The Segregation and Annexation W all: A Crim e against Hum anity

“ I n its Opinion, the Court finds unanim ously that it has jurisdiction to give the advisory opinion requested by the General Assem bly and decides by fourteen votes to one to com ply with that request. The Court responds to the question as follows:

By fourteen votes to one,

The construction of the wall being built by I srael, the occupying Power, in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around , and its associated regim e, are contrary to international law.”

- - I nternational Court of Justice Advisory Opinion July 9 , 2 0 0 4 .

I ntroduction:

On Septem ber 28, 2000, then opposition leader Sharon chose to m ake a m ost provocative visit to the Al-Aqsa com pound in Jerusalem ’s Old City, accom panied by as m any as 1000 I sraeli Special Forces units. As a consequence of this provocation the Palestinian Uprising or Second I ntifada erupted, a show of collective Palestinian dism ay at I srael’s illegal and prolonged occupation of Palestinian land and people.

I nstead of recognizing the adversarial reality of this occupation, the governm ent of I srael, at the tim e headed by Prim e Minister Ehud Barak, initiated the construction of what cam e to be known by , as the ‘Segregation and Annexation W all.’ The first sections of the Wall were built in the northern city of in beginning of 2002.

I srael’s ‘Wall’ is being built in such a way as to divide Palestinian population centers from their adjacent agricultural land and water resources, isolating Palestinian population centers from one another and restricting not only freedom of m ovem ent of individuals but also worsening an already crippled Palestinian econom y. The ‘Wall’ separates Palestinians from Palestinians and serves to secure illegal settlem ents built on occupied land. The m ost evident exploitation of I srael’s breach of convention is the im plem entation of new borders within the West Bank (including east Jerusalem ), an occupied territory.

This actual annexation of land alongside the violations of basic hum an rights highlights I srael’s self- absorbed, unilateral and unconstructive-to-peace policies, with com plete disregard to com m on hum an values that would take into consideration the effect the ‘Wall’ has on Palestinians. So that as Hebrew University's Shlom o Avineri explains while, Prim e Minister has at last internalized the lim its of I sraeli power to im pose the ousting of Palestinians entirely, the rem aining option was sim ply to separate the Palestinians from I sraelis. This m ove m akes evident that withdrawal and construction of this Segregation and Annexation Wall in the West Bank, is m eant to give the I sraelis security and while its effect on Palestinians was unclear, it was left unexplored, one im agines, due to its irrelevance on I sraeli policy.

The Segregation and Annexation W all Deconstructed

Structure

The Segregation and Annexation Wall's construction varies; around Qalqiliya it is pure concrete 8 m eters ( 2 5 feet) high and equipped with watchtowers while in other places it is part concrete and part fence or a series of razor wire and/ or electric fencing all of which includes a 7 0 - 1 0 0 m eter (approxim ately 2 3 0 - 3 3 0 feet) “ buffer zone” with trenches, roads, razor wire, cam eras, and trace paths for footprints. I n and Jerusalem , the Wall is m ade up of a com bination of these m aterials.

Essentially the ‘Wall’ is a physical barrier consisting of a network of fences, walls, and trenches, unilaterally constructed by I srael on Palestinian lands. The m ain barrier takes on m any form s, including 8-m eter high cem ent walls, 3 - m eter high electric and barbed-wire fences, and a com bination of the two. According to I sraeli plans, the barrier will be over 4 5 0 m iles (7 2 0 kilom eters) in length, at a cost not less than $ 1 .6 m illion per m ile ( $ 1 m illion per km ), and will exceed $ 1 billion for the entire project. The infrastructure of the barrier that also includes a buffer zone on both sides, surveillance cam eras, trenches, and observation posts com pounds what I sraeli hum an rights activist calls the “ m atrix of control” of settlem ents, by-pass roads and checkpoints.

W hat’s in a Nam e?

The nam e of the I sraeli Wall (com m only referred to as a "fence" by its supporters and a "wall" by its opponents) is itself a political issue. The m ost com m on nam es used by I srael are "separation fence" (gader ha’ in Hebrew) and "security fence" or "anti-terrorist fence" in English, with "" referring to the land between the fence and the 1949 arm istice lines. Palestinians (including the m edia) m ost com m only refer to the barrier in Arabic as "Jidar Al-Dam wal Fasl Al-Unsuri", (racial segregation and annexation wall), and m any opponents of the barrier som etim es refer to it in English as an " wall". The United Nations and the international com m unity use inconsistent wording, including separation/ security and fence/ wall/ barrier. While the I CJ consistently used the word `Wall.'

