Connery,
et al,
I am not sure I understand the concept of "Palestinian Legitimacy." Yet, I see the growth of sympathy for the Palestinians nearly everywhere I look.
Palestine stated they wanted to go to the ICC..."Authority (PA) decided on Monday to take the Israeli occupation to the International Criminal Court (ICC) for crimes against Palestinians in general, and against deceased Palestinian prisoner, Arafat Jaradat, in particular."
.... .... ....
..... ..... .....
Palestine supports terrorist organizations and their acts while claiming to have legitimate claims against Israel to be forwarded to the ICC for adjudication for those complained of acts. There is no justification for this attack by this terrorist organization and no valid reason why Palestine should not prosecute this organization's members.
.... .... ....
..... ..... .....
(PREFACE)
- Palestine supports terrorist organizations and their acts.
- Palestine should (x) prosecute.
The Palestinians are winning the legitimacy war: will it matter? - By Richard Falk said:
For decades, Palestinian political forces have exercised
their right of resistance in various ways, including the extraordinary non-violent Intifada of 1987, but also engaging in armed resistance in defence of their territory. The Palestinians definitely enjoy a right of resistance, although subject to the limits of international humanitarian law, which rules out deliberate targeting of civilians and non-military targets. Such tactics of resistance challenge Israel at its point of maximum comparative advantage due both to its total military dominance, achieved in part by large subsidies from the United States, and to its ruthless disregard for civilian innocence. -
SOURCE: The Palestinians are winning the legitimacy war: will it matter? > Palestine > Redress Information & Analysis
Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States said:
Considering that the progressive development and codification of the following principles:
(a) The principle that States shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations,
(b) 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,
(c) The duty not to intervene in matters within the domestic jurisdiction of any State, in accordance with the Charter,
(d) The duty of States to co-operate with one another in accordance with the Charter,
(e) The principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples,
(f) The principle of sovereign equality of States,
(g) The principle that States shall fulfil in good faith the obligations assumed by them in accordance with the Charter,
SOURCE: DECLARATION ON PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW FRIENDLY RELATIONS AND CO
(COMMENT)
There is a disconnect between what the "Indigenous Resistance Movement" means, and it application through "Asymmetric Violence"
(or terrorism). Is there a "right to resistance," and if so, what are its boundaries?
On the one hand, the UN
(General Assembly Members), and all its tentacles, recognize the right of Israel to exist. There may be arguments as to the boundaries, but in general - as a nation, the State of Israel has the right to exist.
On the other hand, the UN has generally allowed
[ONE] the regional Arab Governments, on multiple occasions, to set the conditions for war
(1948, 1967, 1973) without penalty: tacit approval. It also permits
[TWO] the conditions to exist which allows the Indigenous Palestinians under several different banners
(Hamas, Hezbollah, Palestine Islamic Jihad, Popular Resistance Committees, etc) to operate without impunity; again a form of tacit approval.
[THREE] And lastly, the UN openly allows the armed wing of the Islamic Jihad (Al-Quds Brigades) to receive direct support from Iranian and Syrian, proving their improved capabilities in the face of Israel’s Defense Initiatives. The UN General Assembly is, in effect, promoting hostilities to flourish in targeting Israel.
- Now there were some that say, this is a misinterpretation of the facts. Yet, in an attempt to hold ground at defensible boundaries from assault from countries that the UN has allowed to attack it on multiple occasions, the UN has insisted that Israel should drop its defenses; and withdraw to positional borders favorable to Arab Army attack.
- Some say, this is a misinterpretation of the facts. Yet, in an attempt to manage an insurgency by the indigenous populations of the Occupied Territories, the UN has insisted that Israel should drop its defenses and dismantle border barriers and walls. With the UN favoring Palestinian terrorist groups with opening accesses to infiltration.
- Some say, this is a misinterpretation of the facts. But the UN General Assembly, even in the face of the principle that disputes should be handled in a peaceful means and knowing that Iran and Syria have been supplying various terrorist in the Occupied Territories with weapons, insisted that Israel should drop its defenses and allow unrestricted trafficking of weapons into the volatile region.
Legitimacy sometimes transcends what is right and what is wrong. In this case, the Palestinians have acquired some strong indicators of Legitimacy from the membership in the General Assembly. It would appear that the UN General Assembly and the ICC/ICJ has, begun the process in setting the stage for yet another major conflict between Israel and the coalition of Palestinian Insurgent Groups, the Arab Regional States, and the Persians (Iran). The intent is not yet clear, but the indicators are all there.
(CONCLUSION)
It is most evident that the UN General Assembly, by not stating unequivocally, that the continuous terrorist actions
(that have been noted numerous times) are unacceptable, lend tacit approval to the campaign of continued asymmetric activity. "Legitimacy" - specifically to the Palestinian terrorist, and generally to the tactics of terrorism.
"The essence of this legitimacy war is to cast doubt on several dimensions of Israeli legitimacy: its status as a moral and law abiding actor, as an occupying power in relation to the Palestinian people, and with respect to its willingness to respect the United Nations and abide by international law." - See more at:
http://www.redress.cc/palestine/rfalk20100405#sthash.rwJHY2z7.dpuf
Most Respectfully,
R
