P F Tinmore,
et al,
Yes, a "legal right", "self-determination," and a "country." One might ask what country?
You forgot to mention that the Palestinians have the legal right to defend their country and have the legal right to self determination in their own country.
The terrorist label is no more than political name calling against those who fight for their legal rights.
(COMMENT)
Terrorism is a tactic and tool, used in an asymmetric strategy. Like the use of WMD
(also a tactic and tool), it is forbidden by international law; under any circumstance.
A/RES/46/51 Measures to Eliminate International Terrorism said:
Reaffirming also the inalienable right to self-determination and independence of all peoples under colonial and racist regimes and other forms of alien domination and foreign occupation, and upholding the legitimacy of their struggle, in particular the struggle of national liberation movements, in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter and the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations,
SOURCE: A/RES/46/51. Measures to eliminate international terrorism
We often hear this partially quoted to justify, in some way, that the UN condones terrorism when it is used in the name of self-determination and the struggle of national liberation. What is not often mentioned is that the Charter and the Declaration of Principles. Forgotten is that resistance does not translate to terrorism or striking non-combatants.
Also forgotten is the fact that all the authors of these (often) quoted rights, the concept of self-determination, the principles cited, and the measures to prevent terrorism, are are also the same entities that recognized the sovereign independence of Israel. One, such as yourself, cannot selectively recognize the legitimacy of some concepts, principles, declarations, and resolution, and not accept others. That would suggest that the wisdom of one
(yourself or the Palestinian) supersedes the collective wisdom, standards, and customary law of the global body. That is rather arrogant of a people that were unable to govern themselves for more than three millennium, and has not made any significant contribution to humanity in more than eight centuries.
Whether we call it terrorism, or we express it in terms of political violence, criminal activity or warfare, or the threat of either, carried out for political purposes, the meaning is the same. The use of such force
(asymmetric or conventional) against the territorial integrity established and recognized by the UN, or political independence of any State (Israel), in any manner inconsistent with the purposes of the UN (the maintenance of Peace), is essentially wrong.
Calling the description
(the use of the word terrorism) as propaganda does not change the character of the actions it is used to label. Using indiscriminate rocket fire or conducting campaigns of attrition, intimidation, provocation, the tactics
(whether you call them playtime or terrorism) range from hijacking planes, blowing up buildings and vehicles, or attacking defenseless school buses - children and old people; they are what they are.
General Assembly Resolution 3314 (XXIX). Definition of Aggression said:
Article 1
Aggression is the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations, as set out in this Definition.
Article 3
Any of the following acts, regardless of a declaration of war, shall, subject to and in accordance with the provisions of article 2, qualify as an act of aggression:
(a) The invasion or attack by the armed forces of a State of the territory (Palestinians and 5 Arab Legions) of another State (Israel), or any military occupation, however temporary, resulting from such invasion or attack, or any annexation by the use of force of the territory of another State or part thereof,
(b) Bombardment by the armed forces of a State (Palestinians and 5 Arab Legions) against the territory of another State (Israel) or the use of any weapons by a State (Palestinians and 5 Arab Legions) against the territory of another State (Israel);
(c) The blockade of the ports or coasts of a State by the armed forces of another State;
(d) An attack by the armed forces of a State (Palestinians and 5 Arab Legions) on the land, sea or air forces, or marine and air fleets of another State (Israel);
(e) The use of armed forces of one State which are within the territory of another State with the agreement of the receiving State, in contravention of the conditions provided for in the agreement or any extension of their presence in such territory beyond the termination of the agreement;
(f) The action of a State (Palestinians) in allowing its territory, which it has placed at the disposal of another State (Iran, Syria & Lebanon), to be used by that other State (Iran, Syria & Lebanon) for perpetrating an act of aggression against a third State (Iran, Syria & Lebanon);
(g) The sending by or on behalf of a State of armed bands, groups, irregulars or mercenaries, which carry out acts of armed force against another State of such gravity as to amount to the acts listed above, or its substantial involvement therein.
1. No consideration of whatever nature, whether political, economic, military or otherwise, may serve as a justification for aggression.
2. A war of aggression is a crime against international peace. Aggression gives rise to international responsibility.
3. No territorial acquisition or special advantage resulting from aggression is or shall be recognized as lawful.
SOURCE: A/RES/29/3314 - Definition of Aggression - UN Documents: Gathering a body of global agreements
This doesn't include the past history of criminal and terrorist behaviors by Palestinians and the associated third parties; numerous as they are.
Israel has been a sovereign state, with territorial integrity and political independence since May 1948. And it has been subject to Hostile Arab/Palestinian (HoAP) Aggression since that time in violation to customary law and the principle that States shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered.
Remember the principle duty of the HoAP is not to use armed force or terrorism
(whatever word/phrase we chose to label it) to deprive the Jewish People of their right to self-determination, freedom and independence (originally recommended in GA Resolution 181(II), recognized as legitimate by the Palestinians), or to disrupt territorial Integrity of a UN Member state. The current Occupation of the "Occupied Territories is to quarantine and suppress the HoAP threat from the Israeli in the pursuit of their right to self-determination.
(POST COMMENT)
There is no justification for the HoAP to promote violence in lieu of peaceful alternatives before the UN and its bodies.
Most Respectfully,
R
