March 12, 2004

THE KINGDOM'S SPEECH AT THE HAGUE: THE WALL IS UNLAWFUL, IT PREVENTS THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE PALESTINIAN STATE AND THE RIGHTS OF THE PALESTINIAN PEOPLE IN SELF-DETERMINATION AND INCREASES HATRED AND VIOLENCE. THE SEPARATION WALL CONSOLIDATES THE ANNEXATION OF THE LANDS OF THE WEST BANK AND THE EXPANSION OF SETTLEMENTS. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has dubbed the barrier wall currently being built by Israel in the West Bank as illegal and that it breaches the international law. In public proceedings before the International Court of Justice in The Hague, Ambassador Fawzi Ibn Abdul Majeed Shobokshi, Saudi Arabia's permanent representative to the United Nations, also described the Israeli move as provocative and imbalanced. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia supported that the International Court of Justice issues an advisory opinion on the issue of Israel's plan to install a separation fence in the occupied territories and studies its adverse consequences, Shobokshi told the gathering. He said the Kingdom also rejects the argument that the court's advisory opinion on the Wall issue is at cross-purposes to the negotiation effort aiming at bringing about peace in the middle east which is today called the Road Map. Instead, the court's legal opinion would contribute to the target of eradicating terrorism and achieving a fair and lasting peace in the region, the Saudi ambassador said, adding that Israel has been and continues to deliberately enhance its position and change the territorial status quo to its benefit. It has been doing so since 1967. The wall is the most recent manifestation, Shobokshi said. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia warned that the Wall denies a viable Palestinian state, denies the right of self-determination and exacerbates the hatred that leads to increased violence. On fear of terrorism and using this as a justification to install the fence, the Kingdom renewed its condemnation of terrorism in all its forms and expressed commitment to fight it. It also underlined the importance of working for addressing the motivation and the provocation that lead to terrorism. This international effort directed against terrorism will not eradicate this phenomenon if handled without addressing its roots, Shobokshi said. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia reiterated that the wall being built by Israel in the West Bank will make any peaceful settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict extremely difficult. This wall not only isolates the Palestinians, but blocks any peaceful initiatives intent on a solution to the Middle East conflict, said Ambassador Fawzi Ibn Abdul Majeed Shobokshi, Saudi Arabia's permanent representative to the United Nations the wall "imposes a new reality on the ground which will complicate matters further and add new burdens to the fundamental issues in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict." He added The proceedings also highlighted the Kingdom's stance and its interest in the success of the Road Map to reach the required peace. In this regard, the Road Map refers specifically to the initiative of Crown Prince Abdullah which was endorsed by the Beirut Arab League Summit of March 2002. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia reiterated its opposition to Israel's West Bank barrier and warned that the "provocative" measure violating international law would trigger a new spate of violence in the region. Referring to Israeli claims that it constructed the barrier to prevent suicide bombings, Shobokshi stressed Riyadh's determination to fight all forms of terrorism and the need to tackle its causes. In conclusion, the Kingdom reiterate it rejection of the argument that the advisory opinion of the court would lead to legal ramifications that would be at cross-purposes to the Road Map and would adversely affect the peace process and that the court ought to refrain from giving its opinion on the issue. On the other hand Secretary General of the Arab League Amr Moussa stressed that Israel's announcement of its withdrawal from the session of the International Court of Justice to give advisory opinion on the legality of the racial separation wall which Israel is building in the occupied territories, reflects the power of the Arab stance in this case. In a statement before leaving to The Hague to attend the first sessions of the International Court of Justice, Moussa said that the Arab League has charged a group of the Arab and foreign lawyers to follow up the written procedures. For his part, spokesman of the Arab League Husam Zaki stressed that the attendance of the first session of the court aimed at backing the case politically and stressing the Arab rejection of the building of the racial separation wall which violates all the international norms and charters particularly Geneva 4th convention. On Monday, the Palestinians presented a detailed case to the ICJ, urging the 15-judge panel to take a firm stand against the barrier, which is a series of walls, fences, razor wire and trenches. As the arguments unfolded in the Grand Hall of Justice of the 90-year-old Peace Palace, the chief Palestinian delegate, Nasser Al-Kidwa, told the tribunal "We are here because the United Nations has a permanent responsibility legally, politically and morally to the question of Palestine until the question is resolved in all its aspects,"Al Kidwa said. Al-Kidwa told the World Court last Monday that Israel's