G.S.Don Morris is Professor, Department of Kinesiology and Health Promotion at California State Polytechnic University, Pomona and Wingate Institute in Israel. He is a member of the Board of Directors of Scholars For Peace in the Middle East
Since when has the world so lost its way? Once again we are asked to believe a story, one so contrived and transparent it is enough to have one accept that the emperor does indeed have on his royal gowns. This is a story of transparency if you are willing to understand the facts rather than the fiction floating across the electronic and print media today. I have always believed that truth eventually wins the day; however, if today’s world finds its members unwilling to seek the truth, unwilling to do the work necessary to uncover the truth and so willing to accept and believe what is presented in the media today, than I may have to reevaluate my position. You see, we are again asked to accept the notion that Israel’s protective barrier is illegal, harmful, and an entity that is cruel to humanity. Now if you are willing to read, to be emotionally, psychologically and intellectually available to the facts, please read on, otherwise do not waste anyone’s time!
Today you are asked to believe the following:
. • Israel is not allowed to have a fence
. • The fence is illegal
. • The fence is not working
. • The fence is nothing more than a “land grab” by Israel
. • Palestinians living in the territory have no rights or recourse
. • The issue of the “fence” is not politically driven
I offer that the preceding is pure fiction, fabrication and is being replicated across the world’s media in order to garner headlines as well as to serve a political agenda. This is a”not too clever” attempt to sustain international pressure upon not only Israel but also to the USA at a most critical moment in the world’s history. We have, after all, listened to “this record” before; we have not only refuted each claim, we have demonstrated the facts on the ground. The Palestinian side has such disdain for the ability of the public to understand, no better yet, they believe that the public either is not willing or capable of doing the work necessary to comprehend the truth. Thus, when their own internal corruption, disruption and malfunction reaches a critical level, they trot out the old “work horse” called misrepresentation and recreation of history. They hope that we, the public, are not able to see if the king is naked before us. Having said this, let us visit the facts as they really did or are now occurring.
Israel is allowed to have a fence
You have experienced three years of murder, in your own yard; no manner of discourse with your neighbor, nor any manner of international pressure has changed the weekly and often daily murder of your people. The murderers walk across your sovereign land, into your restaurants, hop aboard your public buses, enter your Pizza Huts, sit down near you while you are enjoying a cup of coffee or that frappucino you like so much, stand in line at your favorite dance clubs waiting for a longer line to form and then without regard for human life, murder your people. You have talked with your neighbors, you have pleaded with them, you have even had to use some force against them as they prepare to walk once more onto your property with the intention of slaying, maiming and destroying your family. Not wanting to add to your neighbor’s ongoing upset with their own family structure and situation, you decide to prevent them from crossing over onto your property. At great expense to you, risking whatever political currency you had remaining with the world’s opinion, you do what you know you must-you build a protective barrier. Any thinking, caring and compassionate human being would agree that a country has a right to build a protective barrier and guess what, many such fences exist today.
. • For starters, the fence between North and South Korea
. • The fence between Cyprus and the Turkish occupied territory has been in place for decades
. • A fence in Europe! In Northern Ireland this time, ask about the British policy that requires a fence between Catholics and Protestants
. • This is a good fence, as the Dutch people know how to build. It is only meant to keep illegal immigrants from leaving the harbor area of Hoek van Holland. But the purpose is like any other fence: keep the wrong people out of your country.
. • A fence between 2 major United Nations members, India and Pakistan. India is just completing a 460-mile barrier in the contested Kashmir to halt infiltrations supported by Pakistan
. • Saudi Arabia, within the last two years, has constructed sixty miles of barrier in an undefined zone along the Saudi Arabiaâ⁄“Yemen border. The barrier is ten feet high
• Yet another one in Europe! Is it possible? In Solana’
s own country! Spain erected a barbed wired fence, guarded by soldiers, in Ceuta, on the border with Morocco, in order to keep illegal workers (without bombs) out of Spain.
. • Since the late 1980s, Turkey has fenced and mined almost 500 miles of other parts of its border with Syria because of infiltration of Kurdish insurgents.
