Lynda Burstein Brayer is a South African, Israeli-trained human rights lawyer. She has worked in the West Bank. This is at Counterpunch, in a takedown of the Goldstone reconsideration, a discussion of the Palestinian right to self-determination and thus, violent resistance. Others have said the same thing, of course; Michael Neumann said so, at Counterpunch during Cast Lead. Palestinians make this point too. And in our Goldstone volume, Jerry Slater wrote that Israel had no right to launch Cast Lead when it had an alternative response to the Hamas rockets, of negotiations.
There is one outstanding question and issue which Justice Goldstone chose not to address: neither in the original commission nor in his retraction. This is the question of the right of a people to resist an aggressor and/or an oppressor, and the legitimacy of such resistance. I would argue that according to international law today, Israel has no rights to or in the Occupied territories of Palestine. According to the same international law, the occupation ought to have ceased one year after its beginning, that is by June 1968. The United Nations Security Council passed a resolution requiring Israel to withdraw from all occupied territories, Resolution 242 in November 1967.
I would contend that the continuing presence of Israel in these occupied territories, its building of settlements and the transfer of a huge Jewish population into it, and an infrastructure built from Palestinian assets to serve those settlements, its control over the use of land and water, and its continuing oppression of the indigenous population, should be classified as a colonialist venture. From the Palestinian point of view, the Israeli policies and practices are formulated and executed for the destruction of Palestinian society, private and public life, and their material assets.
In this situation of continuing oppression, dispossession, detention, killing and destruction of social frameworks, are Palestinians not permitted to resist all or any of this? If Israel is a colonizing power over and above its status as Military Occupier, precisely because of its settlement activity and control of the resources of the territory in Occupied Palestine then it would seem that the Declaration on Granting Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, 1960 General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV), December 14, 1960 applies to Palestinians today. I quote two relevant articles.
1. The subjection of peoples to alien subjugation, domination and exploitation constitutes a denial of fundamental human rights, is contrary to the Charter of the United Nations and is an impediment to the promotion of world peace and co-operation.
2. All peoples have the right to self-determination; by virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.
Above and beyond the basic right of all human beings to resist their being killed and harmed, and a society to take armed actions to protect itself, this document legitimizes also national liberation struggles, including, at this time in history, most particularly, the Palestinian people's struggle for its own freedom. It is this right which legitimizes all Palestinian attempts to lift the yoke of Israeli oppression from Palestine, including all the actions taken by the Palestinians during Operation Cast Lead.
And is not the right to resist oppression universal? Does this right not justify the American Revolut8ion and then the French Revolution and the wars of liberation in the 1950's and 1960's.
This is a proper comment, namely, that the Goldstone Report did not address Hamas’s right to resist Israeli aggression. (If I recall, it also did not address Israel’s right to attack Gaza.)
Resting Palestine’s right to “armed struggle” in the service of independence and self-determination on UNGA may be a bit thin, but perhaps the matter is not addressed by the UNSC or ICJ. I don’t know.
The US gives weapons to Abbas to be used exclusively against Palestinians in order to “maintain stability” in the region. The US could have supplied Judenrat forces in Nazi occupied Europe with the same justification.
The Zionists still don’t get that Goldstone was doing them a favor with the 4-person Report. This shows just how far-gone those who attacked Goldstone are, and now, those who think he’s finally seen the light. May as well see Thierenstadt, the Nazi show case for itself as a humanitarian enterprise, as authentic. Uncle Sam is a total dupe. I fault American gentiles more than anyone because they don’t even recognize what their ancestors fought for in WW2.
If they did, Chaney, for one, would be up on trial for crimes against humanity and war crimes.
And Wolfowitz et al would be there too.
Anyone who thinks that American colonials had a right to resist King George or that Jewish colonials had the right to resist the British in Palestine is _committed_ to the position that people have a right to resist. . . . Unless they take an essentially racist view that Israeli Jews or American Whites have rights that other ethnic groups do not, and that, of course, is _exactly_ the view of the Israeli and American governments.
