If we Europeans consider peace, democratisation in the Middle-East, the eradication of extreme poverty and the development of the living conditions in Gaza as our ultimate goal, the appropriate means to facilitate this noble cause is not the flotilla, as VP/HR Ashton pointed out earlier. We cannot refer to something that is not necessarily what it seems as humanitarian action. The issue is a very current one, as three Members of the European Parliament representing the political left are planning to enter the ships participating in the flotilla.

In my opinion, it is the right and duty of the EU’s External Action Service to seek clarification in order to create a clear situation and provide the Parliament with unbiased and objective information for evaluation.

Publicly available data support the suspicion of an umbrella organisation with direct links to terrorism acting under the pretext of humanitarian action. Judge Bruguière, the respected and recognised counter‑terrorism expert, proved that the organiser of the flotilla, the Humanitarian Relief Foundation (IHH), had maintained contact with Al‑Qaeda, recruited militants to fight in Afghanistan, Chechnya and Bosnia and played an active role in the bomb plot against the Los Angeles International Airport. The IHH umbrella organisation, Union of Good, supports the activity of extremist radicals through selling weapons to them. The president of Humanitarian Relief Foundation, the key organiser of the flotilla, stated in April 2011: ‘Our problem is Zionism which has infected all humanity like a virus.’ This is obviously not a humanitarian work credo or stance.

How does the European External Action Service intend to promote an objective approach and evaluation with the tools available in a situation where the Parliament is also involved?