by Jim Terral

February 11, 2004

Canada has sided with Israel in the matter of whether or not the  International Court of Justice should offer a non-binding opinion on  the legality of Israel's so-called "security fence."

An article in the Ottawa Citizen (Battle over barrier heats up," January 31, 2004) reports that "the government believes the matter is a political, rather than a judicial, issue."

The article quotes Minister of Foreign Affairs Bill Graham as saying, "I will give the court a written opinion to the effect that we consider that it's not time for the court to take this as a legal question. It's better that it remains for discussions between the parties, as mandated by the (UN) Security Council."

Discussions between parties? Are there discussions going on? It  seems from here that the relation between the Government of the State of Israel and the Authority of the non-state of Palestine has been characterized in recent months by the fact that it is not happening. There are no discussions timely or otherwise.

What we know is that the "fence" is already being built -- not discussed; indeed it is almost entirely built. A sensible position might have been that the "fence" is already a fait accompli. Since Israel has never paid serious attention to United Nations opinion anyway, nothing the ICJ could say or do would be likely to make any difference to the building of the "fence"-- or the seizure of land, or to the disruption of the lives of innocent Palestinian civilians, or to the provocation all that entails.  At least such a position would accurately name some of the best known details of the situation.

The loss of life to terrorist actions in Israel is truly lamentable. That it continues even as the "security fence" nears completion strongly  suggests that the recent official gloating on the part of the Israeli Prime Minister about the success of his anti-terrorism policies in general and of the "fence" in particular is without any foundation.

The "fence" itself is truly a political manoeuver. The Road Map has been a cynical political game from the beginning. Bringing the "fence" before the court for legal assessment is an attempt to end the political gamesmanship.

It's a pity that the Government of Canada got sucked into yet another round of playing politics, and this time on the wrong side. The earlier abstention from the General Assembly vote at least had the merit of portraying an honest division within the Canadian polity. But Canada's partisan vote this time around and Graham's own reference to "discussions between the parties" creates the illusion Canadians understand only one side of the issue and are unaware of the grassroots work being done by non-violent groups
on both sides of the Green Line.

Canada depends on the strength and effectiveness of international institutions like the UN and the ICJ. This attempt to pretend that a region which has long been the legitimate concern of the UN, and indeed is the creation of the international community, is now somehow immune from the mercies of international justice will do neither Canada nor the court any good.

What damages the credibility of the court and the UN, over and over again, are their persistent failure to address the most vital issues -- such as the Rwandan genocide -- because of political manoeuvering, usually though not always by the US and important allies of the US. It's about time that the Court and the international community had a serious, legal look at the persistent failure of Israel to respond meaninfully to numerous Security Council Resolutions. It's time to look at the "fence" and a lot more. In fact, it's past time, and the issues aren't going away.

Your Comments