CYIL vol. 7 (2016)

50 / 536

36
JAN ONDŘEJ – MAGDA UXOVÁ CYIL 7 ȍ2016Ȏ
– for example, the terrorists acts in Paris in November 2015 or in Brussels in
March 2016, for which responsibility was claimed by the Islamic state. The Security
Council of the UN in its resolutions considers the acts of international terrorism
a threat to international peace and security.29 These acts are strictly forbidden, and
this applies in the case of the Islamic state. For example, Resolution. 2170 describes
ISIL, ANF and others as a threat to international peace and security.30 On the other
hand, some point out that even the militant Lebanon organization called Hezbollah,
considered a terrorist organization, is now a legitimate political party.31 a change
of attitude towards some of the actors cannot be therefore excluded. The extent
of breaches of international law in the case of the Islamic state is so high that the
idea of any change of attitude towards this actor is difficult to imagine. Any state
which applies terror outside becomes internationally isolated and is condemned by
the international community, as is also expressed in the Resolutions of the Security
Council of the UN. A newly emerging entity which uses terror methods against its
“own population” and externally and which would seek to become a state would be
excluded and have no chance to be accepted into the international community. In
this respect, the Islamic state differs from de facto regimes, which often have arisen
on openly illegal acts, for example the so called Republic of Northern Cyprus, or at
least under arguable circumstances (South Ossetia, Abkhazia). These de facto regimes
try to present themselves as entities that obey certain legal rules that characterize
a state. However, unless the Islamic state is considered a so called de facto regime,
the rules of international law that refer to a state cannot be applied. Rules of
international law can apply to insurgent groups. For example, in December 2012
the USA recognized, in a speech of President Obama, the Syrian opposition as
a legitimate representative of the people of Syria opposed to the regime of B. Asada.32
The ceasefire between fighting sides was proclaimed in Syria in February 2016 and
referred to the Syrian army as well as to opposition groups. However, it did not
refer to the radical groups the Islamic state and Al-Nusra Front,33 which should
remain targets of continuous attacks. The Islamic state is the refer not considered
an insurgent or similar group either.
Based on Security Council resolutions34 the Islamic state and Al-Nusra Front are
considered terrorist organizations. The Security Council of the UN, acting according
29 E.g., UN Security Council resolutions S/RES/1368, 12. 9. 2001, S/RES/1530, 1. 3. 2004, S/RES/1611,
7. 7. 2005.
30 UN Security Council resolution, S/RES/2170, 15. 8. 2014.
31 McLaughlin in ARANGO, Tim. ISIS Transforming Into Functioning State That Uses Terror as Tool.
The New York Times. Accessible at:
transforming-into-functioning-state (Viewed 2 November 2015).
32 United States Recognizes Syrian Oppozition as “Legitimate Representative of the Syrian People”, in:
The American Journal of International Law, 2013, vol. 107, p. 654 et seq.
33 Příměří v Sýrii začne v sobotu, Asad vyhlásil volby. Právo 23. 2. 2016.
34 UN Security Council resolutions, S/RES/2170, 15. 8. 2014 and S/RES/2178, 24. 9. 2014.