The W est Bank ‘W all’

The constructed and approved (solely by the I sraeli Knesset) extents of the ‘Wall’ roughly follow the 1949 Jordanian-I sraeli arm istice line, also known as the "". I n som e areas the route diverges from this line, particularly in areas with a high concentration of Jewish settlem ents: east Jerusalem , Ariel, Beitar I llit, , Gush Etzion, Em m anuel Karm el Shom ron, Givat Ze'ev, Oranit, and Maale Adum im . These divergences m ay be as m uch as 20 kilom eters from the ‘Green Line’.

The ‘Wall’ violates m ultiple international conventions, agreem ents, and resolutions, including article 2.4 of the United Nations Charter (prohibiting the use of force to violate territorial integrity), the Fourth Geneva Convention (prohibiting the destruction of land or property and the practice of collective punishm ent), and both the I nternational Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the I nternational Covenant on Econom ical, Social, and Cultural Rights (defining rights of m ovem ent, property, health, education, work, and food). The ‘Wall’ also is contrary to UN Security Council resolution 242 which calls for the “ Withdrawal of I sraeli arm ed forces from territories occupied in the recent [ 1967] conflict.”

The Wall encroaches into the occupied from along the entire perim eter of the West Bank, frequently abutting or intersecting Palestinian villages, while leaving agricultural fields, shops, and fam ily m em bers on the opposite, I sraeli-claim ed side of the border. I n places like , the barrier loops prom inently into the West Bank, enveloping entire Palestinian villages and creating ghettos with a single, narrow checkpoint guarding the entrances to these villages. Effectively Qalqilya has turned into a very large open air prison. The Annexation and Segregation Wall, upon its com pletion, will result in I srael’s annexation of roughly half of the W est Bank, displacing and disconnecting Palestinians from their hom es, fam ilies, neighbors, and fields. I t is this encroachm ent and the resultant hum anitarian crises that the I sraeli Suprem e Court, itself, ruled illegal in its June 30, 2004 ruling, notwithstanding its approval of the justification for the barrier based on security concerns.

I n a m ore broad-reaching ruling on the ‘Wall,’ the I nternational Court of Justice ruled on its legality in a July 9, 2004 verdict. I n sum , the decision rendered the construction of the ‘Wall’ contrary to international law, recom m ended that the State of I srael end its construction and dism antles existing segm ents and that I srael pay reparations to those who have suffered loss as a result of the construction, and instructed the United Nations to pursue necessary m eans to address the illegality of the ‘Wall.’ Both I srael and the U.S. disregarded this ruling and thereby dism issed the relevance and authority of international law over I srael. The U.S. continues to provide m ore aid to I srael than to any other country in the world.

The im pact of the visually and spiritually offensive ‘Wall’ on the Palestinian people has been m ore devastating than abstract facts can convey. Hom es have been dem olished, water supplies have been cut off, fields have been razed, villages divided, and access to the other side has been cut off. Farm ers have lost their fields or lost access to them . Faithful com m unities—Palestinian Muslim s and —have been denied access to houses of worship. Fam ilies have been split. According to UN estim ates, 6 8 0 ,0 0 0 Palestinians ( 3 0 % of the W est Bank population) are directly affected. The Sabeel Liberation Theology Center in Jerusalem reports that “ Palestinians have been separated from their places of em ploym ent, their farm lands, hospitals, schools, places of worship and their fam ilies. I n the first phase of the wall alone, 1 0 0 ,0 0 0 trees have been uprooted; 3 5 ,0 0 0 m eters of irrigation networks have been destroyed; and 7 5 % of teachers and students living in the construction areas have had difficulty arriving at school.” These effects further deteriorate the quality of life of the Palestinian population in the occupied territories.

On February 18, 2005 the I sraeli cabinet approved a new route for the ‘Wall’ which would leave approxim ately 7 percent of the West Bank and 1 0 ,0 0 0 Palestinians on the I sraeli side. Map: [ 1] Before that tim e the exact route of the barrier had not been finalized, and it had been alleged by som e that it would encircle the West Bank, separating it from the valley. [ 2]

The Jerusalem W all

On July 10th 2005 I srael's cabinet, ignoring Palestinian objections and US m isgivings, endorsed the construction of a ‘Security wall’, saying that security needs have forced it to build 8 0 kilom eters of eight- m eter- high concrete w alls and electric fences around Jerusalem . The ‘Wall’ leaves four Arab neighborhoods of Jerusalem (Kufr Aqab, Anata, , and the Shufat refugee cam p), with som e 5 5 ,0 0 0 residents, on the West Bank side, while including the largest Jewish West Bank settlem ent, Ma’aleh Adum im , with close to 3 0 ,0 0 0 people, on the Jerusalem side. The Jerusalem enclosure is part of the 7 2 0 km ‘Wall’ I srael has been building for m ore than two years to separate itself from m uch of the West Bank. Looping the Annexation Wall around Ma’aleh Adum im , located east of Jerusalem near , would cut off east Jerusalem , the Palestinians' m ost potent sym bol, from the rest of the West Bank.

