United Nations — Israel and its American supporters
are waging a major advocacy campaign to thwart
Palestinian efforts to have the Security Council act
on the International Court of Justice's ruling against
the West Bank security fence.
The immediate goal of the campaign is to secure a high
number of abstentions at the General Assembly, where
the Arab Group is expected to introduce a resolution
on Friday calling on Israel and all members states to
comply with the court's 14-to-1 decision, according to
a copy of the draft resolution obtained by the
Forward. The resolution is expected to be adopted. But
the main objective of Israel and Jewish groups is to
ensure that no majority emerges in favor of a similar
resolution at the Security Council, which is the only
U.N. body with enforcement authority. Any anti-Israel
resolution regarding the fence would in all likelihood
prompt an American veto, further damaging Washington's
relations with the Arab and Muslim worlds.
To help head off the need for a U.S. veto at the
15-member council, where nine votes are required to
pass a resolution, the Conference of Presidents of
Major American Jewish Organizations, the Jewish
community's main pro-Israel umbrella group, has
launched what is being described as its "biggest
mobilization" on a U.N. issue since the failed effort
to defeat the 1975 resolution equating Zionism with
racism. Leaders of the Conference of Presidents are
urging the group's 52-member organization to reach out
to ambassadors and foreign capitals across the globe.
Meanwhile, Israel's ambassador to the United Nations,
Dan Gillerman, is planning to meet this week with
several colleagues from other countries to convey
Jerusalem's argument that only negotiations on the
ground will yield significant progress, an Israeli
official said.
"The Palestinians want to make the ruling a binding
decision and would like to put sanctions in place,"
said Amy Goldstein, U.N. director of B'nai B'rith
International. "If they achieve this, this is no less
than a redux of the Arab boycott of Israel."
Israeli officials and Jewish groups are focusing much
of their lobbying efforts on the European Union, which
has two veto-wielding, permanent Security Council
members in France and Great Britain, as well as an
influential nonpermanent member in Germany. All three
countries have previously said the court should not be
used to rule on what is essentially a political
dispute. The issue was on the agenda of a monthly
meeting of E.U. Foreign Ministers this week in
Brussels.
The proposed resolution being circulated by the
Palestinians leaves open the possibility of imposing
sanctions on Israel, while insisting "the United
Nations, and especially the General Assembly and the
Security Council, should consider what further action
is required to bring to an end the illegal situation
resulting from the construction of the Wall."
Palestinian officials have vowed to use the
international court's nonbinding advisory opinion on
the fence to stigmatize Israeli policies. However,
Nasser Al-Kidwa, the Palestinian U.N. observer, told
reporters on Monday that the Palestinian Authority
would wait before taking its case to the Security
Council. He declined to say whether he would push for
sanctions against Israel, a move that could antagonize
countries sitting on the fence. A spokesman
representing European Union Foreign Policy Chief
Javier Solana was quoted as saying that the E.U. did
not favor such an approach to addressing the fence and
the world court's ruling.
Observers say the Palestinians could bring up the
fence decision during the annual meeting of the
General Assembly in September, when the presence of
heads of states and foreign ministers attracts more
media attention than the traditionally quiet summer at
the United Nations.
In its opinion, issued July 9, the court ruled that
the construction of the "wall" in the Palestinian
territories was illegal and should stop immediately,
and that Israel should make reparations. The opinion
asks "all states not to recognize the illegal
situation resulting from construction of the wall and
not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the
situation created by such construction."
Officials at Jewish organizations criticized the
ruling's failure to take into account the "root
causes" for the wall: Palestinian terrorist attacks.
Jewish organizational leaders also said that the
judges went out of their way to rule against Israel on
details on which the court was not even asked to rule.
"It's just terrible. The court overreached, and this
gives a lot of heart to those who think the U.N. is no
good to begin with," said one Jewish official.
In Israel, officials were vowing to ignore the ruling.
Despite the defiant comments, the Israeli Defense
Ministry reportedly has decided to redraw the fence's
route so that it will more closely follow the Green
Line, the pre-1967 border dividing Israel and the West
Bank.
A June 30 ruling the Israeli High Court ordered that a
smaller, 30-kilometer section of the proposed route be
changed. The Israeli court ruled that Israel had a
right to build a barrier in the West Bank on security
grounds but ordered one segment rerouted to avoid
cutting off Palestinian villagers from farms, jobs,
public services and cities.