Articles on the Apartheid Wall and International Law
Posted inSem categoria /

Articles on the Apartheid Wall and International Law

Cracking Under the Strain
Jonathan Cook, Al-Ahram Weekly
Severe cracks surfaced inside the Israeli government this week as its senior law officers publicly
fell out with the defence establishment and the Foreign Ministry over the country’s future strategy in the face of the July
verdict of the International Court of Justice that the separation wall being built in the West Bank is illegal. [MORE]

Back to context
Azmi Bishara, Al-Ahram Weekly
JULY 19TH, 2004 —
When the dynamics of power politics divert the public sphere, in the case of the state, and international
public opinion, in the case of nations, from the plight of the victim then it is time that the dry language of the court comes
to the rescue. The reason is that this language is not subject to the constraints of the balance of power, or to the demands
of diplomatic niceties, but serves to interpret law and pronounce judgement. Of course the politics of power, in the case of
the state, and the diplomacy of international balances of power, in the case of nations, assert themselves again when the
court ruling needs someone to execute it. [MORE]

Why Israel boycotted the International Court hearing on West Bank wall
Jean Shaoul, World Socialist Web Site
MARCH 28TH, 2004 —
Israel’s refusal to appear before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) hearing on the West Bank
security wall demonstrates its longstanding contempt for the United Nations and flouting of international law. Yet, instead
of eliciting condemnation and threats of reprisals from the United States, Britain and the European Union for having acted
as a “rogue state,” Israel has been supported in its insistence that the ICJ—and by extension the United Nations—has no right
to interfere in Israel’s affairs without prior agreement. [MORE]

Israel boycotts International Court on West Bank barrier: Why the wall is being built
Chris Marsden, World Socialist Web Site
MARCH 24TH, 2004 —

Even if Palestine wins at The Hague…
Ali Abunimah, The Electronic Intifada
FEBRUARY 24TH, 2004 —
Palestinian UN envoy, Nasser Al-Kidwa, told the International Court of Justice (ICJ) that he hopes a
ruling that Israel’s separation barrier in the West Bank would lead to the same kind of international sanctions that followed
after the Court’s 1971 ruling against South Africa’s occupation of Namibia. But if this hope is what Palestinian Authority
(PA) strategy is built on, then we are in trouble. Electronic Intifada’s Ali Abunimah says that the Palestinians are not
wanting for international legal decisions supporting their rights. What they badly lack is a political strategy to convert
these rulings into reality. [MORE]

Buses and Bantustans at The Hague
Amira Howeidy, Al Ahram Weekly On-line
FEBRUARY 19TH, 2004 —
The Palestinians are likely to win the legal debate over Israel’s separation wall in the World Court
next week. But Tel Aviv has more leverage outside the courtroom. Amira Howeidy wonders who will have the last laugh. [MORE]

The ‘International Community’ and the Apartheid Wall
Samer Elatrash , ZNet
FEBRUARY 15TH, 2004 —
The twin spectres of “politicizing” the UN and damaging the “fragility” of non-existent peace talks
between General Sharon and the decrepit Palestinian Authority are again being invoked, this time to scuttle the upcoming
deliberations in the International Court of Justice at the Hague on the legality of Israel’s separation barrier in the
occupied West Bank. [MORE]

Skirting the issue
Jonathan Cook , Al-Ahram Weekly Online
FEBRUARY 6TH, 2004 —
Israel’s furious diplomatic activity to sabotage a decision taken by the United Nations General Assembly
last December to seek the opinion of its highest judicial body, the International Court of Justice, on the legality of Israel
building its separation wall across large swaths of occupied Palestinian territory began to pay dividends at the weekend.
By the Friday deadline for submitting affidavits, 31 states had joined Israel in rejecting the court’s authority to rule in
the matter: 15 member states of the European Union, 10 further members-in-waiting, as well as the United States, Canada,
Australia, Russia, South Africa and Cameroon. Britain, Germany and France presented their own, separately written
affidavits. [MORE]

Facing up to the wall
Dina Ezzat , Al Ahram Weekly On-line
JANUARY 22ND, 2004 —
On the political front Arab-Israeli tensions are expected to escalate in coming weeks as both sides prepare arguments to present to the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The ICJ will open hearings over the legality or otherwise of the separation wall Israel is constructing across the Palestinian occupied territories — as requested by the UN General Assembly — on 23 February.
The Arab League and four Arab countries — Egypt, Palestine, Jordan and Saudi Arabia — will present evidence to the ICJ on the
illegality of the construction of the wall and its negative humanitarian and political consequences. [MORE]

The Wall and International Law
Mohammad Abu-Harthieh, Jerusalem Center for Human Rights
AUGUST 26TH, 2003 —
The Wall, as well as the Occupation itself as its wider context, is a manifest violation of human rights
and international law. Violations include the principle of collective punishment (the wall is justified as a security
structure, meaning that a whole people is to be locked in as a punishment for suicide attacks), the seizing of private
property by an occupying power, demolition of houses to build the Wall, the violation of such basic human rights as the
right of work and freedom of movement, and separating people from their families, another violation of basic human rights.