Read the whole thing.
- The right to self-defense, including the right to combat terror, is a cornerstone of international law, enshrined in the UN Charter (Article 51) and numerous Security Council Resolutions.
- In order to delegitimize Israel’s self-defensive measures, many NGOs have issued statements distorting international law or even inventing legal bases under which Israel’s rights are denied.
- Al Haq and PCHR falsely claim that Israel cannot invoke self-defense in response to attacks from non-state actors in occupied territory. In making this legally incoherent argument, these NGOs misinterpret key passages in international law.
- A second approach, taken by Human Rights Watch and B’Tselem, alleges without any evidentiary basis that Israel’s exercise of self-defense is merely a pretext for punishing the Palestinians. There is no legal doctrine that establishes that an otherwise legal military action in self-defense becomes illegal simply because one of its alleged motives is to “punish” the aggressor.
- Other groups, including Oxfam and FIDH, pay lip service to Israeli self-defense, but reject every Israeli action as a “violation of international law.”
- The NGOs make no realistic suggestions of what would be considered lawful and effective measures, effectively nullifying the right to self-defense.
- Palestinian NGO, the Palestinian Center for Human Rights, receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars from European governments (EU, Denmark, Norway, Ireland, Netherlands), labels direct attacks on Israeli civilians as acts of “resistance.”
Pages
▼
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
How NGOs misinterpret international law
NGO Monitor just published an excellent essay comparing how different NGOs try to read international law to claim that Israel does not have the right to defend itself. In summary: