The slogan “Resistance is justified when people are occupied” has become a familiar chant at anti-Israel protests, particularly since Hamas’ October 7 attacks. But does international law actually justify violence against civilians in the name of resistance?
The UN Charter recognizes the right to self-determination, while the Geneva Conventions establish protections for civilians during armed conflict. Neither provides a blanket legal justification for terrorism, murder, rape, or hostage-taking.
Under the Geneva Conventions, deliberately murdering civilians and taking hostages are prohibited. Additional Protocol I also explicitly bans attacks directed against civilians, regardless of the political or military objectives being pursued.
These protections apply even in situations involving military occupation.
On October 7, Hamas terrorists crossed into Israel, attacked residential communities and the Nova music festival, murdered civilians, and abducted 251 people into Gaza. Claims of resistance cannot make those actions lawful.
The argument that occupation justifies violence has also been used to excuse attacks far beyond Gaza, including terrorist incidents targeting Israelis and Jews abroad.
International law recognizes self-determination, but it does not grant anyone permission to massacre families, attack music festivals, or take innocent people hostage.
Calling terrorism “resistance” does not make it legal. The protection of civilians is not optional, regardless of the cause being invoked.
Found this video interesting? Follow the HonestReporting page on Facebook to catch more videos, and read articles debunking news bias and smears, as well as others explaining Israel’s history, politics, and international affairs. Click here to learn more!
© Divuach Ne’eman R”A, 2025
