RSS
Why Palestinian Terrorism Is Never Legal or Justified: A Fact-Based Retort
Partygoers at the Supernova Psy-Trance Festival who filmed the events that unfolded on Oct. 7, 2023. Photo: Yes Studios
In a world of international anarchy, law-based counter-terrorism is never just about strategy, tactics, or doctrine. Whatever an insurgency’s specific features, this critical arena of national security planning should remain intellect-based and logic-centered.
For Israel in the Islamic Middle East, this means an ongoing awareness of enemy concepts of death. It signifies, among other things, that Israel’s counter-terrorism planners ought continuously to bear in mind the primacy of an historically under-examined form of geopolitical power.
This neglected form of power, abstract but incomparable, is “power over death” — meaning, in what manner should have jihadi promises of immortality been affected by the Assad regime collapse in Syriaand the still-unresolved Gaza War?
“An immortal person,” says Jewish philosopher Emmanuel Levinas, “is a contradiction in terms.” Accordingly, any promise of immortality to jihadi terrorists will be densely problematic. It will, however, still resonate among those many insurgents who routinely prefer mystery to reason.
Assuming that others use decision-making rationality often make sense in explaining world politics, but there remain enough significant exceptions to temper any mundane generalities.
If Israel’s national decision-makers were to survey the prevailing configuration of global jihadi terrorist organizations (Sunni and Shiite) from a suitably- augmented analytic standpoint, the nexus between “martyrdom operations” and “life-everlasting” could become more conspicuous and understandable.
At that point, Israel’s national security planners could begin to place themselves in a better position to deter murderous hostage-takers and suicide-bombers, in microcosm (i.e., as individual human terrorists) and in macrocosm (i.e., as law-violating organizations or states that support the terrorist microcosm).
Those jihadi insurgents who seek to justify gratuitously violent attacks on Israelis in the name of “martyrdom” are acting contrary to codified and customary international law.
All insurgents, even those who passionately claim “just cause,” must still satisfy longstanding jurisprudential limits on permissible targets and levels of violence. Moreover, as a binding matter of law, such limits can never be tempered by any actively contending claims of religious faith. Under law, Palestinian claims of insurgency “by any means necessary” remain nothing more than an empty witticism.
Under established rules, even the allegedly “sacred” rights of insurgency always exclude any deliberate targeting of civilians or any intentional use of force to inflict unnecessary suffering. When Hamas terrorists kidnapped and beheaded Israeli infants on October 7, 2023, they were acting not on behalf of sovereignty or self-determination, but rather to cultivate the grotesque pleasures of a lascivious barbarism.
Law and strategy are interrelated. At the same time, they remain analytically distinct. The legal “bottom line” is unambiguous: Violence becomes terrorism whenever “political” insurgents murder or maim noncombatants, whether with guns, knives, bombs or automobiles. Always irrelevant to assessments of “just means” (jus in bello) is whether the expressed cause of terror-violence is just or unjust (jus ad bellum). Under the universal “law of nations,” unjust means used to fight for allegedly just ends are still law-breaking ipso facto.
Sometimes, Israel’s martyrdom-seeking jihadi foes advance the supposedly legal argument of tu quoque. This argument stipulates that because “the other side” is guilty of similar, equivalent or even greater criminality, “our side” is innocent of any wrongdoing.
Jurisprudentially, any such argument is disingenuous and incorrect, especially after landmark legal judgments by the Nuremberg (Germany) and Far East (Japan) ad hoc tribunals. Historically, tu quoque is always an immutably discredited posture.
For conventional armies and insurgent forces, the right to use military force can never supplant “peremptory” rules of humanitarian international law. Nonetheless, without a scintilla of law-based evidence, supporters of jihadi terror-violence against Israeli noncombatants continuously insist that “ends justify means.”
Leaving aside the ordinary ethical standards by which any such argument should be dismissed on its face, ends can never justify means in the law of armed conflict. Indeed, there can be no authoritative argument against this civilizing affirmation.
Witless banalities of politics ought never be taken as valid expectations of international law. In such law, whether codified or customary, one person’s terrorist can never be another’s “freedom-fighter.”
It’s really not complicated. Whenever an insurgent group resorts to unjust means, its actions constitute terrorism. Even if adversarial claims of a hostile controlling power could be plausible or acceptable (e.g., relentless Palestinian claims concerning an Israeli “occupation”), corollary claims of entitlement to “any means necessary” remain false.