The establishm ent of new Jewish neighborhoods coupled with the route of the ‘Wall’ is creating in east Jerusalem , reducing econom ic opportunities, and producing overcrowded living conditions. I f the process is com pleted, som e 2 0 0 ,0 0 0 Palestinian east Jerusalem ites will end up inside the Jerusalem envelope, live under greater I sraeli control, and increasingly be separated from the West Bank; the rem aining 5 5 ,0 0 0 will be outside the ‘Wall,’ disconnected from the city that has been their centre of gravity, fearful of reduced social services and, in m any instances, determ ined to find their way back into the fenced-in areas. That will be an explosive m ix.

The ‘Wall,’ once com pleted, would create a broad Jerusalem area encom passing virtually all of m unicipal Jerusalem as expanded and annexed in 1967, as well as m ajor settlem ents to its north, east, and south. This new "Jerusalem envelope", as the area inside the ‘Wall’ euphem istically has been called, incorporates large settlem ent blocks and buffer zones, encom passes over 4 per cent of the W est Bank, absorbs m any Palestinians outside of m unicipal Jerusalem and excludes over 5 0 ,0 0 0 within, often cutting Palestinians off from their agricultural land. Expansion of the large Ma'ale Adum im settlem ent to the east of Jerusalem and linking it to the city through the E1 , a planned built-up urban land bridge, would go close to cutting the West Bank in two. New Jewish neighborhoods/ settlem ents at the perim eter of the m unicipal boundaries would create a Jewish belt around Arab east Jerusalem , cutting it off from the West Bank and constricting Palestinian growth within the city.

The Gaza ‘W all’

A sim ilar `Wall,' the I sraeli Gaza `Wall,' runs parallel to Gazan portion of the 1949 arm istice line. The 30 m ile (52 kilom eter) long `Wall' was constructed in 1994 by I srael under the leadership of I sraeli Prim e Minister Yitzhak Rabin. I t consists m ainly of a wire fence with posts, sensors, and buffer zones. There are several crossing points in the `Wall': Erez Crossing, the Rafah Crossing, Sufa crossing, Kissufim crossing, and the Karni crossing used m ainly for cargo. The `Wall' is augm ented by an open observation area 3 0 0 m eters wide on the Gaza side of the `Wall.' I srael claim s that the `Wall' has been effective in preventing terrorists and suicide bom bers from leaving Gaza. Along the Egyptian border with Rafah, a steel `Wall' was erected along the "Philadelphie Route", with several large arm ored posts along it. Rafah is an area of frequent clashes between I sraeli soldiers and Palestinian's. This heavy fortification system is m eant to protect the soldiers© lives and stop sm uggling tunnels which are used by Palestinian's to obtain weapons and explosives.

The Gaza ‘Wall’ is less controversial than the I sraeli West Bank ‘Wall’, as it traces the actual border with Gaza, whereas the West Bank Wall delves significantly outside of the 1949 arm istice lines, I srael's internationally recognized frontier. This is the m ain reason why the latter was ruled illegal by the I nternational Court of Justice.

Recent Developm ents: Another W all in Gaza

“ The I sraeli navy plans to build a sea barrier off the coast on Northern Gaza, saying it will keep out potential attackers once I srael pulls back from occupied land this sum m er.” The story goes on to say, “ The navy said the barrier, stretching 9 5 0 m into the sea, is necessary because of the expected loss of surveillance system s in the planned pullout… the barrier’s first 100m will consist of cem ent pilings buried into the sandy bottom … the structure will extend another 8 0 0 m in the form of a 1 .8 m eter deep fence floating beneath the surface. I srael to build sea barrier off June 17, 2005.

The Hum anitarian I m pact

The United Nations Office for the Coordination of Hum anitarian Affairs in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OCHA-OPT) said that the land between the ‘Wall’ and the 1949 borders constitute som e of the m ost fertile in the West Bank (WB).

I n a report issued Tuesday on the "Prelim inary Analysis of the Hum anitarian I m plications of February 2005 wall Projections", OCHA-opt revealed that the total length of the new Apartheid Wall route will be 7 2 0 km long com pared to 6 2 2 km of the previous route, adding that an approxim ately 1 4 2 ,6 4 0 acres or about 1 0 .1 % of W B land will lie between the ‘Wall’ and the 1949 borders, including east Jerusalem .