. • Let us not forget the fence between Mexico and the USA. There is really no need for this fence since the millions of illegal Mexicans in the United States do not commit suicide bomb attacks in American restaurants.
Maybe it is just me, do you not also find it ironic that three countries -India, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey -condemned Israel at the UN General Assembly and yet had the audacity to vote to refer the Israeli fence to the ICJ (International Court of Justice) for an advisory opinion even though they had themselves built barriers in areas contested by their neighbors?
The fence is legal Those of us who want to build a fence do not need ask our neighbors for permission and we do have to follow the law of the land. So what do legal scholars state? 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 and thus display their ignorance. 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. I hear 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.
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 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.”
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. 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.” It is curious that the very group of neighbors, the Palestinians, 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 agreedupon arbitration.Finally, did you know that the UN General Assembly (GA) resolution asking the International Court of Justice (ICJ) 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.”The fence is working It is clear the barrier is saving lives every single day.
The statistics on terrorist attacks carried out by the terror infrastructure in the northern West Bank provide the support for such a statement. If you compare the statistics prior to the construction of the barrier with the attacks carried out by the same terror cells following the construction of the barrier, there is a sharp decrease in terrorist activity targeting innocent Israeli civilians.
For example, during the past 11 months, from August 2003 to June 30, 2004,terrorists operating from the northern West Bank managed to carry out three homicide attacks inside Israel, all within the second half of 2003. These attacks murdered 26 Israelis and wounded 76. However, on two of the three occasions the terrorists infiltrated through areas where the barrier had yet to be completed.
Please note that in the 34 months since the beginning of the conflict, the terror infrastructure in the northern West Bank (where the security barrier is initially being built or is built) succeeded in carrying out 73 attacks, in which 293 Israelis were killed and 1,950 were wounded. Since the barrier has been constructed, there has been a dramatic decrease of approximately 90% in the number of successful terror attacks. In fact, we used to average 26 attacks per year and we are down to three. Yes, three too many! Not spoken of in the media but important to those of us living here in Israel, the security barrier has produced a dramatic general decrease (roughly 85%) in the number of Israelis wounded, from an average of 688 Israelis wounded a year, to 83 the year following the completion of the barrier’
s northern section.
The security barrier was reluctantly built in response to Palestinian behavior. The data clearly indicates that the barrier is saving lives, on both sides of the barrier I might suggest, as well as preventing wounds that remain with individuals and their families for a lifetime. If you were under such attack, if you had a moral, ethical and duty to protect your loved ones, would you not build such a passive barrier to save lives? It is doing what its stated intention is-protect one’s citizens from those who continue to desire to murder these same citizens.
The fence is only for security and nothing more You can’t go a day without hearing from one after another Palestinian spokesperson that the wall is nothing more than a tool to illegally annex more territory. This certainly sounds good if you are anti-Israel. This certainly raises the hair on the backs of the Palestinian populace and is therefore an emotional trigger. What better way to keep your citizens angry, upset, and emotional so that the attention is taken off their own leaders and their own poor quality of life? This is also a great strategy for recruiting international support, in the form of money as well as “shoes on the ground”. Imagine, those Israelis stealing yet more of the Palestinian land. The problem, for the Palestinians, is that all of it is false. Not only is it false, when they repeat it over and over again, it is clear they are intentionally misleading, misrepresenting and attempting a revisionist history lesson.
First, this is a security barrier not a wall. Second, Israel has never illegally annexed any land. Third, and perhaps most important, the land upon which the Palestinians reside remains to this day, disputed territory. This last point is crucial to understanding what is really happening in this part of the world. If you did not know better, if you haven’t read, studied or followed this conflict from its inception you would be lead to believe that this is occupied land. Please understand that there is no sovereign state called Palestine. This is not what the media implies nor is it what is taught in many schools. I know, when you hear about this or that Prime Minister as well as this governing body you are lead to believe that this is a sovereign nation. I offer this not to impugn the Palestinian people. Rather, this fact explains so much of this conflict. Yet, the world turns its head away from this truth and it appears to want to treat the conflict as though it was dealing with two sovereign nations embroiled in a long-term dispute.
