September 2004

Israeli Wall Ruled Illegal

In a decision hailed by supporters of peace and justice in the Middle East, the International Court of Justice ruled July 9 that the wall being built by Israel in the West Bank violates international law. The ICJ called on Israel to tear it down and compensate Palestinians harmed by its construction.

"Israel is under an obligation to terminate its breaches of international law; it is under an obligation to cease forthwith the works of construction of the wall being built in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around East Jerusalem, to dismantle forthwith the structure therein situated," said the ruling, read by the court president, Judge Shi Jiuyong of China.

The court's advisory on the legality of the fence called on the United Nations Security Council to consider "further action" to stop construction.

Israel's security does not merit construction of the barrier, said the court, stating that it "cannot be justified by military exigencies or by the requirements of national security or public order."

The case began last December when the UN General Assembly agreed to a Palestinian request to seek a World Court opinion on the legality of the wall. The court found that the barrier could become tantamount to annexation of Palestinian land if it is completed and that it impeded the Palestinian's right to self-rule.

"The Court considers that the construction of the wall and its associate regime creates a `fait accompli' on the ground that could well become permanent, in which case, and notwithstanding the formal characterization by Israel, it would be tantamount to de facto annexation," the court said. "That construction, along with measures previously taken, thus severely impeded the exercise by the Palestinian people of its right to self-determination."

Fourteen of the 15 justices supported the decision, with the single objection from the U.S. judge, Thomas Buerghenthal.

Thirteen judges also stated that all countries "are under an obligation not to recognize the illegal situation resulting from the construction of the wall and not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by such construction." Only Buergenthal and Judge Pieter Kooijmans (Holland) rejected the call for all countries to act against the project.

The completed wall, 90% of which is being built on Palestinian territories occupied by Israel since the 1967 war, would cut off more than 230,000 Palestinians from their surrounding areas. Entire towns and villages are being enclosed, and many farmers are being prevented access to their fields. The court said that this violates international humanitarian law by infringing on Palestinians' freedom of movement and freedom to seek employment, education and health.

Just days later, on July 20, the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution condemning the wall, with 150 nations voting in favor of the draft. Only six countries (the United States, Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, Palau and Australia) voted against the resolution, while Canada was among ten abstaining.

A last-minute compromise struck between the European Union nations and the Palestinian sponsors of the resolution enabled the entire EU bloc to support the draft.

Palestinian UN observer Nasser al-Kidwa drafted the resolution, based on the ICJ decision. Kidwa said the resolution was the most important one ever discussed by the UN General Assembly. Under the resolution, the assembly demands that Israel comply with ruling that the barrier built on Palestinian land was illegal and should be torn down. The draft also demands that Israel pay reparations for damages caused by construction of the barrier.

The Assembly vote, and the opinion of the ICJ, both have symbolic value as statements of support for the barrier's destruction and as major steps towards peace in the Middle East. As the highest court of the United Nations, the ICJ's opinion carries enormous political weight, especially given the near-unanimity of the ruling by its highly respected panel of judges.

The decision also helps to strengthen the argument that international law and human rights - not the "might makes right" doctrine of the US and Israel - are central to peace in the Middle East. For example, the court confirmed that Israel's settlements and its annexation of East Jerusalem are all illegal, and that the Geneva Convention applies to the Occupied Territories.

Communist Party of Canada leader Miguel Figueroa welcomed the ruling, calling it "a major victory by the Palestinian people in their struggle against Israeli occupation. Ever since Israel began construction of the apartheid wall, world public opinion has condemned this illegal action. By dividing the entire West Bank into small pieces of land, Israel aimed to permanently block the development of a viable Palestinian state."

Figueroa also condemned Canada's abstention in the July 20 UN vote as "an outrageous act, a shocking rejection of the near-unanimous conclusions of the international court. This decision of the Liberal government simply panders to Israel's flaunting of international law in pursuit of its Zionist, annexationist aims. Canadians are rightly telling Prime Minister Martin that it is completely unacceptable for our country to abstain on this issue. We need to join the rest of the world in demanding that Israel end its occupation of Palestine once and for all."

No country in the world, pointed out Figueroa, has violated decisions of the United Nations as often as Israel, which has the solid backing of the United States. "If any country deserves the designation of `rogue state,' it's Israel," said Figueroa. "Instead, the Bush Administration, with the support of allies such as Britain and its friends in Ottawa, is allowed to use such terminology to justify `regime change' through imperialist pressure, subversion and open military aggression. As long as the U.S. is allowed to arbitrarily declare some countries as targets for attack, while others which thumb their noses at the UN and international law receive massive amounts of military aid, the world will continue to become more dangerous. Canada needs a foreign policy which rejects the Bush doctrine in favour of the rule of international law and peaceful settlement of international disputes."

© 2004 Communist Party of Canada