- Joined
- Mar 6, 2019
- Messages
- 33,637
- Reaction score
- 33,811
- Location
- PNW
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
There is common misconception often repeated on various threads, but most prevalent on middle East (Israel/Palestine) and Ukraine threads. It is failure to recognize, or to excuse, "occupations" that are ongoing. The Red Cross explains this concept most succinctly:
"Under international humanitarian law (IHL), there is occupation when a state exercises an unconsented-to effective control over a territory to which it has no sovereign title. Article 42 of The Hague Regulations of 1907 defines occupation as follows: "Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised."
Occupation law – as a branch of IHL – regulates the partial or total occupation of a territory by a hostile army. Provisions regulating occupation can be found in The Hague Regulations of 1907, the Fourth Geneva Convention and Protocol I additional to the Geneva Conventions.
Under occupation law, the occupying power does not acquire sovereignty over the occupied territory and is required to respect the existing laws and institutions of the occupied territory as far as possible. It is presumed that occupation will be temporary and that the occupying power shall preserve the status quo ante in the occupied territory."
Both Israel and Russia have been in decades-long violation of the principles - principles to which both have agreed through ratification of governing treaties. Instead, both have advanced facially fraudulent claims of "annexation" and sovereignty.
I think it is important as a matter of morality and respect for the international order, that this reality be acknowledged. Failure to do so is the basis for ongoing conflict throughout the world. That failure allows the aggressive behavior of expansionist autocrats - including China. The historical parallels to the previous century are unmistakable.
"Under international humanitarian law (IHL), there is occupation when a state exercises an unconsented-to effective control over a territory to which it has no sovereign title. Article 42 of The Hague Regulations of 1907 defines occupation as follows: "Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised."
Occupation law – as a branch of IHL – regulates the partial or total occupation of a territory by a hostile army. Provisions regulating occupation can be found in The Hague Regulations of 1907, the Fourth Geneva Convention and Protocol I additional to the Geneva Conventions.
Under occupation law, the occupying power does not acquire sovereignty over the occupied territory and is required to respect the existing laws and institutions of the occupied territory as far as possible. It is presumed that occupation will be temporary and that the occupying power shall preserve the status quo ante in the occupied territory."
Both Israel and Russia have been in decades-long violation of the principles - principles to which both have agreed through ratification of governing treaties. Instead, both have advanced facially fraudulent claims of "annexation" and sovereignty.
I think it is important as a matter of morality and respect for the international order, that this reality be acknowledged. Failure to do so is the basis for ongoing conflict throughout the world. That failure allows the aggressive behavior of expansionist autocrats - including China. The historical parallels to the previous century are unmistakable.