The Six-Day War and the Right of Self-Defence

1971 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 65-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amos Shapira
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Gaza Strip ◽  
Arab Countries ◽  
Mining Operations ◽  
History Of ◽  
Entire History ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Gaza Strip ◽  
The Right ◽  
United Nations Charter

A.Brief Factual Background: It is not proposed here to unfold the entire history of the Arab-Israel conflict. Our purpose is rather to outline briefly the major, and by and large undisputed, events preceding the outburst of all-out hostilities on the morning of June 5, 1967.In the aftermath of the first Arab-Israel war, in 1949, Israel and the surrounding Arab countries signed armistice agreements, according to which all hostile military activities between the signing parties were to cease. However, throughout the years following the signing of the agreements, innumerable border incidents, military or semi-military raids and reprisals, sabotage and mining operations, and other belligerent actions occurred, each side charging the other with aggression. In May 1948, Egypt closed the Suez Canal to passage by Israeli shipping and, at the end of 1949, installed guns at Sharm-el-Sheikh, overlooking the Straits of Tiran, thus blockading the Israeli port of Eilat. To justify her actions, Egypt persistently asserted the existence of a “state of war” or “state of belligerency” between Israel and herself, irrespective of the armistice agreement and her obligations under the United Nations Charter. In October 1956, the second Arab-Israel war, known as the Suez (or Sinai) Campaign, broke out. But even this violent confrontation and the arrangements which followed, including the stationing of the United Nations Emergency Force (UNEF) in the Gaza Strip and Sharm el-Sheikh, did not bring about stability and peace. Tension continued to mount in the area.

Anticipatory Self-Defence in the Legislative History of the United Nations Charter

1991 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy L. H. McCormack
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Security Measures ◽  
International Peace ◽  
Armed Attack ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Right ◽  
United Nations Charter ◽  
Self Defence

Article 51 of the United Nations Charter states that:Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of selfdefense shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.International lawyers are still arguing about the scope of the right of self-defence in Article 51 of the U.N. Charter. Most of the arguments focus on the semantics of Article 51. Those who argue for a “restrictive view” of the provision emphasise the qualifying phrase “if an armed attack occurs”.

An Aboriginal School – A Model 1979-?

1979 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-25
Author(s):  
D.A. Moeckel
Keyword(s):  
Middle Class ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Local Community ◽  
Aboriginal People ◽  
Further Education ◽  
Right To Education ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Right ◽  
United Nations Charter ◽  
Aboriginal Children

This model is based on the following set of suppositions:– the Aboriginal school should be bilingual;– Aboriginal people are traditionally tied to their land and therefore students are reluctant to leave their local community for further education;– Communities in Australia will become self-managing, self-sufficient, and will determine their own future;– education of Aboriginal children will prepare them for their rightful position in their Community in relation to the above;– the Aboriginal attitude to education is different from that of the European Australian, and schools should cater for their needs as seen in the Community and not through the eyes of middle-class non-Aborigines;– Aboriginal people have the right to education on the basis of the United Nations Charter, Article 26:

Against Human Rights

Philosophy ◽  
1990 ◽  
Vol 65 (253) ◽  
pp. 341-348 ◽  
Author(s):  
John O. Nelson
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Free Speech ◽  
The Other ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
Human Right ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Right ◽  
United Nations Charter ◽  
The U.S

Let me first explain what I am not attacking in this paper. I am not attacking, for instance, the right of free speech or any of the other specific rights listed in the U.S. Constitution's Bill of Rights or the United Nations' Charter. I am, rather, attacking any specific right's being called a ‘human right’. I mean to show that any such designation is not only fraudulent but, in case anyone might want to say that there can be noble lies, grossly wicked, amounting indeed to genocide.

Treaty Stipulations in Favor of Third States

1956 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
pp. 338-357 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eduardo Jiménez de Aréchaga
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Security Council ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Member States ◽  
Economic Problems ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Article 50 ◽  
The Right ◽  
United Nations Charter

Many recent and important treaties contain provisions in favor of third states. The United Nations Charter, for instance, confers upon non-member states the right to participate in the discussion of disputes in which they are involved (Article 32); the right to bring such disputes to the attention of the Security Council or the General Assembly (Article 35); and the right to consult the Security Council with regard to the solution of special economic problems arising from the application of preventive or enforcement measures (Article 50). Also Articles 2 (7) and 81 have been interpreted and applied as conferring rights upon states not Members of the Organization.

scholarly journals Why is it so hard to belong? The difficulties of refugees in their integration processes within Brazilian society and labor market

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 265-277
Author(s):  
ANA CHRISTINA CELANO TEIXEIRA ◽  
ELIANA CRISTINA MOTTA DA SILVA ◽  
DANIELA LONGOBUCCO TEIXEIRA BALOG ◽  
BIANCA SÁ
Keyword(s):  
Labor Market ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Large Population ◽  
Brazilian Society ◽  
Racial Issues ◽  
History Of ◽  
Entire History ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Different Origins ◽  
The City

Abstract The world has recently witnessed a social phenomenon that has been present during the entire history of humanity, but has now taken on greater proportions and impact: the large population displacements of refugees. According to the United Nations, more than 75 million people were in this situation worldwide at the end of 2017, a figure never observed before (UNHCR, 2017). Since 1951, more than 147 countries, including Brazil, have signed the United Nations Refugee Convention, which established obligations for signatory governments to provide refugees with legal and safe working conditions. Considering this context, this study aims to investigate the perceptions of refugees of different origins regarding the processes and difficulties of integrating into Brazilian society and labor market. The processes deal with bureaucratic barriers, cultural differences, ethnic-racial issues, and language, among others. The study uses a qualitative approach consisting of eight interviews in the city of Rio de Janeiro with refugees of a variety of nationalities and both genders. The results show that these respondents perceive a gap between public policies and practices involving refugees in the workplace, and also discrimination by the population, employers, and authorities, describing a multicultural rather than an intercultural context. Despite these challenges, respondents say they intend to continue living and working in Brazil.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document