As for hum anitarian im pact, the report revealed that if the two of the sections "pending com pletion of detailed staff work", Ma'ale Adum im and Ari'el/ Em m anuel fingers colonies are included, then approxim ately 1 4 2 ,6 4 0 acres or about 1 0 .1 % of W B land will lie between the wall and the 1949 borders, including east Jerusalem .

The previous route incorporated 1 7 4 ,3 6 0 acres or 1 2 .7 % of the W B including east Jerusalem . The 2 .5 % decrease in the new route in WB area located between the 1949 borders and the wall, is largely due to the shift of the wall back to lie on the 1949 borders in the South area, the report said.

I t added that a larger decrease in affected WB land would occur, if the sections pending com pletion of detailed staff work, Ma'ale Adum im and Ari'el/ Em m anuel fingers were excluded. Then only 6 .8 % of WB land would be incorporated by the wall.

The report said that the land between the wall and the 1949 borders constitute som e of the m ost fertile in the WB. I t is currently the hom e for 4 9 ,4 0 0 Palestinians living in 3 8 villages and tow ns, excluding the com m unities in east Jerusalem . Meanwhile the previous route had approxim ately 9 3 ,2 0 0 Palestinians living betw een the 1 9 4 9 borders and the w all. The reduction in population is due to an easing of the closures in Qalqiliya (population 4 5 ,8 0 0 ). While the city rem ains encircled by the wall, the checkpoint at the entrance of Qalqiliya is not m anned.

The ‘Wall’ will also affect those people living east of it who m ay need to cross it to get to their farm s, jobs and services. More than 5 0 0 ,0 0 0 Palestinians, for exam ple, live within a one kilom etre strip of the wall including east Jerusalem .

As for the affect of the planned Ma'ale Adum im section, the report said that cutting 1 4 km east across the m ost narrow section of the WB, the planned Ma'ale Adum im , I sraeli colony, section will im pede m ovem ent between the northern and southern areas of the WB, blocking the current roads used by Palestinians to travel between these areas.

For Palestinians citizens residing in and around east Jerusalem , the addition of the Ma'ale Adum im section will increase existing m ovem ent restrictions created by the constructed parts of the wall. Approxim ately 2 3 0 ,0 0 0 Palestinians hold east Jerusalem residency perm its. About one- quarter of these people are located on the WB side of the ‘Wall’ and will need to cross it to access services which they are entitled to inside Jerusalem , the report said. Wall length stretches a total of 6 7 0 kilom eters (including east Jerusalem ), the new ‘Wall’ route will run from the northern Jordan River in eastern Tubas to the southern-m ost tip of the West Bank in the Hebron Governorate. Because of its m eandering path into the WB, the ‘Wall's’ length is approxim ately twice the length of the 1949 West Bank (Arm istice Line) adjacent to I srael, 3 1 5 km . The length of the ‘Wall’ will be 1 2 9 km less if the sections labeled "pending com pletion of detailed staff work" are rem oved, the report revealed.

2 0 % of the ‘Wall's’ length runs along the 1949 borders. More of it is now planned to be on the 1949 borders prim arily as a result of the shift of the southern route in Hebron towards the borders, the report added.

The ‘Wall's’ planned path cuts into WB land in m any places. I n the planned Ari'el/ Em m anuel finger, it cuts 2 2 km or 4 2 % across the width of the WB. I n the planned Ma'ale Adum im section, the wall route cuts into the WB 1 4 km or 4 5 % of its width, the report said.

I n areas where the wall has been constructed, the I sraeli Forces issued m ilitary orders in Septem ber 2004, creating "no-construction" zones, averaging up to 2 0 0 m eters on the WB sides of the ‘Wall.’

Moreover, the I sraeli cabinet approved m oving a 6 km section of the ‘Wall’ in this area closer to the 1949 borders. As a result, the Palestinian population in this area will no longer be located in a "closed area", but rather on the WB side of the ‘Wall.’ This will reduce the overall Palestinian population in "closed areas" by about 3 4 0 persons and the num ber of acres in "closed areas" by 7 8 5 .

The new route adds 2 0 km along the 1949 borders in South Hebron and is m arked on the m ap as "pending com pletion of detailed staff work." The new route contains two sections m arked as "road protection structures". They constitute an additional 1 0 km of ‘Wall’ and close off the Gush Etzion (West Bethlehem ) and (North Jerusalem ) areas, the report added.

There are special security areas m arked in the Ari'el/ Em m anuel colonies fingers where som e requisition orders have been issued and/ or construction has begun along the planned route.

The report shows that Palestinians who live in "closed areas" are required to pass through gates in the ‘Wall” to reach m arkets, schools, hospitals and m aintain fam ily connections in the rem aining areas of the WB. Although I srael introduced som e changes to the operation of the gates, access for Palestinians in these areas is restricted.

I n February 2005, UN staff has observed 6 3 gates in the constructed wall. Of these 2 5 are accessible to Palestinians with the correct perm it. The I sraeli Governm ent has not released inform ation on which access gates will be opened through the planned routes of the ‘Wall.’ This is particularly significant in the Jerusalem area, where tens of thousands of Palestinians will be affected, the report said.

The area between the ‘Wall” and the 1949 borders, will be 5 6 I sraeli colonies contains approxim ately 1 7 0 ,1 2 3 I sraeli colonizers - an estim ated 7 6 % percent of the WB colonies population. This figure does not include the I sraeli colonizers population in east Jerusalem .

While Palestinians citizens residing in "closed areas" between the ‘Wall’ and the 1949 borders face an uncertain future in term s of their personal and lands' status. On 7 October 2003, the I sraeli Forces issued a num ber of m ilitary orders restricting access to land areas located between the ‘Wall’ and the borders in the Jenin, Qalqiliya and districts. Those orders require approxim ately 5 ,0 0 0 citizens living in these "closed areas" to apply for perm its to rem ain living in their hom es. The perm its are valid for up to a year for citizens and are valid for only one gate. Use of other gates is also m ilitarily regulated and allowed only in em ergency cases, the report added.

The ‘Wall’ will further restrict farm ers living outside this 'closed area' from reaching their land. Medical staff, business people and international hum anitarian organizations also have to apply for special perm its. According to the m ilitary orders, I sraeli citizens, I sraeli perm anent residents and those eligible to im m igrate to I srael in accordance with the Law of Return, are exem pted from these requirem ents, the report revealed.

I f the m ilitary orders that restrict entry into the "closed areas" between the borders and the wall are applied to the new parts of it, then m any m ore thousands of Palestinians are likely to face difficulty continuing to live in their hom es or access land.

As yet no publicly available studies have been conducted by the I sraeli Governm ent to m easure the `Wall©s' im pact on Palestinian lives. However, the I sraeli High Court ruled on 30 June 2004 in the "Beit Surik" case, that the "rights, needs, and interests of the local population" m ust be considered in designing the route, the report said.

Where the `Wall' has been constructed, Palestinians face econom ic hardship from being restricted from or not being able to reach their land to harvest crops, graze anim als or earn a living. Citizens have also been cut off from schools, universities and specialized m edical care by the constructed `Wall' the report added.

The dam age caused by the destruction of land and property for the `Wall©s' construction will take m any years to recover and hinder Palestinian developm ent should a political situation allow this. The `Wall' also fragm ents com m unities and isolates citizens from social support networks. Even where the `Wall' route does not encircle an area as an enclave, its presence m ay still im pact a com m unity. For exam ple, the `Wall' route surrounds on three sides approxim ately 4 3 ,9 0 0 Palestinians residing in com m unities between At-Tira and Beit Sira northwest of Jerusalem , the report concluded.

The Legal Case ( in brief) :

Apart from the fact, that I srael's Wall is in com plete contravention to any form of logic or any m oral/ ethical standards, it is also in contravention to the entire international legal system . Altogether the `Segregation and Annexation Wall' is in breach of:

The Hague Regulations of 1 9 0 7

The I V Geneva Conventions of 1 9 4 8

The United Nations Charter, Universal Declaration of Hum an rights ( 1 9 4 8 ) ,

various General Assem bly and Security Council resolutions

The Advisory opinion of the I nternational Court of Justice ( I CJ) in The Hague

The I nternational Convent on Civil and Political Rights ( I CCPR) and the

I nternational Convent on Econom ic, Social and Cultural Rights ( I CESCR)

The United Nations Convention on the Crim e of Apartheid – ( The I nternational

Convention on the Suppression and Punishm ent of the Crim e of Apartheid)

The legally binding bilateral agreem ents signed, prior to the interim period, betw een the Liberation Organization and the State of I srael.

Violations of Hague Regulations:

Section I I Article 23(g), and section I I I Articles, 46, 50, 52 and 55 which prohibit the destruction of `enem y property,' private property cannot be confiscated ºno general penalty shall be inflicted upon the population on account of the acts of individuals for which they cannot be regarded as jointly or severally responsible.º

Violations of I V Geneva Conventions:

Geneva Convention Articles 33, 46, 49, 52, 53, 56 and 58 prohibits the creation of unem ploym ent or restricting the opportunities offered to workers¼ it also prohibits any destruction of personal property belonging individually or collectively to private persons.