Recalling Hague Convention No. IV: “The right of belligerents to adopt means of injuring the enemy is not unlimited.”
What about Israeli attacks on Gaza targets? Though Israel’s bombardments of Gaza are spawned multiple Palestinian casualties, the legal responsibility for these harms lay entirely with Hamas “perfidy” or “human shields.” While Palestinian casualties were always unwanted, inadvertent and unintentional, Israeli civilian deaths and injuries were always the result of jihadi criminal intent or “mens rea.”
International law does not provide an intuitive or subjective set of standards. This law has determinable form and content. Therefore, it can never be casually invented or reinvented by terror groups to justify selective adversarial interests. This is especially the case when inhumane terror-violence intentionally targets a designated victim state’s most fragile and vulnerable civilians. Murdering captive infants is never defensible. Never.
National liberation” movements that fail to meet the test of just means can never be protected as lawful or legitimate in themselves. Even if relevant law were to accept the questionable argument that jihadi terror groups had fulfilled all valid criteria of “national liberation,” these groups would still fail to satisfy equally significant jurisprudential standards of distinction, proportionality, and military necessity.
These standards were specifically applied to insurgent or sub-state organizations by the common Article 3 of the four Geneva Conventions of 1949, and (additionally) by the two 1977 Protocols to these Conventions.
There is more. Standards of “humanity” remain binding upon all combatants by virtue of the broader norms of customary and conventional international law, including Article 1 of the Preamble to the Fourth Hague Convention of 1907. This rule, commonly called the “Martens Clause,” makes “all persons” responsible for the “laws of humanity” and for associated “dictates of public conscience.” There can be no exceptions to this universal responsibility.
Under international law, terrorist crimes mandate universal cooperation in both apprehension and punishment. As punishers of “grave breaches” under international law, all states are expected to search out and prosecute or extradite individual terrorists. This is emphatically true for the United States, which incorporates international law as the “supreme law of the land” at Article 6 of the Constitution.
For the foreseeable future, jihadi “martyrs” could present an incrementally existential threat to Israel. If these criminals should ever get their hands on usable fissile materials, however, this threat could become more immediately existential. This does not mean that terrorists would necessarily require a “chain-reaction” nuclear explosive, but only the essential ingredients for an advanced radiation dispersal device.
In a worst case scenario, jihadi use of radiation dispersal weapons against Israel could spur Iran into protracted and enlarged military conflict with Israel. At that unpredictable point, Israel’s policy considerations of adversarial “last things” could become all-important.
In essence, for Israel, a jihadist enemy that links terror-violence to faith-based hopes of immortality could pose an incomparable threat. To suitably deter this fearsome peril, Israel’s national security planners should more expressly examine all strategic, geographic, and legal dimensions of the problem. For these science-based planners, jihadi searches for “power over death” ought immediately to become a subject of highest policy urgency.
Prof. Louis René Beres was educated at Princeton (Ph.D., 1971) and is the author of many books and scholarly articles dealing with international law, nuclear strategy, nuclear war, and terrorism. In Israel, Prof. Beres was Chair of Project Daniel (PM Sharon). His 12th and latest book is Surviving Amid Chaos: Israel’s Nuclear Strategy (Rowman & Littlefield, 2016; 2nd ed., 2018).
The post Why Palestinian Terrorism Is Never Legal or Justified: A Fact-Based Retort first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Antisemites Target Synagogues in Spain, France Amid Surge in Jew Hatred Across Europe
The exterior wall of a synagogue in Girona, Spain, vandalized with antisemitic graffiti. Photo: Screenshot
Pro-Palestinian activists have vandalized synagogues in Spain and France in recent days, sparking public outrage and calls for authorities to step up protections.
These are only the latest incidents in a troubling wave of anti-Jewish hate crimes targeting Jewish communities across Europe which continues unabated.
On Thursday, the Jewish community of Girona, a city in Spain’s northeastern Catalonia region, filed a police complaint and urged authorities to take action after the outer wall of the city’s synagogue was defaced with an antisemitic slogan.
Unknown perpetrators defaced the synagogue’s walls with antisemitic graffiti, scrawling messages such as “Israel is a genocidal state, silence = complicity.”
The city’s Jewish community strongly condemned the incident, urging authorities to conduct a swift investigation, impose exemplary sanctions, and ensure robust security measures.
“Disguised as political activism, [this attack] seeks to stigmatize citizens for their faith — something intolerable in a democratic society,” the statement reads. “Tolerance and respect are values we must defend together.”
