By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The Global Sumud Flotilla (GSF), carrying aid and activists including Greta Thunberg, reported that one of its vessels was struck by a drone off the coast of Tunisia. Footage posted online showed the vessel being hit and a fire breaking out on the main deck. Tunisian authorities initially denied a drone was involved, suggesting the explosion originated inside the vessel, but the incident is under investigation. The flotilla aims to break Israel’s siege on Gaza, and this is not the first time aid ships en route to Gaza have faced such incidents.
Read the original article here
Tunisia denies claims Greta Thunberg’s Gaza flotilla was hit by drone. Let’s delve into the controversy surrounding the recent events involving Greta Thunberg’s Gaza flotilla and the claims of a drone strike, as denied by Tunisian authorities. It seems we’re dealing with a situation that is, to put it mildly, complicated.
Initially, the narrative that emerged was that one of the ships in the flotilla was targeted by a drone, resulting in a fire. However, the Tunisian government has refuted these claims, stating there were no drones in the area. This denial throws a wrench into the initial assumptions, forcing us to re-evaluate the evidence. And what evidence are we talking about? Well, there’s video footage that captures a falling, glowing object impacting the ship, quickly followed by the emergence of fire and smoke. The key detail here is the falling motion, which isn’t consistent with how a rocket would travel.
The observed behavior of the falling object suggests something falling, as a flare does. Considering the denial of a drone presence by Tunisian authorities, the flare theory seems increasingly likely. The fire appears to have originated near some life jackets, making a flare, or even a carelessly discarded cigarette, a more plausible explanation than a deliberate drone attack.
However, as with most things involving conflict, it’s tempting to jump to conclusions, especially when we have emotionally charged issues. The initial reaction to “something from above caused fire” was naturally to attribute it to a drone. But, as many have pointed out, that’s a pretty hasty conclusion, especially when we have the more likely explanation.
One has to also consider the past behavior of the flotilla organizers. It seems they’ve been down this road before. Reports indicate a similar situation occurred during a previous voyage, where they claimed an Israeli drone breached Maltese airspace. Those claims were also debunked by Maltese authorities. This pattern raises questions about the veracity of such claims. It’s also important to note that this recent event echoes the tactics used by the flotilla in the past.
The distress call from the ship, picked up by an oil tanker, further complicates the picture. The captain is heard reporting drone strikes and a fire onboard, seemingly confirming the initial narrative. But, as more information comes to light, it’s becoming clear that we should be taking that information with a grain of salt.
What is really going on? Given the proximity to other boats in the flotilla, and maybe other boats not associated with the flotilla, unless convincingly proven otherwise, a flare accidently hit one of the boats, causing a fire. Israel’s involvement seems unlikely, and there’s no real reason for them to strike this flotilla. Besides the fact that the boats were far from Israel, they have been clear with Thunberg to turn back if she attempts to run the blockade.
It’s worth considering the possibility of a manufactured incident. The focus on publicity and the potential for international support could, unfortunately, be motivating factors. This isn’t about helping Palestine, it’s about using the suffering of Palestinians as a PR campaign. With a goal of raising international outcry to damage Israel, the drama is the point.
There’s an alternative explanation, as some have suggested, of an accidental cause like a cigarette, which would support the flare theory. That would certainly be a much easier explanation than a sophisticated drone strike. But, we can’t forget the video evidence and the simple fact that flares fall, while drones, well, they just don’t look like that.
This leads to another point that’s also worth emphasizing: a real drone strike probably would have sunk the boat and killed everyone onboard. The fact that it didn’t, while the video evidence isn’t really indicative of a drone strike, is more evidence that this isn’t about to become some international incident.
Israel likely wouldn’t bother striking the boat as there is no benefit. They can, and likely will, simply detain Thunberg and her crew again if they sail near the blockaded Gaza strip. So the entire narrative seems more theatrical than real.
The question of who, or what, launched the flare remains. Was it accidental? Deliberate? Or something else? Until more concrete evidence emerges, all options remain on the table. It also seems that they are a very long way away. Israel would not need to send anything to reach them. They could simply use a drone.
One must also consider, if an actor were behind the event, that their goal is to garner international sympathy. They are unlikely to care about the truth. The whole thing, as one person says, is a “publicity stunt”, and likely a complete “false flag”. And, if that is the case, it is unlikely that they care what the actual truth is.
It’s a reminder that in the complex world of international politics, truth can be elusive, and the narratives we encounter may not always reflect the reality. Until more information becomes available, we must approach this situation with a critical eye, considering all available evidence and keeping an open mind.