SELECTED TERRORISTIC CLAIMS ARISING FROM THE ARAB-ISRAELI CONTEXT

• NCJ Number: 47402
• Journal: Akron Law Review Volume: 7 Issue: 3, Dated: (SPRING 1974) Pages: 404-421
• Author(s): J J PAUST
• Date Published: 1974
• Length: 18 pages
• Corporate Author: University of Akron
• Publication Format: Article
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: FROM SYMPOSIUM ON TERRORISM IN THE MIDDLE EAST SPONSORED BY THE AKRON INTERNATIONAL LAW SOCIETY, HELD IN AKRON, OHIO (FALL, 1974)

Annotation

VARIOUS JUSTIFICATIONS FOR TERROR AND ANTITERROR ACTIVITIES ARE EXAMINED IN RELATION TO INTERNATIONAL SANCTIONS.

Abstract

THIS PRESENTATION FOCUSES UPON THE CONTENT OF RELEVANT INTERNATIONAL LAW AND THE EFFORTS BY SOME OF THE PARTICIPANTS IN THE MIDDLE EAST STRUGGLE TO JUSTIFY CONDUCT OR TO SEEK APPROVAL OF CONDUCT THROUGH CHANGES IN THE LAW. MORE SPECIFICALLY, THE FOCUS IS ON INTERNATIONAL LEGAL NORMS, GENERAL COMMUNITY POLICIES WHICH ARE AT STAKE, GENERALLY SHARED EXPECTATIONS OF THE COMMUNITY WHICH PROVIDE CONTENT TO LEGAL NORMS, AND CERTAIN BASIC TYPES OF RECURRING CLAIMS BY THE PARTICIPANTS IN THE STRUGGLE WHICH WILL AFFECT THOSE POLICIES AND EXPECTATIONS OR WHICH SEEK TO CHANGE THEM. A DEFINITIONAL FRAMEWORK OF WHAT IS MEANT BY TERRORISM OR A TERRORISTIC STRATEGY IS PRESENTED, AND BASED ON THIS FRAMEWORK, CERTAIN PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW APPLICABLE TO TERRORISM ARE EXAMINED. EXAMPLES OF THE GENERAL CATEGORIES OF APPLICABLE LAW INCLUDE: THE UNITED NATIONS CHARTER ARTICLES ON HUMAN RIGHTS, SELF-DETERMINATION, AND THE USE OF FORCE; CUSTOMARY NORMS ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND THE USE OF FORCE; BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS EXPECTATIONS; THE LAW OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN TIMES OF ARMED CONFLICT, INCLUDING THE CUSTOMARY LAW OF WAR AND THE 1949 GENEVA CONVENTION; AND BASIC EXPECTATIONS CONCERNING SELF-DETERMINATION. THESE LAWS, NORMS, AND EXPECTATIONS ARE EXAMINED WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THREE BROAD AND INTERRELATED CLAIMS MADE BY MIDDLE EAST PARTICIPANTS: (1) ATTEMPTS TO EXCLUDE CONTEXTS FROM LEGAL REGULATION, WHICH INCLUDES THE USE OF TERROR AGAINST AGGRESSORS OR OPPRESSORS AND DURING JUST WARS, SELF-DETERMINATION STRUGGLES, AND GUERRILLA WARFARE; (2) CLAIMS RELATING TO TARGETS, WHICH INCLUDE COMBATANTS, NONCOMBATANTS, PROPERTY, AND MILITARY TARGETS; AND (3) CLAIMS RELATING TO CONTEXTUAL NECESSITY, INCLUDING PROPAGANDA STRATEGIES, REPRISALS AND COUNTERTERROR, AND EXPORTATION OF TERROR. IT IS CONCLUDED THAT THE DECISION OF PERMISSIBILITY OR IMPERMISSIBILITY IS MERELY A CHOICE; TO BE RATIONAL AND REALISTIC, IT SHOULD REFLECT A DECISIONAL EFFORT TO LOCATE EACH CLAIM IN THE CONTEXT OF ACTUAL PARTICIPANTS, PERSPECTIVES, BASE VALES AND RESOURCES AVAILABLE, SITUATIONS OF INTERACTION, STRATEGIES UTILIZED, ACTUAL OUTCOMES, THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY, AND THE REALIZATION OF SHARED POLICIES THAT ARE TO BE SERVED. (KBL)