Recently I wrote an assignment on how States are obliged to obey the standards and rules of the international legal system as a result of the very nature of International Law itself. I was asked to what I extent did I agree with this premise or whether I disagreed completely. My hypothesis was that yes, to a certain extent, a great number of States do feel compelled to align themselves with the purposes and principles incorporated in the Charter of the United Nations. I argued that in essence, it is much more beneficial for the State to work in unison with other States to maintain international peace and security whilst maintaining its right to self-determination and sovreignty. States are perhaps naturally compelled to strengthen their vital interests but in an ideal world they would only do so in conformity with the true spirit of International Law and respect for humanity.

But unfortunately, some States, whilst not necessarily considered a threat to other States take things to the extreme and squander the supposed inalienable rights of their own populations or of minorities in their territory. Others, usually considered a grave threat, may resort to the use of nuclear weaponry and fearmongering in a bid to instill terror and make a point that they are not to be trifled with. On such States the powers that be (and supposed champions of Democracy) will barely think twice before severing diplomatic relations, imposing economic sanctions, resort to the use of force to keep them in check, try their leaders in Court and execute them. Do not get me wrong, I do not support these 'rogue' States either. But I cannot but question the most damning of realities. Why is it, that with some States, who act in the same manner and worse, the world does absolutely...NOTHING?

The USA, which outgoing (at long last) President George W. Bush personifies as the 'good' that triumphs over 'evil', has in fact turned out to be one of the largest rogue States in modern times, hellbent on pursuing an imperialistic hegemony self-catered solely for its twisted interests. To use a quote by renowned British comedian Bill Bailey, 'America's like the bully of the world going up to countries an saying "give us your sweets or I'll smash your face in!'"America, the bully of the world, and the UN is powerless. The comedian continues '...and Britain leans round the back and goes yeahhhhh'. UK, America's licensed sidekick endorsing and aiding the bullying of the world, and the UN is powerless. The European Union, certainly one of the largest international communities in the world coming closest to representing the ideals of democracy and internationalism but sometimes silent when it matters most and active when it shouldn't be, and we accept it. There is another State which to me represents nothing less than the failure of the international system. That State is Israel.

According to Professor Richard Falk, the United Nations special rapporteur for human rights in the occupied terrirtories, Israel is currently committing serious war crimes in its military assault on Gaza and the Palestinian people (see Statement by Prof. Richard Falk). Some are quick to argue that Israel has the right to self-defense and to maintain security for its people and thus the war is justified because Palestine broke the peace (ceasefire) first by lauching rockets into Israel. Let us for a moment assume that Palestine did break the ceasefire. Proffessor Falk rightly points out that the Palestinian people cannot suffer collective punishment because 'the actions of a few militants' - but that is what is Israel is doing - and in so doing it is targetting and killing civilians ,thus outrageously violating the Fourth Geneva Convention. But according to a CNN Newsreport it has become quesitonable as to who really broke the ceasefire. Regardless, the mass killing of innocent civilians - many of them children, is not only disproportionate, but undignified and severely unjust. Such attrocities and brutal agression should not be allowed to happen in the world, but Israel it seems, has a free licence to kill.

Where is Barak Obama, the man who holds that "all men are created equal; that they are endowned by the creator by certain inalianble rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," which rights are "self-evident"? Are Palestinians considered inferior to man, are they not created equal? Is the EU taking an affirmative stance? Unfortunately it is disunited, confused and weak. Why is the UN so powerless?

The international legal system created 68 years ago in San Francisco is at the face of it extremely admirable but rotten at the core. Perhaps it was even intended to grant a sense of legitimacy to those with ruthless intentions. But he who surrenders so readily to despair shall only aid those who want to keep him so.

I dream of a Palestine that is free.

It's Monday, the sixth of May 1968 in Paris. The national student union and the union of university teachers are marching together for a common cause. They are marching against the police invasion at the University of the Sorbonne in Paris. They are fighting for equality and social justice in the education establishment. They are fighting for the principles their country was built on. Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité. Together they eventually brought down the authoritative De Gaulle administration.


Thirty-eight years later the bold French are at it again, this time against Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin. Students and unions are marching against a law which will authorize employment termination without justification against persons aged under twenty-six. They will not allow that their livelihood be disposed of so readily. Eventually, Dominique de Villepin did not get elected as President.


It is October the twenty-third 2008. Rome's streets are sprawling with some thirty-thousand students and vigiliant policemen. They are fighting against the 'Gelmini reform' which will cut 8 billion euros in the education budget, lay off teachers, shut down schools and privatise universities. Simultaneously they are fighting for immigrant rights which have been harshly threatened under the new Berlusconi regime.


It is January 2009 in Malta and students are being used as pawns in a big man's game. Teachers unions demand a substantial increase in university lecturers wages. If not, they will pretty much boycott our education. On the other side of the coin the concerned government authority doesn't seem to care, only going as far as issuing politically cheap statements which seem to advocate student's welfare but which in reality are only intended to safeguard its political ground amongst students. The leftist parties seem pretty much mute about the whole affair. The student's council will organise a rally, a step in the right direction perhaps, but is it enough?


Any person of sound mind would tell you that in order to ensure a healthy and stable academic status in the country then it has to be compensated for. Moreover, the fact that people's pockets are sucked dry because of a precarious economic situation adds to the complexity of the problem. In this regard, if we truly are to become a center of excellence in Europe or at least respected amongst our counterparts for our educational standards, then the lecturers cause seems to merit some justification. In fact, for the past weeks or months when this whole ordeal erupted I was rather supportive of the educators' cause and wondered why on earth we did not, as students, support them.


But I have been infused with a degree of skepticsim. Well not skepticism but the need for a well thought out reform in the education sector. For unlike the situation in France, the student-teacher union bond is not so straightforward.


First things first, I think we need to untie the puppet's chord that binds us to its master (be it government or stubborn union) and become free-thinking individuals and shapers of our own destiny. We should put aside those who we voted for last March and come up with broad solutions together. We need to destroy the pawn culture and find it within ourselves to create the we-mean-business-culture of our French and Italian counterparts. If they can win, we can win too. Some may cringe and assume that this would be some nasty revival of the Student Left and if that is to be its term, then so be it. I have no shame to form part of such a movement and I don't think that you should either. It's not about Marxist revolution, it's about our dignity and rights as students.


Secondly we need to do away with the please-all attitude and discuss that which is truly in our best interests and, equally important, the interests of future generations of students. In this current scenario that is developing I have personally come up with a very basic and rudimentary theory:

• An increase in wages is justified if:-

1. A system is put in place which rewards and promotes educators strictly on academic merit and not political or other connections;
2. A system is put in place which ensures that care-free and non-dedicated educators are appropriately penalised. Perhaps we should strive to implement a well-thought out system whereby students themselves can assess their educators;
3. Educators strive to better themselves and their professional work on a continuous basis

If educators can guarantee students such an outcome only then will I support them to the fullest ,rally side by side with them and support their democratic right to industrial action. It might temporarily hinder my academic progress but I know that the end result will be far better then the present status-quo.


Students, rise up. We deserve much better.