It is not widely known that there are currently 40 or more ongoing conflict and occupation situations in the
world.
- Iraq
- Afghanistan
- Western Sahara
- East Timor
- East Congo
- Nagorno-Karabakh
- Northern Cyprus
- Crimea
- and others
Why is the international community not bothered by these occupation situations?
Why are these situations, curiously, rarely seen by the international community as "occupations"?
Why are resolutions or agenda items so rarely found in the highly politicized and partisan UN human rights Council?
- These examples clearly fall within the factual definitions of occupations as set out by the international law of armed conflict, specifically the 1907 Hague regulations in the 1949 fourth Geneva convention
- These examples involve extensive movements of people from the occupiers' territory into the occupied territory for purposes of settlement
Why is it the case that Israel is singled out for special international scrutiny and criticism?
This is a double standard.
The 1974 Turkish occupation of northern Cyprus has been accompanied by extensive settlement activity by over 200,000 settlers on land owned by former Greek Cypriot residents.
They are in fact the majority of the population of Northern Cyprus.
The international community has never recognized turkeys claims vis-a-vis Northern Cyprus.
Apart from one major Gen. assembly resolution from 1983 calling for an end to the"occupation," the international community remains silent regarding both the occupation and related settlement activities in northern Cyprus, and further resolutions have been few and far between.
The 1975 Moroccan occupation and annexation of Western Sahara has not been recognized by the international community.
Several Gen. assembly resolutions have deplored the continued occupation of the territory by Morocco.
Morocco has settled hundreds of thousands of settlers in the area, doubling the local population, but no international resolution has made reference to this settlement policy.
During a 2016 visit to Sahrawi refugee camps in southern Algeria, Former UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon described Morocco's presence in Western Sahara as an "occupation," which resulted in the expulsion by Morocco of the civilian component of the United Nations mission for the referendum in Western Sahara (MINURSO). Only after the UN Secretary-General expressed regret over a "misunderstanding" in his use of the word "occupation" to describe Morocco's annexation of Western Sahara, was the situation remedied.
The Indonesian 1975 occupation and annexation of East Timor was condemned by UN Gen. assembly resolution 3485 of 1975 and security council resolution 384 (1975), which strongly deplored the military intervention of the Armed Forces of Indonesia in Portuguese Timor and called upon the government of Indonesia to desist from further violation of the territorial integrity and to withdraw its Armed Forces from the territory.
These resolutions, however, made no mention of "occupation," nor was there any international reference to the transfer of over 100,000 Indonesian settlers (20% of the population) into the territory.
The 1978 Vietnamese occupation of Cambodia lasted for 10 years, during which hundreds of thousands of people were transferred into the territory.
While the Gen. assembly, in resolutions adopted between 1979 and 1989, deplored "foreign armed intervention and occupation," no mention was made regarding the transfer of settlers.
The 2004 Syrian occupation of Lebanese territory was dealt with in the Security Council resolution 1559 (2004) calling for "all remaining foreign forces to withdraw from Lebanon."
This resolution and others dealing with the Syrian presence in Lebanon made no mention of occupation or of the settlement of thousands of Syrians in the territory.
The 2002 seizure by Russia of Abkhazia and South Ossetia from Georgia and the subsequent organized migration of settlers into Abkhazia amounting to some 4% of its population has not given rise to any significant international resolutions regarding the Russian actions
The 2014 Russian seizure, occupation, and annexation of Crimea from Ukraine was condemned by Gen. assembly resolution 68/262 (2014) but without any mention neither of occupation nor the extensive settlement of over 100,000 Russians in the area
There has been NO legally binding agreements, resolutions, or declarations determining that the territories are indeed Palestinian.
A sovereign Palestinian territory has NEVER existed.
The territories have NEVER belonged to any Palestinian entity.
Therefore, the terminology declaring that the territories are both "occupied" and "Palestinian" lacks ANY legal authority.
The proper legal term for these territories is "disputed," until a final agreement is reached.