Let us examine some additional facts. The Palestinian leadership has said that the fence should be built along the so-called “green line”. There is no “green line”. The so called “Green Line” has never represented an international boundary. The 1949 armistice agreements specifically refer to this fact. There was never a recognized and legitimate sovereign nation in the West Bank. The legal status of these areas remains that of disputed territory-to be resolved through negotiations. It is this that is required by Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, which call for the parties to start negotiations, inter alia, on “secure and recognized boundaries”, and agreements reached between the parties specifically refer to the need for direct negotiations to resolve this issue.
Israel is building a security barrier that is intended to counter terrorism not to dictate a border that is and remains the subject of permanent negotiations. It is Israel’s stated public policy that by building this fence its very function will become irrelevant and that one day it will be dismantled. Again, fact can lead you to better understanding. The fence has already been moved, it is currently under going a change in its direction. For most thinking human beings one’s words followed by behavior consistent with the words (aka integrity) is the litmus test for credibility. Therefore, I offer that the barrier is precisely that and it will be de-constructed when the leaders of the Palestinians cease and desist from placing Israelis in harms way. Furthermore, their leadership knows this but it does not support their real agenda so they must continue to be disingenuous to the entire world. A side bar note, the Palestinian 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” than 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. Did you know who illegally annexed both the West Bank and Gaza? It wasn’t Israel! Yet the Palestinian spokespeople look right into the camera and without blinking tell you a falsehood and do their best to convince you that the “wicked” ones of Israel want to “grab their land”. Well, you now have more information to draw your own conclusions-you see it is this mistaken and misplaced kind of reasoning that we deal with every day. I believe you can see through this shaky “house of cards” that represents a contentious argument founded on lies.
Palestinians have many rights-more than in their own territory The security barrier is scheduled to be 720 kms. long, three-to eight-metres high, and even the Israelis understand that it is impossible to not create hardship for some Palestinian farmers and villagers. Israel’
s independent judicial system has been significantly involved in the fence building process. Every Palestinian who is affected by the fence has a right of direct appeal to Israel’
s supreme court. The Israeli Supreme Court affords Palestinians due process with regards to the “fence issue”. The court has already recognized ruled that Israel must find an alternative route for 30 to 40 kms. just north of Jerusalem.
Please understand that this ruling was in direct response to complaints brought by Palestinian villagers themselves. Under Israeli law they have the right to challenge expropriations and to be compensated for their lost land. The system is not much different from the system that prevails in other democratic countries when a major public project is deemed to supersede the rights of individual landowners.
Changes of the barrier’s route were made after Israeli authorities conducted negotiations with landowners making sure that their particular needs were taken into account. In certain areas archeological sites were discovered and the route was changed to prevent damage to these historical areas.
The land used in building the security barrier has been/was seized for military purposes. The land has not been confiscated and it remains the property of the owner. Legal procedures are already in place to allow every owner to file an objection to the seizure of their land. Moreover, property owners are offered compensation for the use of their land and for the damage to their trees.Many incorrect statements have been presented regarding the fate of farmers who cultivate olive and other fruit trees growing within the security barrier. Every Palestinian farmer/owner of the trees can indicate a new site to which the trees will be relocated and can be accessed freely. Thus far, contractors designated by The Ministry of Defense to build the security barrier are responsible for uprooting and replanting olive and fruit trees. To date 60,000 olive trees have been relocated in accordance with this procedure.I interpret these legal actions as favorable for the Palestinian population. By this I mean that they are afforded every possible legal action and the Palestinians are able to fight against Israel’s security barrier-this is unheard of anywhere else in the Middle East. My conclusion is simply this: as inconvenient the barrier is for the Palestinians they do have many legal rights as well as a tested legal protocol for adjusting the route of the barrier. Their legal issues are being addressed on a regular basis. It is beyond inconvenient for our murdered children, daughters, wives, sisters, brothers and all other