Israeli wall resolution approved [Israeli Security Fence to be reviewed by the ICJ]

The Australian ^ | December 09, 2003 | AP

[yonif]

THE UN General Assembly approved a resolution today asking the International Court of Justice to issue an advisory opinion on the legal consequences of Israel's construction of a separation wall.

The vote was 90 in favour, eight opposed and 74 abstentions, reflecting unease in many nations on referring the issue to the world court, based in The Hague, Netherlands. Several noted that any opinion would be advisory - not legally binding.

The United States and Israel strongly opposed the resolution, arguing that it would "politicise" the court and undermine efforts to reach a Middle East peace settlement. Israel insists the barrier, which it began building last year, is needed to prevent suicide attacks and says its construction is purely for security.

Arab nations argued that going to the court was the only action available to try to stop construction of the barrier which the Palestinians call a land grab by Israel ahead of possible talks about the borders of a Palestinian state.

The Palestinian UN observer, Nasser Al-Kidwa, started pushing for the resolution after Secretary-General Kofi Annan issued a November 28 report declaring that Israel has failed to comply with a General Assembly demand to halt construction of the barrier, which juts into the West Bank.

[yonif]

Why does Israel need a security fence? (Flash presentation)

[richardtavor]

The land doesn't belong to the Palestinians anyway.

[anotherview]

Here is the Jerusalem post report on the vote, with a bit more detail:

Dec. 8, 2003
UN votes 90:8 to send fence to Hague
By JPOST.COM STAFF

The United Nations General Assembly voted Monday to request that the International Court of Justice deliberate on whether Israel is legally obligated to halt construction of the security fence.

Ninety voted for the motion, eight against, among them the United States, Israel, the Marshall Islands and Uganda. Seventy-four abstained, including the members of the European Union.

EU Ambassador to Israel Giancarlo Chevallard defended the abstentions, saying that European states could not vote against the proposal in order to maintain open channels with those states that support the idea, and that the European vote would regardless be unlikely to affect the inevitable outcome.

Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said that Israel will, should the need arise, present its case before the IJC and argue that the fence is a legal barrier designed to protect lives.

The assembly voted 144 to 4 with 12 abstentions last month on a resolution demanding that Israel halt construction of the barrier.

This is "the fence that Arafat built," UN ambassador Dan Gillerman said Monday. "Arafat built the fence, and his terror initiated it and made the fence inevitable. If there were no Arafat, there would be no need for a fence," he said.

He also attacked the world body itself, saying, "We don't think that it is up to the United Nations or any other international body to determine the legal aspect of this measure," adding that none of Israel's neighbors "have an independent legal system comparable to ours."

The Palestinian UN observer, Nasser Al-Kidwa, started pushing for the resolution after Secretary-General Kofi Annan issued a November 28 report declaring that Israel had failed to comply with a General Assembly demand to halt construction of the fence, which juts into the West Bank.

[anotherview]

The fence is a rational, non-lethal way of stopping the bloodshed. The Palestinians are against it because it precludes violence as an option for them. Clearly the U.N. prefers bloodshed to the fence.

[samtheman]

When they get down building their fence, can we hire them to build us one on the Mexican border (we can't seem to do it ourselves).

[thoughtomator]

Exhibit A in support of the case that anyone describing themselves as an "international official" should be shot on sight.

[1ofmanyfree]

It did not take the anti-Semites long to spin a security fence into a "separation wall".

All the land won from the attacking (and defeated) Arab countries armies is rightfully the property of the Israeli state. They fought off a multi-national surprise attack and won the war. The West Bank and Gaza are the spoils of war and rightfully theirs. Israel has the right to do as they please in ALL these areas.

The un needs to move on...

IMHO