Apartheid Wall in the West Bank would destroy the goal of Palestinian statehood. The representatives were addressing the opening session of a three-day hearing in The Hague of the ICJ. The United Nations General Assembly has asked the ICJ to deliver an advisory opinion on the legality of the Wall on December 8. The Palestinian team included Professor James Crawford, head of Cambridge University international law department, and other Arab and international lawyers. Al-Kidwa, the Palestinian observer at the UN, said the Wall would "render the two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict practically impossible." He indicated that the Wall was destroying the internationally-backed roadmap peace plan which aims for the creation of an independent Palestinian by 2005. "Saving the roadmap and the prospects for peace requires a cessation of the construction of this wall, its removal and non-recognition by states of any of its consequences," he said. Al-Kidwa denied Israeli claims that the Wall is about security. "The wall being built on the West Bank is not about security, it's about entrenching the occupation and the de facto annexation of large areas of the Palestinian land," he told the judges. "This wall if completed will leave the Palestinian people with only half of the West Bank within isolated, non-contiguous walled enclaves," he indicated. Al-Kidwa said he hoped a court ruling that the Wall was illegal in international law, although it would be non-binding, could lead to international sanctions against Israel. A 1971 ruling by the court that South Africa's occupation of Namibia was illegal led to sanctions against the apartheid regime. "At the time (in Namibia), just like now, we realized that there could be no military solution for fundamental political problems," Aziz Pahad, deputy minister of South African foreign affairs, told the ICJ. Pahad is leading the South African legal team that will be making submissions, together with several other countries, this week in opposition to the Wall. South Africa remains committed to a two-state solution: Israel with safe borders and a viable Palestinian state with similarly safe borders. "The barrier eliminates the prospects of two such states and of peace in the Middle East," Pahad told the ICJ. Malaysian Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar addressed the (ICJ) on Tuesday. Earlier, Malaysia had responded to the court's invitation for written statements prior to the oral hearing by submitting a 50-page document questioning the legality of the Israeli action. Thirteen countries and two regional organizations the Arab League and the Organization of the Islamic Conference gave their oral submissions over the three-day hearing. Separately, British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said the Wall being built by Israel on the West Bank is "unlawful," but legal action before the ICJ is inappropriate. Speaking at a meeting of the EU foreign ministers, he said his views were shared by the European Union as a whole. "We regard the wall as unlawful wherever, as in many places, it moves away from the international border, the green line, and is built on Palestinian land," he said. "We also believe notwithstanding (Israel's) beliefs that the building of the wall is going to be counterproductive," he said, noting that the EU had made its views known repeatedly to the Israeli government. But he reiterated that Britain and the European Union do not support the legal action launched at the Hague-based ICJ. "It is quite inappropriate to take this before the ICJ given that one of the parties to the hearing, the Israelis, have refused consent to the jurisdiction," he said. "The ICJ only works effectively where all parties to any hearing accept its jurisdiction." Israel faced a second day of condemnation at the World Court but Prime Minister Ariel Sharon dismissed the hearings as an "international circus" and vowed to keep building fences. Sharon vowed to finish his "security fence" regardless of the verdict of the International Court of Justice, as Israel began work on a new section of its controversial West Bank barrier. Seven countries, including Jordan, Indonesia, Malaysia and Cuba, added their voices to the Palestinian case challenging the legality of the barrier. Jordan took a leading role in Arab opposition to the barrier despite its peace treaty with the neighboring Jewish state, voicing fears it could lead to a destabilizing influx of Palestinian refugees into Jordan. Prince Zayed Ibn Raad, the head of Jordan's delegation at the court, acknowledged Israel's right to defend itself, but said it did not justify construction of the barrier on parts of the West Bank which were under Jordanian control until the 1967 Six Day War. "Much of the wall now being built by Israel is in territory that does not belong to Israel, but is in fact occupied territory," the prince, who is Jordan's ambassador to the United Nations, told the court. Instead the barrier was "aimed at further assimilation of occupied territories into the state of Israel." Jordanian Foreign Minister Marwan Moasher told Parliament last month that the barrier would revive the option" of transferring Palestinians from the West Bank to Jordan, despite Israeli assertions to the contrary. "My country already hosts a huge number of refugees and displaced persons," said Raad. Cuba said the barrier turned Palestinians into a "population of prisoners" and Indonesia, the most populous Muslim country, also called on the court to declare the structure illegal. Meanwhile the head of the Arab League Amr Moussa said the Arab world is ready to make peace with Israel if it meets its obligations, such as abandoning its West Bank security fence. Amr Moussa, secretary reiterated a Saudi-backed plan approved by his organization in 2002 calling for a comprehensive peace with Israel. Saudi officials have recently indicated that they would try to revive the plan at the upcoming summit of the Arab League. The Saudi plan is to be presented at an Arab League summit at the end of March in Tunis. This will be the first Arab League summit since the war in Iraq. "We are ready to live in peace in the Middle East with the state of Israel provided that the state of Israel will respect its obligations," Moussa said on the sidelines of the world court case into Israel's West Bank security fence. He conditioned peace on a full withdrawal from occupied lands and an independent Palestinian state. Moussa spoke on the opening day of the International Court of Justice hearings into the Israeli barrier. Moussa said the continued construction of the barrier is threatening the chances for peace. "The question of the wall is seriously affecting the future settlement, if any. It confirms the attitude of the occupying power. They want to annex territories, to partition, divide the territory and make it difficult for the people to live there," he said. He also rejected Israel's argument that the world court case is undermining the internationally backed "road map" peace plan. "The road map doesn't function because of the reservations that Israel has put," he added. The initial stages of the road map call on Israel to halt settlement activity in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, while the Palestinians are required to dismantle fighting groups and reform the Palestinian Authority. Israel has hinged its compliance on the Palestinian crackdown. Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has pledged a series of unilateral steps, including a pullout from some Jewish settlements and imposing a new boundary on the Palestinians, if there is no progress in peace efforts in the coming months. The Arab League and the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC), backed the Palestinian challenge to Israel's West Bank barrier in the World Court while Israeli political sources disclosed tentative plans to shorten the network of fences and walls. The sources said Israel aimed to trim the barrier's planned route by some 80km to 640km, but said the proposed changes were more about pleasing Israel's ally the United States than impressing the court. The Arab League and Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC), which represent about 20 per cent of the world population, testified on the last of three days of hearings in what has become one of the highest profile cases in the court's 58-year history. "Does this not all bring back to the present the Berlin Wall episode which was dubbed the wall of shame?" Arab League representative Michael Bothe said in the court in The Hague. "The wall is profoundly affecting living conditions in the Palestinian occupied territories. It leads to migration, to the displacement of major parts of the Palestinian population, to a consolidation of the unlawful Israeli settlements." "With the wall there is no longer a viable Palestine, thus no peace possible between the two states," said Monique Chemillier-Gendreau, legal adviser to the 57-member OIC. Israeli political sources said the route would be trimmed to mollify Washington and secure its backing for a broader plan of steps to separate from the Palestinians. But the Defence Ministry, responsible for building the barrier, emphasised that any changes would need government approval. About 180km have been built so far. Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmad Maher once again criticized the dividing fence built by Israel, saying it is contradicting international law.þ þ In a press statement, Maher said all international organizations had þ þconfirmed that the fence is contradicting international law and human rights.þ þ He added, there is no license to allow a country to violate international þ þlaw or human rights on the pretext of preventing violent acts. "This matter þcannot be accepted according to international law," said Maher.þ þ He said, Egypt had submitted a detailed written argument to the þ þinternational court regarding the dividing fence issue. He added that the oral þargument before the court is a secondary aspect, but the main issue is the memos presented to the court.þ Meanwhile Palestinian Prime Minister Ahmed Qurei expressed his comfort over the International Court of Justice (ICJ) first hearing on the legality of the so-called security barrier built in the þ þWest Bank.þ þ In a press conference following the Palestinian government weekly meeting, þQurei considered the ICJ hearing in the case as one of the vital phases of þPalestinian national struggle.þ þ He commended the distinguished performance of the Palestinian delegation headed by Nasser Al-Kidwa, Palestine's permanent representative to the UN, and þtheir political efficiency in dealing with this serious dossier.þ þ Qurei has also commended the media coverage of the first day of the ICJ hearing on both Arab and world arenas, expressing hope that such coverage could continue until the end of the trial.þ þ Replying to a question on the absence of Arab countries from ICJ verbal þhearing, Qurei said, they could have their own points of view regarding the verbal arguments; however, all of them had submitted excellent written memos to the court.