The European Jewish Association (EJA) also condemned the incident as a hate crime, urging the Spanish government to ensure the safety and protection of its Jewish citizens.
“This is yet another antisemitic attack, part of a wave we’ve seen daily for nearly two years,” the EJA wrote in a post on X.
This is what members of the Jewish community in Girona found this morning when they arrived at their synagogue to pray.
Antisemitic vandals had defaced the synagogue’s outer wall with the words:
“ISRAEL ESTAT GENOCIDA, SILENCI = CÒMPLICE”
Translation: “Israel is a genocidal… pic.twitter.com/ERj4z1hKOP— EJA – EIPA (@EJAssociation) September 4, 2025
In a separate incident, three pro-Palestinian activists were arrested on Thursday after trying to force their way into a synagogue in Nice, southeastern France, during an informational meeting on aliyah, the process of Jews immigrating to Israel.
According to local reports, several individuals attempted to forcibly enter the place of worship, sparking violent clashes and insults that left a pregnant woman injured.
Shortly after the incident, law enforcement arrested two women in their forties and a man in his sixties, taking them into custody as part of an investigation into aggravated violence.
The charges involve attacks on a vulnerable person, actions carried out by a group, religious motivation, and public religious insults.
Local authorities strongly condemned the act and announced that police officers would remain stationed outside the synagogue for as long as necessary.
Since the Hamas-led invasion of and massacre across southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, antisemitic incidents have surged to alarming levels across Europe.
Jewish individuals have been facing a surge in hostility and targeted attacks, including vandalism of murals and businesses, as well as physical assaults.
RSS
Iran’s Alliances With China, Russia Falter as Regime Faces Growing Isolation, Study Finds
Chinese Foreign Minister Wag Yi stands with Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov and Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazeem Gharibabadi before a meeting regarding the Iranian nuclear issue at Diaoyutai State Guest House on March 14, 2025 in Beijing, China. Photo: Pool via REUTERS
As Iran continues to face major crises both at home and abroad, its ties to China and Russia are proving far weaker than they seem, leaving the regime to confront the fallout largely on its own, according to a new study.
The Institute for National Security Studies (INSS), an Israeli think tank, has released a report examining how the 12-day war with Israel in June exposed the limits of Iran’s alliances with China and Russia.
In the study, authors Raz Zimmt and Danny Citrinowicz note that both China and Russia favored cautious diplomacy over direct support at a time when the Iranian regime was most vulnerable.
“The policy of Moscow and Beijing, which consisted of fairly mild condemnations of the Israeli and US strikes in Iran, sparked criticism and disappointment in Tehran,” the report explains.
“It also reinforced the Iranian assessment that its reliance on Russia and China remains limited, particularly in the event of a military confrontation with Israel and the United States,” it continues.
Earlier this week, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian traveled to Beijing, joining Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin to commemorate the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II, as the three nations aim to project a united front against the West.
The high-profile gathering came after Pezeshkian and Putin held talks in China on Monday on the sidelines of the 25th Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit in Tianjin.
During a joint press conference, the Iranian president hailed Tehran’s cooperation with Moscow as “highly valuable,” adding that continued implementation of their 20-year treaty signed earlier this year would further strengthen ties and expand collaboration.
Putin also noted that the relationship between the two countries is “growing increasingly friendly and expanding” amid mounting pressure and sanctions from Western countries.
According to Zimmt and Citrinowicz, Iran has little room to maneuver, even more so now as the regime faces the imminent threat of UN sanctions being reimposed due to efforts by Britain, France, and Germany, forcing it to rely on its fragile alliances with Russia and China.
“It is clear that for now, Iran has no viable alternative to continuing its political, economic, and security partnership, as limited as it may be, with Russia and China, especially given the escalating tensions between Tehran and Europe,” the paper explains.
“Likewise, Russia and China, who view Iran as a junior partner in a coalition against the West and the United States, have no real alternative to Tehran, and they are expected to continue the partnership as long as it serves their interests,” it adds.
The authors argue that China and Russia could readily sacrifice Iran to further their strategic goals, including strengthening ties with Washington.
The study comes just days after an Iranian official accused Russia without evidence of providing intelligence to Israel during the 12-day Middle Eastern war in June which allegedly helped the Jewish state target and destroy Iran’s air defense systems.
Mohammad Sadr, a member of Iran’s Expediency Discernment Council and close adviser to former President Mohammad Khatami, claimed Israel’s precise strikes on Iranian air defense systems were suspicious.