Violations of the United Nations Charter, Universal Declaration of Hum an Rights, General Assem bly and Security Council resolutions:

A m ajor violation of the Apartheid Wall is the unilateral dem arcation of a new border in the West Bank that am ounts to effective annexation of occupied land. United Nations Charter Article 2.4 states that ª[ a] ll m em bers shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other m anner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.º The `Separation and Annexation Wall' is also in contravention to the 1948 Universal Declaration of Hum an Rights. The Wall severely ham pers

Violations of the I nternational Convent on Civil and Political Rights ( I CCPR) and the I nternational Convent on Econom ic, Social and Cultural Rights ( I CESCR) :

The Wall also breaches the I nternational Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (I CCPR, 1966) and the I nternational Covenant on Econom ical, Social, and Cultural Rights (I CESCR, 1966), both of which I srael is a high signatory party. The rights violated include: freedom of m ovem ent (I CCPR, art. 12), property (I CCPR, art. 1,), health (I CESCR, art.12 and I V GC, art. 32), education (I CESCR, art. 13, and I V GC, art. 50), work (I CESCR, art. 6), and food (I CESCR, art. 11). UN Security Council Resolution 681 (1990), UN General Assem bly Resolution 56/ 60 (2001) confirm that the I V Geneva Convention is applicable to I srael's occupation of Palestinian land, and thus, m akes I srael's com pliance m andatory.

The United Nations Convention on the Crim e of Apartheid:

Under Article 1 of the I nternational Convention on the Suppression and Punishm ent of the Crim e of Apartheid (1979) the Wall constitutes a ªCrim e against Hum anityº. I t divides populations on the basis of race and ethnicity and discrim ination against residents in the West Bank to benefit illegal I sraeli settlers and thus com plies with the definition of ªapartheidº.

On July 9, 2004 the United Nations highest and principal legal body, the I nternational Court of Justice in The Hague, Netherlands (I CJ), delivered its advisory opinion requested to it on behalf of the General Assem bly, from a proposal put forth by the Delegation on behalf of the which is only granted observer status and therefore, cannot do so alone. (Full I CJ Advisory opinion text) The I nternational Court of Justice (I CJ), principal judicial organ of the United Nations, has today rendered its Advisory Opinion in the case concerning the Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

I n its Opinion, the Court finds unanim ously that it has jurisdiction to give the advisory opinion requested by the United Nations General Assem bly and decides by fourteen votes to one to com ply with that request. The Court responds to the question as follows:

A. By fourteen votes to one,

The construction of the w all being built by I srael, the occupying Pow er, in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around East Jerusalem , and its associated regim e, are contrary to international law ”;

B. By fourteen votes to one,

I srael is under an obligation to term inate its breaches of international law ; it is under an obligation to cease forthw ith the w orks of construction of the w all being built in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around East Jerusalem , to dism antle forthw ith the structure therein situated, and to repeal or render ineffective forthw ith all legislative and regulatory acts relating thereto, in accordance w ith paragraph 1 5 1 of this Opinion”;

C. By fourteen votes to one,

I srael is under an obligation to m ake reparation for all dam age caused by the construction of the w all in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around East Jerusalem ”;

D. By thirteen votes to two,

All States are under an obligation not to recognize the illegal situation resulting from the construction of the w all and not to render aid or assistance in m aintaining the situation created by such construction; all States parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Tim e of W ar of 1 2 August 1 9 4 9 have in addition the obligation, w hile respecting the United Nations Charter and international law , to ensure com pliance by I srael w ith international hum anitarian law as em bodied in that Convention” ;

E. By fourteen votes to one,

The United Nations, and especially the General Assem bly and the Security Council, should consider w hat further action is required to bring to an end the illegal situation resulting from the construction of the w all and the associated regim e, taking due account of the present Advisory Opinion.”

History’s ‘W alls’

Berlin W all ¡ 1961 – 1990 ¡ 103 m iles (around West Berlin) ¡ To keep out: East Germ ans

Korean DMZ ¡ 1953 – present ¡ 151 m iles (between North and South Korea) ¡ To keep out: soldiers from either side

US/ Mexico border ¡ 20th century – present ¡ 2000 m iles: Rio Grande River, reinforced by W all in places ¡ To keep out: illegal im m igrants from Latin Am erica

Great W all of China ¡ 220 BCE – present ¡ 4500 m iles, approxim ately ¡ To keep out: invaders from the North (13th – 14th century Mongols m ounted successful conquests)

Chronology of the ‘Segregation and Annexation W all’

1 9 9 4 - 1 9 9 6 : A Wall is constructed around Gaza, under the Labor governm ent of Yitzhak Rabin.

