On Monday, Feb. 23, Israel is scheduled to appear before the International Court of Justice in The Hague to defend the fence it is building to cordon off Palestinian towns in the West Bank.
Until now it’s been the court’s job to deal with criminal matters such as military leaders and dictators who killed innocent civilians. But now the court is about to pounce on a sheer political matter that involves only one country, Israel. On the other side are the Palestinians, who have no state or country of their own.
Israel has repeatedly said the purpose of the fence is for self-defense. And it is no surprise that since building began, far fewer suicide bombers have made their way into Israel and wreaked havoc on its citizens.
Israel also has said the fence, made of chain link and cement, is temporary and could easily be moved. Palestinians, on the other hand, claim that the fence is establishing a new border between both peoples.
But the Jewish state is ready to return to the negotiating table to discuss not only the fence’s location but an inclusive peace agreement. Its only condition is that violence stop. The Palestinians, however, have many other preconditions — including the removal of the fence — before talks begin.
So what right does the world court have to meddle in this issue? None, as we see it. This is a matter for the negotiating table, not for a world court.
Even though the court would issue advisory opinion rather than a ruling, there is no doubt that a negative opinion would lead member countries to impose sanctions against the Jewish state.
We must remember that the court was established by the United Nations, which has been less than supportive of Israel.
And although there are 15 judges who are not supposed to represent their home country but to rule independently, it is hard to believe that Awn Shawkat al-Kawassmeh, a Palestinian from Jordan, and Egyptian Nabil Elaraby could ever vote in favor of Israel.
Moreover, Israel fears that the Arab world will want the court to deal with much more than the fence and put Israel’s entire occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip on trial.
In the meantime, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has said that Israel may adjust the fence’s placement on its own accord. And Israel is lobbying the United States to attend the hearing in The Hague and provide support. At the moment Bush’s government, which opposed the fence, is remaining neutral.
We need to contact members of Congress and urge that they push the administration to stand in support of Israel. Otherwise an unfriendly court could make a major impact on Israel’s role in the world community.