Molly Charles-Reflections

The definition of a terrorist often takes on shades of those groups to which the term is applied and this ensures there in no complete consensus as to Who is a terrorist? But there is clarity on certain aspects, the rationale for the terror act, methods used and power structure enjoyed by the terrorist group. Till recently designation “terrorist group” was generally given to groups functioning outside existing systems of governance and using excessive lethal force viable for them or using threat of the same to achieve their goals.   It largely tended to be groups from countries outside the West, for they felt throttled by the existing mechanism of governance, be it unanswered questions for right to homeland, or being second class citizens in their own land or being denied the basic access such as right to land or hunger free existence. Now, this has changed, thanks to President Trump as the most brutal terror acts on defenceless fishermen out at sea or even on international water...

  Sanctions were meant to act at deterrence but it has been used by the US more than any other country to maintain its stronghold on nations and assert its right to impunity and ensure the international community understands the US is above the law, this has been subtle till President Trump took office this term. Under President Trump, the only international relations that US has practiced is to assert it is a Rogue State and US President is asserting his right to be Rogue with legal liability. If the international community had called his bluff, when he first invaded Iran and dropped bombs on Nuclear facility in Iran with the claim that presence of enriched Uranium 65 Percent meant Iran is making nuclear war heads. No one bother to call out the blatant lie, the plan to use logical fallacy to control international narrative, for if Iran really wanted to have nuclear warhead, it could have just done what India, Pakistan, or North Korea did, which is to enrich uranium in silence an...

  According to Rome Statute Art 31, Grounds for excluding criminal responsibility, Article 31 (1) (a), a person is not criminally responsible if, at the time of their conduct, the person suffers from a mental disease or defect that destroys that person’s capacity to appreciate the unlawfulness or nature of his or her conduct, or capacity to control his or her conduct to conform to the requirement of law [1]. If the idea is to exempt the US President from acts of War Crimes and Acts of Terror that he himself declares online that he has carried out using Rome Statue Art 31 or similar domestic legal provisions, then wouldn’t the US Congress be criminally liable for not restraining him even when he was clearly carrying out war crimes across countries without legal sanction for these criminal attacks. The question that remains unaddressed, isn’t the US Congress criminally liable for the acts of the US President as they in spite of clear evidence from his self-declared explanation, r...

The US has got it wrong 'Rogue States' are not outside its borders; the award-winning Rogue State is within its borders. This a “great” achievement under Trump, who can be awarded as the most eloquent, and experienced person on “being Rogue”. The US President often states he is a man for peace, but his actions speak otherwise, from 2025, the US President has made it clear that being “Rogue” and carrying out terror acts is central to his foreign relationship. The US Congress through its silence supports the US President, who from the time of taking office last year, till now, as the President of the US has been solely responsible for initiating war in Iran, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Somalia, Nigeria and Venezuela. This is an outstanding feat for the US President. The US President has been generous at dropping bombs and missiles across the globe, to free citizens in different nations or to carry out SMART, EVIDENCE FREE and Out of Court initiatives for drug trade control. The US Pres...