Occupation

Definitions

It is advisable to distinguish well two terms which do not recover same reality: “occupation” and “Annexation”, and to look at the definitions which the public international law gives of these two terms in order to better be able to appreciate the various cases of figure:

the annexation : according to the definition given by the former president of the the International Court of Justice, Professor Jules Basdevant, in his Dictionary of the terminology of the international law , the annexation is a “ an operation carried out or not under the terms of a treaty, by which totality or part of a territory of a State passes under the sovereignty of another State ”. It was the case, for example, the heights of the plate of Golan, territories annexed by Israel on the Syria following a law voted by the Knesset the December 14th 1981, even if this one were declared “null” as well by the Safety advice as by the General meeting of the United Nations.
the military occupation : according to the payment of $the Hague of 1907, “ a territory is regarded as occupied when it is placed in fact under the authority of the enemy army ”. In its dictionary already quoted, professor Basdevant precise that the occupation is a “ term employed to indicate the presence of military forces of a State on the territory of another State, without this territory ceasing belonging to this one”.

Examples of occupation

Occupation Japan ease in China

Occupation Nazi in France and Belgium

Soviet occupation in Germany after the Second world war

Current occupations

The occupation is often under pretext of guarantee peace or safety:

Syrian occupation in Lebanon (until in 2005);
part of the population Iraq ienne considers the presence of foreign armies on its ground, following the intervention américano - British of 2003, like an occupation.

Israeli occupation of territories asserted by the Palestinians

One often speaks about the “ Occupied territories ” to define the zones controlled by Israel following the Guerre the six day old of 1967.

In June 1967, Israel militarily occupied a certain number of Arab territories coqnuis on the Transjordanie and the Egypt. Taking into consideration principle of the international law, the use of the war to seize territories was condemned by the resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973) of the Safety advice of the United Nations which declare the “inadmissibility of the acquisition of territories by the war”. This principle was expressly reiterated, with alternatives of pure form, in connection with the statute of Jerusalem, by the resolution 252 (1968) of the May 21st 1968 which reaffirms that “the acquisition of territories by the military conquest is inadmissible”.

However, no sovereignty former to 1967 officially recognized forever on these territories, the Arab States which occupied these areas having insisted in 1949 so that the line of armistice does not constitute not an internationally recognized border but only one line separating two armies .

Occupied territories “ ” or “ disputed ”?

The diplomats rather evoke “territories disputed” in several other territorial conflicts.

For example, one does not speak about occupation for the Cachemire, asserted by the India and the Pakistan, nor for the area of the Haut-Karabagh, asserted by the Azerbaïdjan and the Arménie. The military incursions Morocco groins with the the Western Sahara, which is not under Moroccan sovereignty according to the declarations of the International Court of justice in 1975, are not either qualified occupation. Other examples exist or existed until recently in the Arab world: Zubarah, island described at the time by the International Court of Justice like a “ territory disputed ” between Bahrain and the Qatar before the resolution of the litigation; or the case of Abu Musâ in the Persian Gulf. The Turkish presence in the Northern of Cyprus since 1974 is not described either officially like occupation.

The minister Japan board of the Foreign affairs does not speak either about “ Russian occupation to the Îles Kouriles ” but rather about “problem of the Territories of North”.

References

Random links: