JERUSALEM, 11 July 2004 — While Israelis enlisted American help, the Palestinians sought Europe’s backing yesterday for UN enforcement of a nonbinding international court ruling that found Israel’s massive West Bank wall to be illegal.
Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom said on Israeli radio that he had asked US officials to prevent the adoption of any UN resolution aimed at enforcing the court’s decision. The Palestinians have said they’ll seek the support of the world body’s members in the General Assembly, then go to the Security Council.
“The issue will go to the Security Council because the (Palestinians) have an automatic majority in the UN General Assembly,” Shalom said.
Palestinian Prime Minister Ahmed Qorei told European envoy Marc Otte that the Palestinians want Europe’s support at the United Nations.
Qorei told Otte he hoped the Americans would not “sabotage our efforts,” according to participants in the meeting. Washington has veto power in the Security Council and often has blocked proposed resolutions critical of Israel.
“Now it is the responsibility of the international community, it is the responsibility of the United Nations, to put (in place) a mechanism to commit Israel to this decision,” Qorei told reporters after the meeting.
Otte, standing by his side, was noncommittal, though he noted past EU objections to the barrier.
“We have to look carefully at what the court says and what the consequences are,” Otte said. As to the General Assembly, “we have to see how things happen.”
Several European countries had supported the Israeli and US position that the world court should not interfere because the issue was political, not legal, and could disrupt Middle East peace efforts. The court, however, rejected that argument, saying it had jurisdiction to give an advisory opinion.
Washington said its position has not changed. “It remains our view that this referral to the court was inappropriate and that, in fact, it could impede efforts to achieve progress toward a negotiated settlement between Israelis and Palestinians,” State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said.
Washington, he said, also rejects the idea there should be “further action” by the United Nations considering the court ruling.
In its ruling Friday, the UN’s International Court of Justice in The Hague declared the wall illegal and said construction must stop. It urged the General Assembly and Security Council to consider “what further action is required to bring to an end the illegal situation.”
A leading expert on international law said the ruling constituted the worst scenario for Israel. Olivier Ribbelink, principal researcher at the TMC Asser International Law Institute, an academic body created by the Dutch universities, said: “But purely in international law terms, the decision is just, very clear and very balanced.”
“For Israel, a split judgment, eight votes to seven for example, would at least have shown that there were divergences on points of law,” Ribbelink said.
Israel risked being isolated if a resolution demanding dismantling of the barrier is introduced in the General Assembly. “States could hardly abstain or vote against” such a resolution, Ribbelink said, after such a clear ruling from the UN’s highest court.
