There cannot be a moral equivalence between the illegally occupied (Palestine) and its illegal occupiers (Israel). It is moral degeneracy to do so. (Photo credit: AJ)

As things unfolded on the 7th of October 2023 there was a rush by Israel to frame the narrative to its favour.

It labelled the event as a terrorist attack – a pogrom – but I have been intrigued on why the EU and other nations such as Norway and Ireland have refused to label the event a terrorist attack or a pogrom.

Calling it a “pogrom against Jews” is the most absurd because it implies the Palestinians attacked just because the Israelis are Jews, and not because they are illegally occupying Palestinians and Palestine. The Palestinians have even fought each other in the past for territorial control – so we can safely put that “pogrom” hokum to one side very quickly.

The “terrorist attack” is almost as equally as hideous, if one appreciates international law and the actual facts, as they objectively are.

International law recognises the right of peoples to fight back against foreign occupation, particularly in the case of self-determination as is the case with the Palestinians. This is enshrined in the UN Charter and other key documents such as the International Covenant on Civil and political Rights (ICCPR).

Though the right to fight back is not explicitly detailed in an article of the UN charter, the principle is implied through various resolutions and international legal instruments that address the right to self-determination, and the legitimacy of resistance against foreign occupation.

UN General Assembly resolution 1514

This resolution affirms the right of all peoples to self-determination and independence. It emphasises that subjugation of peoples to alien subjugation, domination and exploitation constitutes a denial of fundamental human rights.

UN General Assembly Resolution 3070

This resolution reaffirms the right of all peoples to self-determination and acknowledges that colonial peoples and territories have the right to struggle for this right and seek independence, including by armed struggle.

UN General Assembly Resolution 3314

This resolution includes the right of the peoples under colonial and alien domination or foreign occupation, to struggle, including armed struggle, to achieve self-determination and independence, consistent with the principles of the Charter of the United Nations and international law.

Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Convention

Article 1(4) of this Protocol extends the protections of international humanitarian law to conflicts in which peoples are fighting against colonial domination, alien occupation, and racist regimes in the exercise of their right to self-determination.

All the above legal points apply to Palestine and the Palestinians.

At a very basic moral level – if someone occupies your house, no one will deny you the right to resist and fight back.

To label Palestinians who resist and fight back as terrorists, has no legal or moral basis.

And so, if the Palestinians came together and made a foray into the territory of their illegal occupiers, as they did on October 7th 2023, that event per se cannot be labelled a “terrorist attack” – it has no legal or moral basis.

Under international law, they have a legal right to take actions inside the invented borders of Israel.

It can only be designated a ‘terrorist attack’ based on a political designation – i.e. a label given based on political alliances and preferences in favour of Israel.

The right for illegally occupied peoples to fight back does have conditions – they have to comply with International Humanitarian Law.

Which includes endeavouring to protect civilians. Indiscriminate attacks on civilians are not permitted and military personnel must be the targets.

And so, we can look at individual scenarios where International Humanitarian Law was not upheld and make judgement calls on a case-by-case basis

Based on Israel’s own figures – the number of military personnel to civilians dead on the 7th of October was 2-1. For every Israeli military personnel the Palestinians took out, two Israeli civilians died. And two children were murdered.

No number of civilian deaths is justified, least of all babies and children. But if we compare that with Israel’s data as it carries out the genocide in Gaza, the 7/10 numbers pale into relative insignificance.

Based on widely accepted figures on both sides and the UN – Israel killed at least 40,000 Palestinians – some of whom are combatants, but the majority are babies and children. An estimated 20,000 babies and children have been murdered – which leaves 20,000, and Israel has said its ratio is also like that of the Palestinians on 7th of October; 2-1.

Which means, from the remaining 20,000, around 6,700 are combatants and 13,400 are civilians. Add to that the 20,000 babies and children, and you have a ratio of 5-1.

For every Palestinian combatant Israel has taken out, it has killed 5 civilians. This is the highest kill ratio in post-war history – it is the only time in post-war history that an invented nation that occupies another’s land has murdered the people it occupies in such a scale.

In the the Iraq war the ratio was 4-1.

Israel and its allies continue to lie to the world by proclaiming “Israel has a right to defend itself” – based on what do they say this?

Not based on international law or morals; if someone occupied your house would you say they had a right to defend occupying your house?

There is no legal basis for this either under international law or any national law in the world. Special Rapporteur and Human Rights Lawyer, Francesca Albanese, has regularly pointed out this fact.

Under international law, an illegal occupier state does not have a right to defend its occupation. The principles of international law and, particularly those enshrined in the United Nations Charter and numerous international treaties, do not support the defence of illegal occupations.

Israel is an illegal occupier state, which has been confirmed by UN Security Council Resolution 2334, which is legally binding, though not legally enforceable (at least for now).

Articles 51 of the UN Charter allows states to defend themselves against armed attacks. However, this right of self-defence does not extend to defending actions or occupations that are themselves illegal under international law.

An illegal occupier state like Israel, cannot justify military actions taken to maintain or reinforce its control over occupied territory as acts of self-defence. Any actions an occupier state takes under the guise of “self-defence” are considered a continuation of illegal activity, rather than lawful acts of self-defence.

Israel has been allowed to continue its state sponsored terror and aggression under the completely fictitious banner of “self-defence”.