Israeli blockade enforcements have always taken place outside of but near published boundaries, in international waters, typically 20–100 nautical miles from shore (see endnote). Anyway, neither the Italian Navy nor the Spanish Navy are going to do anything other than cooperate with the Israeli Navy as they enforce the blockade by stopping, boarding, and seizing the vessels and crew en route to Ashkelon’s port. Spanish and Italian authorities have indicated escorts for safe passage through international waters, not blockade breach.
Italy has confirmed at ministerial level that it is sending the FREMM-class frigate Virginio Fasan (F-591). In an official communiqué, Defence Minister Guido Crosetto authorized “l’intervento immediato della fregata multiruolo Fasan,” noting the ship was already north of Crete under Operazione Mare Sicuro and was redirected toward the area for potential rescue tasks. Concurrently, Spain has publicly committed to dispatch a navy ship from Cartagena to assist and, if necessary, conduct rescues for the flotilla, announced personally by Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez with multiple sources specifying the hull as the Buque de Acción Marítima (BAM) Furor (P-46), an offshore patrol vessel homeported in Cartagena.
Italy and Spain are NATO members; they are not going to attempt to violate a lawfully declared and effectively enforced naval blockade, governed by the law of naval warfare (San Remo/ICRC) and undertaken in exercise of Israel’s asserted Article 51 right of self-defense. In legal terms, blockade enforcement may occur on the high seas provided a blockade is properly declared and effective; Israel announced a 20-nm closure in 2009 and has at times effected interceptions well outside that declared line but still proximate to the theater; that is, in international waters off Gaza as opposed to hundreds of miles away. The UN Secretary-General’s Panel of Inquiry on the 31 May 2010 Flotilla Incident—commonly called the Palmer Report—found that Israel’s naval blockade of Gaza, as a security measure, met the core conditions for a lawful blockade under the law of naval warfare and could be enforced on the high seas.
If there are wild cards for friction, they come from the Flotilla crews themselves and any nearby Turkish assets if they respond under the cover of a PoC mission; Italian and Spanish presence acts as a buffer in those scenarios rather than a liability. Italy’s frigate and Spain’s offshore patrol vessel will likely stand by to assist if needed as Israel stops and boards (visit and search) each vessel, then seizes and diverts them and their crews to Ashkelon for processing and deportation. With civilians and civilian hulls in the mix nothing is likely to happen between militaries. It raises geopolitical frictions a tick, less so military tensions.
Note Al-Jazeera’s language regarding a drone attack that “Israel opposes”; there is no evidence of Israeli involvement in any of the reported incidents surrounding the flotillas this year, and in fact as historic precedent shows, Israeli interaction with past flotillas have never violated hot pursuit guidelines by engaging hundreds of miles away from the blockade boundaries. Frontex, the EU Border agency has boarded and inspected past reported incidents this year and found no evidence to support the crews’ claims; notably yesterday the crew declined inspection after Frontex arrived in response to a 2:00 am local time distress call. Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni urged the flotilla to abandon its voyage and instead hand over the aid for delivery via established channels, calling the activists’ plan “gratuitous, dangerous and irresponsible”.
Considering that the Turkiye-supported Sumud flotilla, a 40-50 hull convoy, lacks any capability to actually beach and move aid tonnage—no plan for lighterage, pier protection, tugs, cranes, surf-zone safety, or even inland distribution—it is eminently clear that the flotilla is a political stunt built to create an incident, not transport aid. This is unsurprising given the flotilla organizers’ documented links to Hamas politburo leaders such as former Chairman of Hamas’s Political Bureau, Ismail Haniyeh, and overlapping Muslim Brotherhood ties through figures such as Muhammad Nadir al-Nuri, the CEO/founder of “Cinta Gaza”.
Endnote
The 2010 Mavi Marmara boarding at approximately 65 nm (120 km/75 miles) from Israel’s coast in international waters[1], the 2012 Estelle around 30 nm off Gaza,[2] the 2009 Spirit of Humanity intercepted in international waters off Gaza,[3] the 2018 al-Awda seized in international waters off Gaza, [4] the 2015 Marianne at or near 100 nm off Gaza,[5] [6] and the 2025 Handala about 40 nm from Gaza.[7] An earlier outlier involved a Libyan-chartered ship compelled to divert on the high seas far from Gaza in 2008[8] For the legal basis permitting high-seas enforcement of a properly declared blockade, see the ICRC Casebook and the San Remo Manual; for Israel’s 2009 declaration, see Notice to Mariners No. 1/2009.[9][10][11]
Follow Dan Linnaeus on X at https://x.com/DanLinnaeus.
[1] Reuters. (2010, June 3). Q&A: What happened in the Gaza flotilla seizure, what’s ahead? https://reuters.com/article/world/q-a-what-happened-in-the-gaza-flotilla-seizure-what-s-ahead-idUSTRE6522NU/
[2] France 24. (2012, October 20). Israeli forces intercept pro-Palestinian boat bound for Gaza. https://france24.com/en/20121020-israel-intercepts-boat-pro-palestinian-activists-bound-gaza-strip-blockade
[3] Reuters. (2009, June 30). Israeli navy boards activist ship to Gaza. https://reuters.com/article/world/israeli-navy-boards-activist-ship-to-gaza-idUSTRE55T71C/
[4] The Guardian. (2018, August 2). Claims of violence as Israel deports crew of Gaza aid vessel. https://theguardian.com/world/2018/aug/02/claims-of-violence-as-israel-deports-crew-on-gaza-aid-boat
[5] Los Angeles Times. (2015, June 28). Israel intercepts ship in pro-Palestinian flotilla bound for Gaza. https://latimes.com/world/middleeast/la-fg-israel-gaza-swedish-ship-20150628-story.html
[6] Reuters. (2015, June 29). Israel blocks foreign activist flotilla from reaching Gaza. https://reuters.com/article/world/israel-blocks-foreign-activist-flotilla-from-reaching-gaza-idUSKCN0P90BN/
[7] Associated Press. (2025, July 27). Israel again intercepts Gaza-bound ship carrying activists and humanitarian aid. https://apnews.com/article/24c32eafd80d08a63e5bed8b83d5972f
[8] Australian Broadcasting Corporation. (2008, December 1). Israel turns back Libyan ship bound for Gaza. https://abc.net.au/news/2008-12-01/israel-turns-back-libyan-ship-bound-for-gaza/225172
[9] International Committee of the Red Cross. (n.d.). Israel, blockade of Gaza and the flotilla incident. https://casebook.icrc.org/case-study/israel-blockade-gaza-and-flotilla-incident
[10] International Institute of Humanitarian Law. (1994). San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea. https://iihl.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/SAN-REMO-MANUAL-on-INTERNATIONAL-LAW-APPLICABLE-TO-ARMED-CONFLICTS-AT-SEA-2.pdf
[11] Government of Israel, Ministry of Transport and Road Safety. (2013, April 18). Notice to Mariners No. 1/2009: Blockade of Gaza Strip. https://gov.il/en/pages/mariners-1-2009
