Skip to comments.Israel's wall : Why the World Court got its barrier decision wrong
Posted on 07/11/2004 6:00:58 PM PDT by Tamar1973
Walls are a poor substitute for peace. But as Israel's new 425-mile barricade that's separating Jewish settlements from Occupied Palestinian Territory, has shown, they work as a substitute for bloodshed.
Israeli officials point out that not one Palestinian suicide bomber has crossed into the Jewish state wherever the barrier -- now 25 percent complete -- has been constructed. The need for reparations is indisputable. The wall has resulted in the loss of private property, the loss of livelihoods and the loss of quality of life for many Palestinian families. As the court correctly noted, the wall "severely impedes the exercise of the Palestinian people of its right to self-determination . . . "
Where the World Court got it wrong was in not recognizing that the world has changed and that sometimes national security threats comes not from invading armies but from neighbors. The court carelessly rejected Israel's self-defense arguments, noting "the threat which it regards as justifying the construction of the wall originates within, and not outside, that territory," and thus is not covered by U.N. articles concerning self-protection.
Such a shortsighted view ignores the violent realities and the diplomatic paralysis that forced the construction of the barricade out of desperation.
Fortunately, another court recently got it right. Israel's own Supreme Court earlier this month also ruled on behalf of Palestinians but offered a much more nuanced ruling. It ordered that a segment of the barrier be rerouted to avoid cutting off Palestinian villagers from their farms and jobs. The military says it will comply.
Israel should be held accountable for building a barricade that has the least possible impact on lives and livelihoods and is, above all, temporary. Toward that end, Israel's own Supreme Court has issued the more reasonable of these two judicial solutions.
I always think of an old saying here. Good fences make good neighbors.
Otherwise there would have been a different decision.
This, BTW, is a very good reason for the United States to refuse to recognize the legitimacy of the World Court, and possibly even imprison any of it's employees should they show up on American territory.
Which translated means: They (the terrorists) has the right to kill Jews at will, so please move the damm wall outta the way.
this is another prime example of how the " world court " is nothing but an anti-america and anti-israel farce.
this case should have been tried in judge wapner's court.
Yhe only problem remaining is the enforcement of the judgement.
Um, can we get one of these things for our mexican border? For starters?
What's a Palestinian? Is it a critter from a Dr Seuss book?
An early-model Dalek - less effective than the current ones, but equally fictitous.
Tom Baker was the best. You agree?