1 9 9 6 : Ariel Sharon proposes building a Wall through the centre of Hebron to annex the Jewish settlem ents in the Old City and the Tom b of Abraham , and to ethnically cleanse the Old City of its Palestinian population.

May 1 9 9 7 : The I sraeli governm ent form ally endorses the plan for a "Greater Jerusalem ," annexing settlem ents and "Judeaizing" the dem ographic m akeup of the city.

1 9 9 3 - 2 0 0 0 : Under the guise of the Oslo agreem ents and “peace negotiations” the Occupation steps up its colonization policies, especially in the so-called (sections of the West Bank under full I sraeli control) doubling the num ber of settlers and settlem ents (both new and expanded) and dissecting the West Bank with settler-only bypass roads. Jerusalem has been sealed off and the Palestinian residents subjected to m any different m ethods of expulsion from their city. This has paved the way for the definitive annexation and ethnic cleansing of Jerusalem and alm ost half of the West Bank through the Apartheid wall.

Septem ber 2 8 th 2 0 0 0 : As I srael hides behind a façade of negotiations that are intended solely to grant the Occupation tim e and political cover for its continuing colonization policies, and after the m assacre com m itted by I srael to defend Sharon’s m arch to the al-Aqsa Mosque, the second I ntifada starts.

Novem ber 2 0 0 0 : I n the first two m onths of the I ntifada, I srael kills well over 200 Palestinians and injures hundreds m ore. The Occupation's Labor governm ent, led by Ehud Barak, announces the approval of plans to build a "barrier".

Septem ber 2 0 0 1 : At the World Sum m it against Racism in Durban, , 3,000 NGOs adopt a declaration condem ning I srael©s "system atic perpetration of racist crim es including war crim es, acts of genocide and ethnic cleansing," and describing I srael as "a racist apartheid state in which I srael©s brand of apartheid as a crim e against hum anity has been characterized by separation and segregation ... and inhum ane acts." The call for com prehensive isolation of I srael is launched.

April 2 0 0 2 : Occupation Forces and gun ships step up their offensive in the West Bank, putting all Palestinian cities and villages under siege and heavy attack. I srael carries out a m assacre of the population in the refugee cam p of Jenin and com pletely razes the centre of the cam p to the ground, also destroying vast parts of the Old City in . The econom ic and adm inistrative infrastructure of the West Bank, and any resem blance of norm al life for Palestinians, is com pletely destroyed.

June 1 6 , 2 0 0 2 : construction starts on Phase I of the fence / w all, the northern section (145 Kilom eters; 90 m iles) from Salem to Masha village, south of Qalqiliya. Construction follows a rash of suicide bom bings (42 from March 2001 ± March 2002). Construction of the Apartheid Wall begins with the confiscation of land and the uprooting of trees in northern Jenin district, as the population of Jenin, and throughout the West Bank - which is still under curfew - tries to recover from the m assacres and attacks of the previous m onths.

July 3 1 , 2 0 0 3 : Phase I of the fence / w all is com pleted

annexed 9 0 ,0 0 0 dunum s ( = ¼ acre, or 2 2 ,5 0 0 acres) , about 2 % of the W est Bank

annexed area includes the Western Aquifer, the second largest source of fresh water, after

the Jordan River, for residents of the region

separated m any Palestinian villagers from their farm plots

isolated m any Palestinian villages west of the wall, in an area now called ªThe Seam º

sealed off Qalqiliya, once the central m arket for 8 5 ,0 0 0 of region's Palestinians; city loses

1 5 % of m unicipal land and 5 0 % of agricultural land. Approxim ately 1 0 - 2 0 % of 4 1 ,0 0 0

residents relocate to villages.

Uprooted: 1 0 2 ,3 2 0 olive and citrus trees ( 6 0 ,0 0 0 replanted) ; 8 5 com m ercial buildings, such as greenhouses; destroyed 1 8 - 1 9 m iles of irrigation pipes

Septem ber 2 1 , 2 0 0 3 : I sraeli envoys tell the Bush adm inistration that the barrier's route is determ ined by security considerations and is not intended to create political borders.

October 2 0 0 3 : I sraeli cabinet approves m id-section of the fence / w all, from Biddya to Beituniya, which will isolate 58 additional Palestinian com m unities west of the w all and bisect neighborhoods in east Jerusalem .

