There are three potential options relative to Gaza's status: 1. It is temporarily occupied by Israel - This is the reasoning of dissent and of the UN. The consequences though are that Israel is RESPONSIBLE (beyond the right) to manage the international ports and trade routes. 2. That Gaza is part of a state in evolution - That would imply that a joint PA/Israel administration of the ports and transfers is appropriate. 3. That Gaza is an independant state responsible to manage its own borders. The significance of either 1, 2, or 3 being the fact, is that whomever is managing the ports, is responsible to abide by international law regarding rules of the sea, which Hamas is not currently. The consequences of Gaza being an independant state, are that if it aggresses on Israel by shelling or abduction, that it throws the whole population into a state of overt war. The current status relative to Hamas is an ennabling status. Wonderful for grassroots, "see, we are responsible to our community", but not wonderful relative to international community (its immediate neighbors for example). Now that Hamas is in a moratorium on participation in the PA, the flotilla is no longer a provocative advocacy for the Palestinian people, but a provocative advocacy for Hamas, partisan. The September Palestinian assertion will result in a state of conflict, close to and likely devolving to a state of war, if not achieved by negotiation. The combination of the flotilla with the Hamas delay on consent to PA administration, then delays the time that the PA is even possible to negotiate. It is a game being played. And, again, it is being played to feed the militant approaches (likud/israel beitanhu and hamas). .
Singapore arrests man who tried to join ISIS (Reuters)
from the article: This time, Israel can pass the test of the Gaza flotilla