Wingate Institute SPME Board of Directors
Here in Israel the following makes the news on a regular basis:
” Four border policemen and three Palestinians were lightly wounded Tuesday morning during a demonstration in the village of Budrus against the construction of the West Bank security fence in the Modi’in area. ” (Jerusalem Post, Sept.21, 2004)
It seems that Israeli and international activists also joined the Palestinian demonstrators as they pelted the Border police with stones, in turn the troops fired rubber bullets and used tear gas to disperse the crowd. End of today’s story-this is usually accompanied with a photo or at most a 30 second video clip. The visual portion that is displayed catches only one moment in time. Typically, the editor of the story selects a camera or video frame that shows the Israeli soldier pointing a gun with the innocent demonstrators throwing “only” stones-might this influence anyone’s perception or understanding?
This story plays to certain audiences in the Middle East and in Europe. My American friends and colleagues rarely hear about the daily episodes of mischief perpetrated against Israelis. The demonstrations at the fence or at locations where the fence is being built are for the news consumer in the afore-mentioned locales. The demonstrations have become one of the tools used by the Palestine Territory authorities to foster the belief that Israel is the mean spirited dictator who is undermining and has undermined the “Palestinian people”. The Palestine Territory leaders know that perception (a snapshot of a situation) is more powerful than the truth and thus have embarked upon a strategy of revisionist history, misrepresentation of facts and misinterpretation of international law. Capture the perception of a person and you have won their hearts seems to be the modus operandi of the Palestine Territory leaders.
Time to offer another paradigm, another way of examining the series of events that unfold daily over here-I call it context! It is past time that the “fence” events are placed within the proper context in order for the truth to begin to emerge. In addition, the context must be repeated time and time again, using the same tactic Israel’s enemies use-repeat something often enough and finally they will believe. To refuse to use this strategy is akin to burying “our heads in the sand.” The basic arguments used by the Palestine Territory leaders fall into the following groups: historical, legal, communal hardship and social degradation. The following is but a summary of facts within each of these categories that is designed to provide proper context for explanation of the “actions on the ground”.
Historical facts:
Israel is a recognized sovereign state/nation (since 1948) and is so recognized by the existing international rule of law. The land mass known as the Palestine territory is divided into two sections: Gaza and the West Bank. Egypt and Jordan illegally annexed both landmasses and continued to control them until 1967. Israel was attacked in 1967 by both of these countries as well as other Arab countries. As a result of this short defensive war, Israel took over control of both locations-they are disputed territories. Arabs living in the West Bank were given Jordanian citizenship during the timeframe 1950-1967. In 1964 the Arab League, a confederation of fourteen Arab countries met in Cairo and established a political body to deal directly with the problem of the Palestinian Arabs, aka, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). Yasser Arafat became its second Chairman in 1969. Curiously, within Article 24 of the PLO Charter they state the following:
“This Organization does not exercise any territorial sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, [or] on the Gaza Strip…” Their own binding document demolishes their claim that the West Bank or Gaza is “historic Palestine.”
Do you remember the PLO’s first leader? He was an Egyptian, Ahmed Shukairy. He is remembered for saying on May 31, 1956, to the UN Security Council: “It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but Southern Syria.”
Since 1967 Israel has had to assume responsibility for both territories up to and even after partial implementation of the Oslo Accord agreement. As will be presented later under the legal portion, there does not exist a sovereign border between Israel and the territories-at best, an armistice line was suggested. Final borders are to be part of a negotiated peace. Israel has rights to the land defined within the existing territories.
Thus, a sovereign nation, with administrative obligations for people choosing to live in these same territories, has responsibilities to protect its own citizens and to provide for those residing in the territories. After thousands being wounded, many with permanent injuries they will retain for their entire lives and after nearly 900 citizens murdered by homicide bombers, the Israeli government had three choices. It could continue with “business as usual”, it could escalate the use of force and re-enter the territories with incredible force, the probability of many civilian deaths was high, or it could build a non-violent security barrier. Data as of this writing demonstrates that the barrier/fence is working-it saves lives on both sides. A drop of over 90% in the number of terrorist attacks according to national data sources. Any thinking, caring and compassionate human being would agree that a country has a right to build a protective barrier.
