Israel stated that the Global Sumud Flotilla (GSF) transported numerous activists, but no humanitarian supplies.
Comprising 40 vessels, the flotilla was stopped on Thursday, coinciding with Yom Kippur, the most sacred day in the Jewish faith.
A video clip was released, depicting Israeli police spokesman Dean Elsdunne moving through what he identified as one of the flotilla’s largest ships, demonstrating its emptiness.
“When we and numerous other nations proposed they transfer this aid for delivery to Gazans — with us ensuring its secure transit — they outright refused, and now we understand the reason: it was never about delivering aid to Gazans, but rather about generating headlines and social media engagement,” Elsdunne remarked in the video as he traversed the empty flotilla vessel.
The Israeli Prime Minister praised the operation, stating that the Israeli Navy personnel involved performed their duties with “utmost professionalism and efficiency.” He further noted that their intervention averted dozens of vessels from entering an active conflict zone.
Conversely, the GSF asserts that its ships did contain humanitarian supplies, such as baby formula, provisions, and pharmaceuticals. When asked for a statement by Digital, the GSF indicated it would upload images and videos of the aid to Instagram and Telegram.
The group labeled the interception of its fleet as “unlawful” and alleged that the participants had been “abducted” and not set free.
The GSF stated, “After Israeli occupation naval forces unlawfully intercepted vessels of the Global Sumud Flotilla — a peaceful, non-violent convoy transporting food, baby formula, medicine, and volunteers from 47 nations to Gaza — hundreds of participants have been seized and reportedly transferred onto the large naval vessel, the MSC Johannesburg.”
The organization further declared, “The interception of humanitarian vessels in international waters constitutes a war crime; denying legal representation and obscuring the status of those apprehended exacerbates that offense.”
Nevertheless, Israel reported that four Italian nationals detained from the flotilla have been expelled, with the remaining deportations currently underway.
The ministry conveyed, “Israel is eager to conclude this process as swiftly as possible.” It added, “As Israel, Italy, Greece, and the Latin Patriarchate of Jerusalem have repeatedly affirmed, any aid these boats might have contained, however minimal, could have been peacefully conveyed to Gaza. This act was purely a provocation.”
Among the activists on the flotilla who have since been taken into custody are climate advocate Greta Thunberg and Mandla Mandela, grandson of Nelson Mandela.
This marks a repeated instance of Thunberg’s deportation from Israel. She was previously apprehended by Israeli officials in June following her involvement in another flotilla headed for Gaza, subsequently being returned to Sweden on a flight transiting through France.
During that period, she opted for deportation, whereas other activists declined. Thunberg informed lawyers from Adalah, a legal center dedicated to Arab minority rights in Israel, that she believed she could achieve “more good outside of Israel” and that refusing departure would “damage” her objective. Adalah currently represents the GSF participants.
Brian Cox, an adjunct professor at Cornell Law School and a retired judge advocate, countered claims asserting the unlawfulness of the flotilla’s interception.
Cox informed Digital that “International law sets forth highly detailed regulations concerning the execution of a naval blockade and the stopping of vessels endeavoring to violate a blockade. Existing evidence suggests Israel meticulously adhered to these legal duties during the interdiction of the Global Sumud Flotilla.”
On X, Cox challenged a former British diplomat who contended that Israel did not possess jurisdiction.
Cox maintained that the fleet’s location on the high seas, beyond Israel’s 12-nautical-mile limit, was irrelevant.
He cited the San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea, stating, “Vessels are subject to capture outside neutral waters if they are breaching or attempting to breach a blockade.” He further rejected the notion that the blockade in question needed to be temporary, noting the manual contains no stipulation for it to be “short term.”
In reply, Murray contended that the manual is “useful as a guide to customary international law as it stood 30 years ago, but is no more than that.”
Digital contacted Murray for his statement.