Resolutions of UN Security Council, e.g. Resolution 1860, point directly that “Gaza Strip constitutes an integral part of the territory occupied in 1967 and will be a part of the Palestinian state”. Thus, as one can see, Gaza Strip is not a subject of international law, so in this case Israel can’t apply the rules of naval blockade in a time of armed conflict between states. But Gaza Strip is not also a part of Israel. And even if it were, in case of a civil war naval blockade can’t go further than territorial waters. Thus, though Israel declared Gaza Strip some obscure enemy territory, many international and humanitarian organizations keep on regarding it as an occupied territory.
All these facts make the blockade of Gaza Strip and impediment for supplies of humanitarian cargo violating the international law, moreover concerning that the mentioned above Resolution 1860 of UN Security Council “calls for the unimpeded provision and distribution throughout Gaza of humanitarian assistance”. Israeli attack on Freedom Flotilla may be regarded thereby as an act of hostility towards the countries, which owned the vessels with humanitarian aid and passengers of which became victims of the conflict. In turn, the actions of crew members and passengers of Mavi Marmara can be regarded as a rightful attempt to resist the attackers of the ship on the high sea.
Particularly this, or similar position was supported by many famous diplomats and specialists in international and sea law in many countries of the world.

Read the whole article on Of Israeli blockade of Gaza Strip and of the seizure of humanitarian flotilla by Israeli military forces | East+West Review Analytics Agency

Originally Posted by Russie1912

Resolutions of UN Security Council, e.g. Resolution 1860, point directly that “Gaza Strip constitutes an integral part of the territory occupied in 1967 and will be a part of the Palestinian state”. Thus, as one can see, Gaza Strip is not a subject of international law, so in this case Israel can’t apply the rules of naval blockade in a time of armed conflict between states. But Gaza Strip is not also a part of Israel. And even if it were, in case of a civil war naval blockade can’t go further than territorial waters. Thus, though Israel declared Gaza Strip some obscure enemy territory, many international and humanitarian organizations keep on regarding it as an occupied territory.
All these facts make the blockade of Gaza Strip and impediment for supplies of humanitarian cargo violating the international law, moreover concerning that the mentioned above Resolution 1860 of UN Security Council “calls for the unimpeded provision and distribution throughout Gaza of humanitarian assistance”. Israeli attack on Freedom Flotilla may be regarded thereby as an act of hostility towards the countries, which owned the vessels with humanitarian aid and passengers of which became victims of the conflict. In turn, the actions of crew members and passengers of Mavi Marmara can be regarded as a rightful attempt to resist the attackers of the ship on the high sea.
Particularly this, or similar position was supported by many famous diplomats and specialists in international and sea law in many countries of the world.

Read the whole article on Of Israeli blockade of Gaza Strip and of the seizure of humanitarian flotilla by Israeli military forces | East+West Review Analytics Agency

Which is basically a confirmation of what I said in this post - http://www.politic.co.uk/israel-poli...tml#post109730 - summarizing: "Finally the San Remo Manual only applies to "belligerent states" and "neutral states" as clearly indicated in Section IV. Gaza, which is part of the Palestinian Occupied Territories along with the West Bank, is not a state, due in large part, rather ironically, to Israel's own intransigence and the foot-dragging of the UN over the last 60 years."