No sooner had yesterday’s bomb blast ripped through a Tel Aviv street, killing one person and injuring some 20 others, than Ariel Sharon put the blame on the World Court’s ruling two days earlier that Israel’s wall is illegal. The prime minister did not say that the attack possibly came to avenge the relentless assaults in Nablus and Gaza, which have killed scores of Palestinians the past few weeks. He did not blame settlements, the killing of children, curfews, checkpoints, extrajudicial assassinations, the occupation, or the land grab. He blamed the ruling by the International Court of Justice.
Of course, those who support the wall will use yesterday’s attack as an example of why it should be built. Those who oppose it say no barrier can prevent attacks on Israelis, like that of yesterday’s, as long as the occupation continues.
The court ruled against the wall, which it said was tantamount to annexation and was impeding the right of Palestinians to self-determination. It was a victory for the Palestinians in the highest court of the United Nations, a landmark decision which also called for Palestinians harmed by the wall to be compensated and for their property which was confiscated for its construction to be returned. If Israel wants to build a wall, the court said, it can build it on its own land, but it musty keep it off Palestinian land.
But because the ruling is non-binding, these are demands Israel will not meet, leading to the bigger question: What, if anything, will change? Soon, perhaps this week, the Palestinians will go to the General Assembly to demand that Israel destroys the wall.
The General Assembly can recommend that the wall be taken down and sanctions be slapped on Israel if it fails to comply, but only the Security Council can order such actions. And it is in the Security Council that Israel is protected against any and all international censure because the US will veto whatever the council decides. The Palestinians might be confident of the General Assembly’s support, but in the Security Council all such efforts will come to nought.
Ever since Israel occupied the West Bank and Gaza Strip in 1967, Palestinians have been unable to turn decisions in their favor made in New York into concrete gains where they matter most — on the ground. It will be no different this time. Israel holds all the military trump cards, and US policy in the Security Council will not change, not in an election year, perhaps not ever.
What then is the value of the ICJ ruling? It is no more than a moral victory, and perhaps, just perhaps, a glimmer of hope that the Palestinian struggle is finally returning from the killing fields to the political arena.
Sharon has all the money and all the military superiority. He knows he cannot win in a court of law, and, more importantly still, he cannot win in the court of world opinion. Eventually that will turn the tide in the Palestinians’ favor, but it will be a long time coming.