So what does this tell us Mr. Weiss? Does it assert what you have proposed in regard to the use of this law, or what I have consistently asserted? That is, it is used as a bludgeon against the poor and weak. The statement that you posted from the article would just be a reiteration of the right to self-defense on the part of the Palestinians if you missed the opening argument of the article, just in case let me quote it –
“The question of the particular legal matrix of an occurrence is essential to the application of the law. Without preserving such distinctions, the law becomes either nonsense or a weapon of the rich and powerful.”
Let me emphasize – “…THE LAW BECOMES EITHER NONSENSE OR A WEAPON OF THE RICH AND POWERFUL.”
Now, that was not that hard to quote was it? Now, look at the applications of this law to date, and who is prosecuted? What are the six that are on the book now, or should I say where – Africa.
GLOBAL INSTITUTIONS AND TRUSTING THE CURRENT WORLD SYSTEM
EXCERPT -
As I have said before, to date most (in the 99th percentile) of the criminal prosecution proceeding from this body of International Law has been that of the weak and the poor hence the exploited, as well as those who would not follow the lead of the global agenda (as interpreted by the few) , that is, the dominant nations.
” I would argue that according to international law today, Israel has no rights to or in the Occupied territories of Palestine”
Well …duh!
Of course not.
And the UN aberration that created Israel was entirely based on an “Exception” for the Jews because of the holocaust.
This whole 60 year conflict has gone on because of the totally insane idea that a Jewish State has the right, because of the holocaust exception, to legally or otherwise to have control or authority over Palestine or any country they choose because of Jewish ‘needs’ or ‘security”. It’s the most bizarre thing I have ever seen. It’s like everyone involved in this was zombie brained by the Jewish “exception” to the point where they can’t get even grasp the NUMBER ONE LEGAL FACT…that Palestine does not belong to Israel and no international body has given Israel the authority to have any say over Palestine.
Is the world going to continue to allow the Zionist and Israel to be the world’s one exception to all laws? I guess we will see eventually.
My impression is that this 60 year get out of jail free card and Israeli assumption that they can criminally act however they please with complete impunity is going to come to an end by popular demand, or worst for Israel, by some group who finally takes ‘exception’ themselves to Israel’s behavior…..despite the US.
You really need to look at the role of Jews in the Palestine solidarity movement: link to counterpunch.org
Israel had no reason to launch the attack on Gaza in December 2008 as there was a six-month ceasefire in place that Hamas had abided by, but Israel did not.
Democracy Now! — January 14, 2009 — Interview with Israeli scholar, professor Avi Shlaim
Professor Shlaim adds:
If Israel is a colonizing power over and above its status as Military Occupier, precisely because of its settlement activity and control of the resources of the territory in Occupied Palestine then it would seem that the Declaration on Granting Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, 1960 General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV), December 14, 1960 applies to Palestinians today.
The General Assembly has periodically adopted resolutions which affirm that proposition and rule-out any other possibility, e.g. A/RES/46/87, 16 December 1991 link to un.org
and A/RES/41/101, 4 December 1986 link to un.org
both said:
*”Reaffirming its faith in the importance of the implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples contained in its resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960,
*Reaffirms also the inalienable right of the Palestinian people and all peoples under foreign occupation and colonial domination to self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, national unity and sovereignty without foreign interference;
169 other countries have ignored Israeli and US objections, in order to extended tacit recognition to Palestine. Most of them have recognized the “permanent sovereignty” and reversionary rights of the Palestinian people to the natural resources of the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem. That recognition flows from a General Assembly Declaration that “The right of peoples and nations to permanent sovereignty over their natural wealth and resources must be exercised in the interest of their national development and of the well-being of the people of the State concerned.” The permanent sovereignty of indigenous peoples has been codified and is subject to the laws regarding succession of States and Governments. Last November, 162 of those countries were present and voted to adopt a resolution that “Recognizes the right of the Palestinian people to claim restitution as a result of any exploitation, damage, loss or depletion, or endangerment of their natural resources resulting from illegal measures taken by Israel, the occupying Power, in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem”.
