The Zionist Entity calls for the resignation of the Secretary General of the United Nations

The Zionist Entity calls for the resignation of the Secretary General of the United Nations

The following are some of the foundations of contemporary International Law recognized – not constituted – by the United Nations, which do fully support the recent statements of the UN Secretary-General, António Guterres (calling for an immediate ceasefire in the Gaza Strip and on the question of hostages), and which make absolutely inappropriate and obscene the request for resignation that the Zionist Entity that calls itself “Israel” has made against him today.

5 – ‘Terrorism’: a concept in evolution

Iñaki Aginaga and Felipe Campo

[...]

“It can be said, therefore and in other words, that the right of self-determination of peoples would be rendered meaningless if it were not incorporated, as a corollary, with the right to exercise their liberation by all means, including armed struggle. These observations, of course, are still far from being fully accepted by the international Law governing relations between States; although slowly, due to the force and stubbornness of the facts, cracks are opening up in such a solid monolithism that only appreciates one side of reality. In this sense there go the most progressive texts of the United Nations that, while preserving formal appearances, allow for an innovative reading.” (Roberto Mesa; 'Historical and Legal Foundations of the Right to Self-Determination of the Palestinian People', 1981.)

However, the freedom of Peoples and their rights of self-determination and of legitimate defence were explicitly, emphatically, insistently and repeatedly affirmed and reaffirmed in the very texts especially referred to terrorism. “The legitimacy of the struggle of peoples subjected to foreign and colonial domination in order to attain self-determination and independence” is the basis of such texts. In the “Declaration on the Strengthening of International Security:

The General Assembly, [...] 18. Calls upon all States to desist from any forcible or other action which deprives peoples, in particular those still under colonial or any other form of external domination, or their inalienable right to self-determination, freedom and independence and to refrain from military and repressive measures aimed at preventing the attainment of independence by all dependent peoples in accordance with the Charter and in furtherance of the objectives of General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960, and render assistance to the UN and, in accordance with the Charter, to the oppressed peoples in their legitimate struggle in order to bring about the speedy elimination of colonialism or any other form of external domination;” etc. [UNGAR 2734 (1970)]

All that is reinforced in the UN General Assembly Resolutions adopted on the “Implementation of the Declaration on the Strengthening of International Security”: 2880 (1971) and 2993 (1972).

In the “Measures to prevent international terrorism which endangers or takes innocent human lives or jeopardizes fundamental freedoms, and study of the underlying causes of those forms of terrorism and acts of violence which lie in misery, frustration, grievance and despair, and which cause some people to sacrifice human lives, including their own, in an attempt to effect radical changes”, the General Assembly attached at first the name and concept of international terrorism to the attempts/attacks: occurred in the Munich Olympic Games, which had been the object of the Resolution. But it soon feels obliged to change of idea and semantics when it next says:

“The General Assembly, [...], 2. Urges the States to devote their immediate attention to finding just and peaceful solutions to the underlying causes which give rise to such acts of violence; 3. Reaffirms the inalienable right to self-determination and independence of all peoples under colonial and racist régimes and other forms of alien domination, and upholds 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 relevant resolutions of the organs of the United Nations; 4. Condemns the continuation of repressive and terrorist acts by colonial, racist and alien régimes in denying peoples their legitimate right to self-determination and independence and other human rights and fundamental freedoms; [...] 9. Decides to establish an Ad Hoc Committee on International Terrorism consisting of thirty-five members to be appointed by the President of the General Assembly bearing in mind the principle of equitable geographical representation;” etc. [UNGAR 3034 (1972)]

These Measures are further developed and reaffirmed, inter alia, in the General Assembly Resolution 42/159 (1987). All of which shows the ideological struggle that was being fought in the United Nations’ Organization (UNO) between the international imperialism and the oppressed Peoples, insofar as these could manifest themselves through the States of the so-called Third World.

In the same way, in the “Annex of the International Convention against the Taking of Hostages”, the Article 12 excludes its application precisely in the cases of “[...] armed conflicts [...] in which Peoples are fighting against colonial domination and alien occupation and against racist régimes in the exercise of their right of self– determination”:

“The States Parties to this Convention, […] Reaffirming the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples as enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations and the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, as well as in other relevant resolutions of the General Assembly, [...] Being convinced that it is urgently necessary to develop international co-operation between States in devising and adopting effective measures for the prevention, prosecution and punishment of all acts of taking of hostages as manifestations of international terrorism, Have agreed as follows: [...] Article 12. In so far as the Geneva Conventions of 1949 for the protection of war victims or the Protocols Additional to those Conventions are applicable to a particular act of hostage-taking, and in so far as States Parties to this Convention are bound under those conventions to prosecute or hand over the hostage-taker, the present Convention shall not apply to an act of hostage-taking committed in the course of armed conflicts as defined in the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the Protocols thereto, including armed conflicts mentioned in article 1, paragraph 4, of Additional Protocol I of 1977, in which peoples are fighting against colonial domination and alien occupation and against racist régimes in the exercise of their right of self– determination, as enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations and the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.” Etc. [UNGAR 34/146 (1979)]

The additional Protocol itself made it clear:

“4. The situations referred to in the preceding paragraph [about “protection of war victims”] include armed conflicts in which peoples are fighting against colonial domination and alien occupation and against racist regimes in the exercise of their right of self-determination, as enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations and the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.” (Art. 1. General principles and scope of application, of the Protocol I Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts; 8 June 1977.)

Moreover:

“The General Assembly, [...] Reaffirming the importance of the universal realization of the right of peoples to self-determination, national sovereignty and territorial integrity and of the speedy granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples as imperatives for the full enjoyment of all human rights, [...] 2. Reaffirms the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples for independence, territorial integrity, national unity and liberation from colonial and foreign domination and foreign occupation by all available means, particularly armed struggle” [UNGAR 33/24 (1978)]; ...“including armed struggle”. [UNGAR 35/35 (1980)]

Etc.