Legal Justification for the fence
According to international law experts Laurence E. Rothenberg and Abraham Bell, of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, “the security fence is a necessary and proportional response to a campaign of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes by Palestinians.”
Many individuals want to apply the rules of the Geneva Convention. The fence does not violate the Fourth Geneva Convention because the convention does not apply to the West Bank, a territory of disputed sovereignty to which Israel has the strongest claim. The Geneva Convention only applies to sovereign nations and the West Bank is simply a disputed territory thus making mute such a claim. This claim has been debated (regarding application to territories) and a legal international ruling has yet to be officially passed by all countries.
One hears the argument that the fence is not a proportional response to the harm it is causing the Palestinians. Well, let’s look at law and specifically let’s examine the Geneva Convention’s rules in this regard given that the Palestinians and world leaders constantly use this as a standard for rule. The Geneva Convention states that a fence that controls movement of civilians does not violate the convention’s rules; the Convention permits occupying states to take necessary and proportional steps for security purposes. It must be stated, time and gain if need be that the court also ruled that the Israeli government must reroute the planned fence in the northern Jerusalem area to balance those interests-Israel is complying. It should further be noted that the court rejected the claim of the Palestinians that, if the concerns were security in nature, the routing of the fence must be along the “Green Line.” The court emphasized that “security, and not political concerns, must determine the routing without any connection to this or another line solely by balancing the concerns of security and humanitarian matters.”
Finally, did you know that the UN General Assembly (GA) resolution asking the International Court of Justice (ICJ) only for an advisory opinion is “actually a request for an endorsement of an already-stated political opinion of the GA? The ICJ lacks jurisdiction over the case because the GA has dictated the desired result. The court is not authorized to make endorsements of the GA’s political opinions dressed in legal garb.” One should understand that the ICJ was established under the Charter of the United Nations to be the principal judicial organ of the United Nations and has no legally binding position in the case of Israel’s security barrier. Yet, the media and the Palestine Territory leadership would have you believe otherwise!
It is curious that the Palestine Territory leaders, who want to use the legal system to justify an unjustifiable position, are in fact in breach of an agreement they signed years ago into law (Oslo Accords). It is this same agreement that they throw in the world’s face to justify their behavior. Yet, they are in fundamental breach of this document. The PLO asking the International Court of Justice to rule on the security barrier is itself a violation of the Oslo Accords. Under the Oslo Accords, any disputes must be resolved by negotiation between Israel and the Palestinians, by agreed-upon conciliation, or agreed-upon arbitration.
In a country that operates with in a “rule of law”, Israel’s High Court of Justice decision regarding the planned routing of Israel’s security fence in the northern Jerusalem area significantly emphasized (June 30,2004) the important position of the rule of law and judicial review over Israel’s security initiatives to protect its citizens from Palestinian terrorism. The Court also “recognized Israel’s right to build a security fence that balances the security concerns of combating terrorism with the humanitarian needs of the local Palestinian population”
It is important to note that the Israeli court clearly determined that the goal of the fence is security in nature. Additionally the court, “in accordance with international and Israel law, ruled that Israel’s security authorities may plan the routing of the fence based upon considerations of military necessity. At the same time, the court emphasized that the routing must also take into account humanitarian considerations and a balance must be created between these two issues.”
Communal hardship
Initially the planned route was approximately 458 miles. The plan has been repeatedly modified. In February 2004, the government stated it is going to shorten the route and move the barrier closer to the 1949 armistice line (green line) to make it less difficult for the Palestinians. These changes will make the length of the barrier less than 400 miles.
Here is the context:
· The land used in building the security fence is seized for military purposes and, unlike reported by the media it is not confiscated, it remains the property of the owner.
· Legal procedures are in place to allow every Territory owner to file a complaint regarding the seizure of his land.
· Did you know that property owners are offered compensation for the use of their land and for any damage to their trees?
· Contractors are responsible for carefully uprooting and replanting the trees. So far, more than 60,000 olive trees have been relocated.
