade is as clear as the lawfulness of the flotilla's mission. Its basis is the internationally recognised right of the people of Gaza to receive humanitarian aid without interference.

The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court classifies the "starvation of civilians as a method of warfare" as a war crime. The Fourth Geneva Convention prohibits collective punishment, and Additional Protocol I forbids the starvation of civilians as a method of warfare.

Moreover, under Article II of the Genocide Convention, deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to destroy a group, including through starvation, may amount to genocide.

International humanitarian law prohibits a naval blockade that disproportionately harms civilians, starves the population, or blocks humanitarian relief - all of which apply to Israel's blockade of Gaza.

This is why it has been condemned repeatedly by UN bodies and experts.

As recognised by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in its July 2024 advisory opinion, Israel is an occupying power in Gaza. It is therefore obliged, to the fullest extent of its means, to provide for the basic needs of Palestinians.

Under Additional Protocol I, even in armed conflict, the delivery of essential aid cannot be obstructed, nor can it be regarded as interference in the conflict or as an unfriendly act. Parties to a conflict must allow the passage of all relief, even when such assistance is destined for the civilian population of the opposing side.

Right to sail

The binding orders of the ICJ have failed to restrain Israel. In the face of repeated UN Security Council and General Assembly resolutions demanding an end to its genocidal actions, no meaningful enforcement has followed.

States have not only failed to act despite Israel's breach of peremptory norms of international law, but many can even be considered complicit through their continued support.

Where the main pillar of the international community - the states - has failed, transnational civil society, as another component of the international community, has stepped in. The Global Sumud Flotilla is the clearest expression of that intervention.

International law of the sea provides no justification for Israel to forcibly interfere with the flotilla's voyage. Customary international law and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Unclos) guarantee all ships the right of free navigation on the high seas.

Unclos allows interference only in exceptional cases - piracy, the slave trade, unauthorised broadcasting, or if the ship is stateless. The flotilla clearly falls under none of these exceptions.

International humanitarian law, as elaborated in the Geneva Conventions, is founded on the protection of civilians. Activists on board the flotilla are therefore entitled to protection as non-combatants.

Training sessions have made clear that all participants are committed to strict non-violence, pledging to remain inactive even in the face of violent interception by the Israeli navy.

This stance comes despite the tragic precedent of the Mavi Marmara in 2010, when nine Turkish civilians were killed.

Israel sought to justify its attack with accusations against the activists, which were swiftly discredited by independent investigations. The same pattern has repeated with other flotillas: Israel's allegations collapse under scrutiny, while evidence of unlawful violence piles up.

Now, the Israeli government has threatened to treat participants in the current flotilla as "terrorists" and to seize their vessels, despite their non-violent mission.

A test of conscience

It is now for Israel to decide whether it will unleash another episode of violence against the united will of global civil society and add yet another layer to its record of international law violations.

While international law enforcement mechanisms have so far failed to halt Israel's crimes, the law has still created something vital: legitimacy. That legitimacy has awakened global consciousness, rallied solidarity with Palestinians, and led directly to this historic flotilla.

By overrelying on crude power and disregarding international law, Israel has entrapped itself in a deepening confrontation with global public opinion.

Any violent response to the Global Sumud Flotilla will only tighten that trap, as each act of violence ensures that new waves of fleets will continue to reach Gaza's shores.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.

===

Deniz Baran is a faculty member and teaching and research assistant at Istanbul University’s International Law Department, and a lawyer registered with the Istanbul Bar Association. He serves as an executive board member of the Istanbul Arbitration Association (ISTA) and is currently pursuing a PhD in Public International Law at Istanbul University. Throughout his career, he has held various academic and professional roles, including Coordinator of the International Law Research Center (UHAM) at Fatih Sultan Mehmet University and International Law Specialist at Al Sharq Forum.

Middle East Eye delivers independent and unrivalled coverage and analysis of the Middle East, North Africa and beyond