Thank you dear subscribers, we are overwhelmed with your response.
Your Turn is a unique section from ThePrint featuring points of view from its subscribers. If you are a subscriber, have a point of view, please send it to us. If not, do subscribe here: https://theprint.in/subscribe/
The entire premise of having a law of state responsibility is extending the protective framework of International Law to people travelling, living abroad and to be facilitating the socio-economy relationship between countries. In this field of International Law, in varied manner it gets reference as responsibility of States with respect to the protection of any citizen overseas. It does include duties or responsibilities of State for making compensation to another State in regard to the injury of a national of one State due to the former State not capable of fulfilling its commitments internationally.
According to some States, it was unwise to be basing the standards of measuring State Responsibility with respect to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as it’s not binding thing and even the citizens under the system that had existed already in States, could not claim damage to violate certain rights. It was suggested that International Law (State Responsibility) had to be based on values and need of the present world order, this did get exhibited in the Purpose and Principle of UN, and it did include to foster a peaceful coexistence of countries, by trying to raise the living standards mainly by the fast socio-economy development particularly of the developing countries and by ensuring equal sovereignty of all countries.
The entire aspect of ‘Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Act’ is important in context of the Conduct of organs of a State, as it says “The conduct of any State organ shall be considered an act of that State under international law, whether the organ exercises legislative, executive, judicial or any other functions, whatever position it holds in the organization of the State, and whatever its character as an organ of the central Government or of a territorial unit of the State.” On February 4, 2025 President Trump met with Prime Minister Netanyahu in the White House. Trump gave everyone a shock when he announced an unprecedented policy towards Gaza.
It is an egregious violation of International Law as Trump said that US will own Gaza and transfer the nearly two million Palestinians out of Gaza into dozen other countries (that he speculated) who shall take them in. This is US explicitly backing ethnic cleansing. Trump also said that US would possibly send its troops to Gaza for developing the economy of that place with housing etc. Trump said it will be good for Greater Stability in Middle East but actually it’s a recipe for total disaster. Trump did not answer a basic question as to what authority he has to take over a sovereign territory and Palestinians who live there in Gaza, where they are supposed to go? It was no surprise that Prime Minister Netanyahu offered support to Trump’s plans during the joint press conference that the two leaders were doing in front of the press. Trump has pressured Egypt and Jordan to take the Palestinians who will be displaced, it’s something that both these countries have rejected. Not just Egypt and Jordan but other countries too are in the list, this includes Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, Arab League and the Palestinian Authority.
So, in context of International Law this is an internationally wrongfully act by the US. On 6 June 2024, Spain had announced that it will join the South African genocide case before the ICJ against Israeli military actions inside Gaza. Spain on this date had become the first country in Europe to back the case filed by South Africa. On 22 August 2024 in an article published by me, I had said “International Law still has to overcome many obstructions laid down by member States of the UN in order to reach a level where institutions function like the ICJ by ensuring its orders are legally binding. So, the agency whatever shape and form it is existing has to move out of dysfunctionality and be adequate to secure the rights of everyone. At times the difficulty with respect to the anarchic situation for self-help were resolved by the factor of balance of power in order to ensure till the extent possible an equally distributed power among nation-states.”
I had also said “Traditional definition of sovereignty means to be independent in both domestic and foreign affairs but today the kind of global trade that is in progress is only making countries sovereign in theory and not practice. So, if nation-states do not have sovereignty, then they are not equal to each other both in theory and practice. And also, it must be understood that as long as the threat or use of force is not controlled, as well as a judiciously prepared means for settling a dispute is not availed, then as per classical realism (domain of International Relations) might is right and it will dominate.”
These pieces are being published as they have been received – they have not been edited/fact-checked by ThePrint.