The Right to Self-Defense in International Law "The Claims of the Israeli Occupation as a Case Study رسالة ماجستير

Abstract

This study aims, at the outset, to analyze the legal framework for the right to self defense as organized by the United Nations Charter, and to clarify its limits and regulations in light of the interaction between public international law and international humanitarian law. The study starts from the hypothesis that the right to self-defense, despite being recognized as an exception to the principle of prohibiting the use of force in international relations, is subject to a narrow legal interpretation and strict conditions. An occupying state cannot invoke this right against a population under its control, as this constitutes an abuse of Article 51 of the United Nations Charter to justify aggressive actions and serious violations of international law. This study is based on taking a sample to apply the theoretical framework and the legal texts that interpret and analyze the right to self-defense, with the Gaza Strip serving as a live case study to examine the legality of Israel's claims under Article 51 of the United Nations Charter to justify its actions and policies, considering the specific legal status of the region as land under occupation and the continued Israeli control over fundamental aspects of sovereignty therein. The legal analysis has shown that attempting to subject the Palestinian situation in general, and the Gaza situation in particular, to the concept of legitimate defense contradicts the objective conditions established by international law, the most important of which is the condition of an armed attack originating from a state, as well as the conditions of necessity and proportionality, in addition to the impossibility of invoking this right in the context of ongoing occupation. The study addressed Israeli military practices in the Gaza Strip according to the rules of international humanitarian law, especially the principles of distinction, proportionality, and military necessity. The study concluded that the pattern of behavior adopted reveals serious violations that may amount to war crimes and crimes against humanity, raising suspicions in some aspects of committing genocide according to the standards established in international criminal law. The study emphasizes, in its final results, that the use of the concept of self-defense outside its legitimate legal framework undermines the international collective security system established by the United Nations. The study also concluded the necessity of restoring strict legal interpretation of Article 51 and activating mechanisms for international judicial accountability, ensuring that states that violate the law do not escape ``v punishment, thereby contributing to the protection of the rights of peoples under occupation, foremost among them the Palestinian people.