Decem ber 8 , 2 0 0 3 : UN General Assem bly condem ns construction of the fence / w all.

Decem ber 2 6 , 2 0 0 3 : While dem onstrating against the fence / w all, I sraeli Gil Na'am ai is shot and wounded by I sraeli soldiers at Masha village; this action galvanizes the ªintifada of the fence.º

Feb 2 4 , 2 0 0 4 : I nternational Court of Justice begins hearings on the legality of the I sraeli security barrier, I srael and Palestinians use the hearings as a platform for dem onstrations about terror and the occupation.

Spring 2 0 0 4 : Residents of Mevasseret (I sraeli) and Beit Suriq (Palestinian) villages organize a kite-sitting ªas an act of solidarity and a sign of the neighborly relations between the two com m unities.º

July 9 , 2 0 0 4 : July 9 , 2 0 0 4 : I nternational Court of Justice, the principal j udicial organ of the United Nations, gives its advisory opinion that construction of the w all is contrary to international law that I srael m ust dism antle the w all and pay reparations for dam ages.

February 1 , 2 0 0 5 : I sraeli High Court of Justice orders one week halt in construction of the `Wall' near Mevasseret to consider the route.º ªThis is the first tim e I sraeli citizens living near the seam line have joined a petition to the court over the fence's route.º

February 1 8 , 2 0 0 5 the I sraeli cabinet approved a new route for the `Wall' which would leave approxim ately seven percent of the West Bank and 1 0 ,0 0 0 Palestinians on the I sraeli side. Map: [ 1] Before that tim e the exact route of the `Wall' had not been finalized, and it had been alleged by som e that it would encircle the West Bank, separating it from the Jordan valley.

July 1 0 2 0 0 5 I srael©s Cabinet, ignoring Palestinian objections and US m isgivings, endorsed the construction of a `Wall' in Jerusalem , saying that security needs have forced it to build 80 kilom eters of eight-m eter-high concrete walls and electric fences around Jerusalem .

MI FTAH's Position

On Sunday the I sraeli Cabinet approved Sept. 1 to be the com pletion date of the 8 m high, 730 km long Apartheid Wall in the West Bank, cutting off 55,000 Palestinian residents of Jerusalem from their work, schools, hospitals and fam ilies.

The decision was m ade after I sraeli Prim e Minister Ariel Sharon called for workers to speed up building the Apartheid Wall, including closing off Jerusalem , which will separate Palestinians from the holy city they want as the capital of a future Palestinian state. I f com pleted, the Wall will de facto annex 47 percent of the West Bank, isolating Palestinian com munities into , enclaves and m ilitary zones. And only 12 percent of historic Palestine will be left for all Palestinians.

While I srael claim s the Wall is for ªsecurityº purposes, the strategic path of it actually reveals it as a land grab for incorporating m uch m ore of the West Bank into the boundaries of I srael, and, thus, creating new facts on the ground. Not only is this Wall a violation of the road m ap, which I srael agreed to m ove forward on in the peace process in 2003, but it is also illegal according to the I nternational Court of Justice's ruling last year, which called on I srael to stop construction and dism antle what was already built.

The fact that I srael m ade this decision the day after the one year anniversary of the I CJ ruling is a slap in the face to the international com m unity, exposing I srael's arrogance that it is above international law. But even m ore im portantly, the Apartheid Wall takes away m ore of Palestinians' already dim inished hum an rights and freedom s. I srael's not-so-subtle goal is to drive the Palestinians out of Jerusalem , so that I srael can annex it fully, elim inating the possibility of Jerusalem being a final-status issue in future peace negotiations.

MI FTAH condem ns Sunday's decision and calls on I srael to com ply with international law and put an im m ediate stop to the Wall's construction. I srael's decision is an unacceptable exercise of political power to advance I srael's agenda, which are adversary to Palestinian rights to freedom and self- determ ination, as well as international law.

Pictures and Videos

To view selected videos: 1) http: / / stopthewall.org/ news/ video.shtm l 2) http: / / www.thewallofhate.org/ film / thewall.wm v

To view selected pictures 1) http: / / www.m iftah.org/ Display.cfm ?DocI d= 7797&CategoryI d= 23

Sources:

Negotiations Affairs Departm ent ± www.nad-plo.org UN Office for the Coordination of Hum anitarian Affairs UN OCHA (Relief Web) ± www.releifweb.org Anti-Apartheid Wall Cam paign ± www.stopthewall.org B'Tselem - www.btselem .org I nternational Court of Justice ± www.icj-cij.org United Nations ± www.un.org Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics - www.pcbs.org