civilians-they have been permanently impacted! The issue of the “fence” is politically driven Of course this is being driven to foster political gain. It is useful to examine the temporal context that has produced this infamous legal ruling. During the fall of 2003 motions were brought to the floor of the UN General assembly requesting that the fence be stopped. Debate continued for several months and in December of 2003 the General assembly of the United Nations voted to send the request to the International Court of Justice. Do you know what the vote was? The resolution barely passed. Final tally was 90 to 4 with 74 abstentions (an abstention is a polite parliamentary way to vote No). The world’s major democracies voted against sending the resolution to the ICJ on the grounds that it had no authority to offer even an advisory opinion. The world’s notorious dictatorships out voted and outmaneuvered the standing democracies-this alone does not bode well for us in the future. A point to understand is that all General Assembly resolutions are non-binding and are themselves only advisory in design. Curiously, four of the Security Council’
s five permanent members -the US, Britain, France, and Russia -all voted against sending the issue to the ICJ, with only China, the fifth permanent member, voting in favor to send it forward.Let’s understand something before moving along. After months of debate, a resolution was passed by a group of people who could only ever offer an advisory opinion. Within this group the world’s democracies voted against offering such advice, while the likes of China, Syria, Iran voted to send the resolution to the ICJ. Beginning in January of 2004 the ICJ began its examination of the fence. Mind you, no matter what this court resolved, its edict is only advisory-sound familiar? Yet to read the world’s newspapers or to listen and to watch the visual media, one would think the ICJ outcome of July 9, 2004 was credible and binding. You have been made to think that Israel is a bandit, trying to operate outside of the law-be very careful with this interpretation. Did you know the ICJ ruling is 59 pages long and it took the first 22 plus pages to offer a justification that it, the ICJ, has the authority to offer an advisory ruling. Now, doesn’t that strike you as odd? What has been conveniently left out of most of the reporting of this ruling is the following:
. • This report is simply advisory and is in no way legally binding, contrary to the Palestinian representation of this report in the days subsequent to its release
. • The ruling did indicate that the fence is being built for security reasons and NOT for purposes of annexing land
. • The ICJ ruling primarily addresses the portion of the barrier around Jerusalem rather than suggesting the entire barrier is not legal-it does not object to the barrier built along the 1949 armistice line
With this perspective it is helpful to ask who and what is this ICJ? Examine the list of judges who comprise this International Court:President of the court: China -Shi Jiuyong Vicepresident: Madagascar -Raymond Ranjeva
US UK France Germany Netherlands Japan Slovakia Brazil Venezuela Jordan Sierra Leone Russia Egypt -Al-Arabi
This court’s very composition is political. Eight of the fifteen Judges who serve on it come from non-democratic countries. This was a politically charged case and consider that these judges are more apt to listen to their dictator leaders than honor the notion of justice. The court’s president hails from China, a country known for its severe human rights abuses and bully-like behavior. The vice-president, is from Madagascar. This is a country that even Amnesty International cites in its 2003 reports for unlawful killings, torture, and arbitrary arrests and detentions. Of the other thirteen countries represented on the court, only seven have strong democratic credentials. Even then, six of these countries are not looking favorably upon Israel. Finally, the remaining six range from countries with considerable human rights problems. These are the people, human beings with their own life experiences and biases, who sit in judgment of Israel. Be honest, this kind of venue will produce a fair, balanced and objective opinion? You still do not think that this entire episode, begun by the Palestinians, is political in design and intent? If you cannot allow yourself to even try on the idea that his entire escapade is politically motivated, simply have the courage to watch what happens these next weeks and months.
Summary
I believe that the world has lost its way-any semblance of fairness and balance is gone in the world community of public opinion. There seems to be an absence of moral and ethical clarity and people are more willing now than ever before to look for and “see” the worst in USA-Israeli policy. It has become socially acceptable to denigrate democracies and to promote the “cause” of regimes that at best operate void of human dignity or respect for the value of human life. It is not too late to awake from our slumber, but others must be willing to speak up and out. It takes courage to go against the tide of popular world opinion. As I said earlier in this piece, I still hold on to the belief that truth ultimately wins-for all of our sake I hope I am correct.