General Assembly resolution 2625 (XXV) of 24 October 1970, “The Declaration of Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation Among States in Accordance with the Charter of the United Nations” reflects customary international law. It established that:
*Every State has the duty to promote, through joint and separate action, realization of the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, in accordance with the provisions of the Charter, and to render assistance to the United Nations in carrying out the responsibilities entrusted to it by the Charter regarding the implementation of the principle, in order:
(a) To promote friendly relations and co-operation among States; and
(b) To bring a speedy end to colonialism, having due regard to the freely expressed will of the peoples concerned;
*The establishment of a sovereign and independent State, the free association or integration with an independent State or the emergence into any other political status freely determined by a people constitute modes of implementing the right of self-determination by that people.
*Every State has the duty to refrain from any forcible action which deprives peoples referred to above in the elaboration of the present principle of their right to self-determination and freedom and independence. In their actions against, and resistance to, such forcible action in pursuit of the exercise of their right to self-determination, such peoples are entitled to seek and to receive support in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter.
*The territory of a colony or other Non-Self-Governing Territory has, under the Charter, a status separate and distinct from the territory of the State administering it; and such separate and distinct status under the Charter shall exist until the people of the colony or Non-Self-Governing Territory have exercised their right of self-determination in accordance with the Charter, and particularly its purposes and principles.
The Goldstone report noted the belligerent rights regarding food, medical, and humanitarian supplies, but failed to acknowledge the inherent right of the Palestinians in Gaza under the laws of war to obtain the means to defend their own territorial integrity and protect themselves from genocide.
To be really frank, what nation has ever been brought to justice under this system regarding indigenous violations? In the UN recognition of the indigenous there were several powerful nations abstaining from the recognition of such said rights and they have never been addressed in any form of judicial format. In fact, it was the same nations which in major proposed the UN, and hence all the cognate outgrown from there –
WORLDWIDE INDIGENOUS MESSAGE
“ICT: Are you at all surprised that the United States hasn’t signed on to the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples?
Morales: Not only the United States. The first country to not only sanction, but also to enact it into law was Bolivia. But in the United States, all of the rules and treaties and agreements on human rights never get signed.”
U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples? Who did not sign it or recognize it? The colonial nations, that’s who – the major dominant nation offenders settler states (USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, United Kingdom, etc.).
“THE RULE OF LAW IS THE LAW OF RULE – THE LAW IS THE LIE” – Chief Crazy Horse
“POSSESSION, A WAR THAT DOES NOT END”
Good piece from Brayer. And Phil, you conceded it yourself some weeks ago. You wrote that (not verbatim) “when Americans would live under the same conditions as Palestinians, of course we would take up arms and fight back”.
The right to resist occupation (wether from an external power or from a non-lawful government) is sacrosanct and eternal.
I guess the new colonistas learned from the olde colonistas link to hansard.millbanksystems.com
“There has been found hitherto but one substitute for war. It has succeeded over and over again: it succeeds regularly in the long run, wherever it can be introduced. This is to take the disputed question out of the hands of the disputants, to refer it to a third party whose intelligence, impartiality and diligence have been secured, and to impose his decision upon the parties with overwhelming force.” Sir John Seeley
Interesting read from British Parliament 1937 link to hansard.millbanksystems.com
>> I would contend that the continuing presence of Israel in these occupied territories, its building of settlements and the transfer of a huge Jewish population into it, and an infrastructure built from Palestinian assets to serve those settlements, its control over the use of land and water, and its continuing oppression of the indigenous population, should be classified as a colonialist venture.
Crystal clear. To anyone but a Zio-supremacist, that is.
Yeah, the new colonialists learn from the old colonialists, and adapt accordingly, becoming more sophisticated in how they extract natural resources and oppress the natives. Hence, we have the IMF and the WB, for example. Funny, the USA is now a candidate for this process, and the Americans don’t see it, just, e.g., the appointed leaders in the Fed Reserve and Treasury, and, of course, Wall St.