þ þ On the other hand, Qurei has criticized the stance of some countries, þ þmainly the United States, alleging that the ICJ is not the right court to look þinto such a case, adding that it could delay the peace process in the Middle East.þ þ "We don't think such a case could delay peace, but it is a peaceful way to þshow Israel's oppression against Palestinian people," said Qurei. "If we fight, they call us terrorists, and if we resort to peaceful ways, they say we delay peace," he added. Also Human Rights Watch said in a briefing paper the construction, route and operation of Israel's separation barrier inside the West Bank violate international human rights and humanitarian law. The statement said today the International Court of Justice, the United Nations' main judicial organ, begins hearings on the barrier in The Hague in response to the U.N. General Assembly's request for an advisory opinion on the legal consequences of the barrier. The Israeli government has argued that the separation barrier is necessary to prevent Palestinian suicide bombings-and other attacks against civilians-originating in the West Bank. "Israel has a right and duty to protect its civilians from attack, but it must not use means that entail indiscriminate punishment of entire communities," said Joe Stork, acting executive director of the Middle East and North Africa division of Human Rights Watch. "Israel's separation barrier seriously impedes Palestinian access to essentials of civilian life, such as work, education and medical care." The Human Rights Watch briefing paper argues that the barrier imposes arbitrary and excessive restrictions on the freedom of movement of tens of thousands of Palestinians and violates Israel's obligation under the Geneva Conventions to ensure the welfare of the population under occupation. The route of the barrier, moreover, is designed to incorporate and make contiguous with Israel the civilian settlements that have been constructed over the past three decades. "The settlements violate the Geneva Conventions' prohibition against transfers of population and have gravely affected Palestinian access to basics like employment, land and water," Stork said. "The separation barrier further encroaches on the land and resources of the West Bank with the aim of consolidating this illegal enterprise." Human Rights Watch takes no position on the Israeli-Palestinian territorial dispute, but monitors abuses against civilian populations by all sides in the conflict. Meanwhile the International court of Justice hearings into Israel's West Bank barrier wrapped up with arguments by pro-Palestinian parties that the massive structure was destroying the chances for peace in the Middle East. The Palestinians, were optimistic that the court would find against the Jewish state. Declaring a close to proceedings, Presiding Judge Shi Jiuyong said "a date and time for the court to announce its rulings" would be set later. Any verdict will be merely advisory. In the final round of hearings, both the Arab League and the Organization of the Islamic Conference argued the barrier was not about security but merely an attempt to grab Palestinian land. "The wall does not stand between terrorists and potential victims but between the farmer and his land the child and its school, patient and doctor and families who want to unite and the faithful from his or her holy places," said the league's chief counsel Michael Bothe. "The wall being constructed in the Palestinian occupied territories presents separation, leads to discrimination ...and destroys real prospects for a fair and lasting peace," he told the judges. "The effects of the wall are many, but all negative. It is an affront to international law (and) adds to the suffering of the Palestinian people." OIC Counsel Monique Chemillier-Gendreau said "with the wall, a viable Palestine is no longer possible and therefore no peace" is possible. "The wall occupies large areas of summarily confiscated Palestinian territory. "It has been abundantly demonstrated that this huge military installation has led to a massive violation of human rights." Israeli government legal adviser Daniel Taub, who observed proceedings, said they had been completely one-sided. He took heart from the decision by the United States, European Union and Russia three of the four backers of the road map peace plan who all boycotted the hearings on the grounds it was an inappropriate venue for such a case. "We still hope that the court will realize it's a trap," said Taub. "All the issues have to be dealt with as part of a comprehensive settlement" rather than in a courtroom, he added. Israel's hawkish Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has already vowed to forge ahead with its construction, insisting it is essential to halt Palestinian attacks. The Palestinians argued at the hearings that the barrier would increase the likelihood of attacks and is wrecking the road map, which aims for the creation of a Palestinian state next year alongside a secure Israel. After the end of the hearings, chief Palestinian delegate Nasser Al-Qidwa refused to be drawn on the future Palestinian strategy. "The next step is to receive the advisory," he told reporters. Michael Tarazi, legal advisor to the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), voiced confidence that the judges "will do their job and apply international law." The Israelis' decision to boycott the case showed "they do not have a case worth defending", he said.