· Israel is providing agricultural passageways to allow farmers to continue to cultivate their lands, and crossing points to allow the movement of people and the transfer of goods. They continue to make a living.
· The fence has caused some disruption, difficulty and hardship for those living near it. Israel’s Supreme Court heard the grievances of Palestinians. It found and then ruled that the construction of the security fence is consistent with international law and was based on Israel’s security requirements rather than political considerations. Furthermore it also required the government to move the fence in the area near Jerusalem to make things easier for the Palestinians.
· If you only secure your information about the fence by watching Western media you would think it is a wall. However, less than 3% or about 15 miles is actually a 30-foot high concrete wall, and it is being built in specific locations where it will prevent Palestinian snipers from shooting at cars as they have done for the last three years along the Trans-Israel Highway. Again, did you know that his highway is one of the country’s main roads? The remainder is a fence similar to that used throughout the United States, but with a network of barriers, underground and long-range hi-tech sensors, unmanned aerial vehicles, trenches, land mines and guard paths.
·.Yes, in certain areas Palestinian farmers must use one of the 41 agricultural gates that exist along the route to enable them access to their lands. In addition there 9 crossing points for pedestrians and vehicles-these take the place of existing check points. Yes, select internal checkpoints have been a source of real upset. As of this writing many additional agricultural gates are planned. No one discounts that this represents an inconvenience to farmers.
· It is important to remember that the security barrier has been built in response to the terrorism emanating from the West Bank. If there were no terrorism and no homicide bombers there would be no fence!
Yes, the farmers are inconvenienced, yet alive and they have legal and humanitarian rights. Murdered Israeli children, women and other civilians are gone-the thousands of permanently injured Israelis (those the media do not discuss) live forever with their damaged bodies, spirit and souls.
Social Degradation
The security barrier is precisely designed to stop homicide bombers and those bent on killing Israelis by other means from entering their sovereign land. Contrary to what you have been told the barrier will be de-constructed when the leaders of the Palestinians cease and desist from placing Israelis in harms way. Behaviour and actions are what count-Israel has a record of doing just this. Furthermore, their leadership knows this but this does not support their real agenda so they must continue to be disingenuous to the entire world. The Palestine Territory leadership indicates that the “wall” is tearing apart the social integrity of the Palestinians because it isn’t built along the “green line.” The Palestinian Territory leadership is counting on you, the reader, not knowing the geography of this area. You see, if the barrier did indeed follow the “green line” then it would create far more humanitarian problems, dividing arbitrarily certain villages, and separating other villages from access to water and other basic services on a large scale.
They also want you to believe that families are being torn apart by this barrier. Hmm, an inanimate structure is making or causing their society to crumble? Might the difficulties within the social matrix of those Palestinians living in the territories be the result of two generations of anti-Israel, anti-Jew incitement? Any possibility that their local television programming featuring the most despicable portrayal of Israelis is allowed to be shown daily, 365 days a year? Could it be that the textbooks, educational classes and teachers preaching hatred toward Israelis in place of mathematics, reading, writing, science has created not only a dis-empowering educational climate, it has created an environment that fosters and promotes death and destruction? Might the religious leaders preaching death, destruction and anti-Jew messages every week in their “services” contribute to the attitudes and beliefs of their own following? Is it any wonder that a society under constant social cohesion attack be in jeopardy?
The world needs to be willing to open its eyes to the concept of social responsibility. Until a society is willing to accept its own behaviour, own it and then ask itself critical questions, nothing will change. Perhaps the international community should provide assistance toward this end. It is one thing to cry incessantly social abuse, it is altogether a different thing to place the blame for such destruction properly on itself. The curious thing about what has just been written is that the world community knows this is all true. These leaders are not unlike the ostrich, they have placed their heads in the sands of irresponsibility and have forfeited their position to offer true reform. The result is ongoing violence. It is said that one who turns away from the truth, one who chooses to ignore reality is as guilty as those perpetuating the dastardly actions. Advice is cheap, actions matter and it is time for those who support murder and mayhem to look within themselves-do not be afraid of the truth, embrace it and act accordingly! The next time a story,a snapshot appears on your television or in some printed medium, place it in proper context before you jump to an incorrect conclusion.