He noted Russia’s refusal to support Iran during the war, saying that Moscow had shown a “bias in favor of Israel” and that the recent conflict demonstrated the “strategic agreement with Russia is nonsense.”
“This war proved that the strategic alliance with Moscow is worthless,” Sadr said during an interview with BBC Persian, referring to the 12-day war between Iran and Israel.
“We must not think that Russia will come to Iran’s aid when the time comes,” he continued.
At the SCO summit in Tianjin earlier this week, Tehran also described its ties with China as “flourishing,” pointing to a strategic pact similar to the one it signed with Russia.
According to some reports, China may be helping Iran rebuild its decimated air defenses following the 12-day war with Israel.
China is the largest importer of Iranian oil, with nearly 90 percent of Iran’s crude and condensate exports going to Beijing. The two sides also recently signed a 25-year cooperation agreement, held joint naval drills, and continued to trade Iranian oil despite US sanctions.
“It should be noted that despite the 25-year cooperation agreement signed between Tehran and Beijing in March 2021, the partnership between the two countries remains very limited, and China does not provide solutions to most of Iran’s economic difficulties, including the need for infrastructure investment,” the INSS study explains.
RSS
US Lawmakers Urge Trump to Restrict Visas for Iran’s President, Other Regime Officials Ahead of UN General Assembly
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian speaks during a meeting in Ilam, Iran, June 12, 2025. Photo: Iran’s Presidential website/WANA (West Asia News Agency)/Handout via REUTERS
A bipartisan group of US lawmakers is urging President Donald Trump to block or sharply restrict visas for Iran’s president, Masoud Pezeshkian, and other top Iranian officials traveling to New York this month for the United Nations General Assembly, warning that Tehran will use the global platform to disguise its escalating repression at home.
In a letter sent to Trump on Thursday, 40 members of Congress pointed to Iran’s recent human rights record, which includes nearly 1,500 executions in the past year, and accused Pezeshkian’s government of openly threatening to repeat the mass killings of dissidents that scarred the country in 1988.
“Immediately following the recent 12-day war between Israel and Iran, the Iranian regime escalated its widespread internal crackdown, arbitrarily arresting hundreds of ethnic minorities, civil society leaders, women’s rights activists, and others,” the lawmakers wrote. They described Iran’s leaders as “criminals” who “support terrorism” and “sow hatred and instability across the Middle East.”
The letter was signed by an unusually broad coalition of Republicans and Democrats, including House GOP Conference Chair Elise Stefanik (NY), as well as Reps. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX), Deborah Ross (R-NC), and Val Hoyle (D-OR), underscoring how concern about Iran’s hostility toward the US and its allies continues to cut across party lines.
Drawing a distinction between the regime and the Iranian people who support democracy, the lawmakers asked Trump to make a strong statement against a country that US intelligence agencies have long labeled the world’s foremost state sponsor of terrorism.
“We respectfully urge you to restrict the Iranian delegation’s freedom of movement, and, to the extent possible, refrain from issuing visas to key delegation members, including for its President, Masoud Pezeshkian,” the letter stated.
It continued, “We urge you to take a strong stand against the Iranian regime’s ongoing support for terrorism and human rights abuses, in line with your dedication toward ‘Peace through Strength’ and the maximum pressure campaign against the regime. We look forward to working you to further
oppose the destructive and destabilizing influence of the government of Iran and support the
Iranian people on the world stage.”
The lawmakers’ request comes as the Trump administration weighs new restrictions on several UN delegations ahead of the annual gathering. According to a State Department memo obtained by the Associated Press, the US is considering limiting the movements of officials not just from Iran, but also from Sudan and Zimbabwe. The department is also considering limiting the movements of officials from Brazil, whose president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, traditionally opens the General Assembly.
The proposals also suggest that Iranian diplomats be barred from shopping at Costco or Sam’s Club without explicit permission from the State Department, according to the AP report. Diplomats from Iran have historically relied on those stores to buy affordable goods unavailable in their home country. By contrast, the memo indicates that delegates from Syria may be granted a waiver, reflecting shifting US priorities in the region.
Under the UN Headquarters Agreement, the US is obligated to grant visas to foreign officials attending UN functions. But successive administrations have imposed restrictions on the travel of adversarial delegations, typically confining them to Manhattan and surrounding boroughs. The latest proposals would go further, potentially requiring advance State Department approval for movements and limiting access to certain businesses.