|
To The Editor of The Guardian
May one hope that impartial UN delegates will take the following reality
into account when voting on the expected General Assembly resolution in
the wake of the ICJ advisory.
Believe it or not, Israel's construction of the anti-terror barrier (ATB)
complies fully with its duty under the Oslo Accords. Article XV of the of
the 1995 (Oslo II) Interim Agreement specifically provides that "Both
sides shall take all measures necessary in order to prevent acts of
terrorism, crime and hostilities directed against each other, ..". Having
regard to the Palestinian Authority's (PA) flagrant failure to comply with
its obligations under this clause, Israel's construction of the ATB should
be welcomed as the only non violent remaining means available to comply
with its obligations under this clause.
The more so is this true in view of the PA's tolerance of, and even
cooperation with, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, PFLP and other openly terrorist
organizations in gross violation of Article XIV which unambiguously
forbids any armed forces in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip other than
the Israeli army and the Palestinian Police Force. This clause clearly
states "Except for the arms, ammunition and equipment of the Palestinian
Police described in Annex I, and those of the Israeli military forces, no
organization, group or individual in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip
shall manufacture, sell, acquire, possess, import or otherwise introduce
into the West Bank or the Gaza Strip any firearms, ammunition, weapons,
explosives, gunpowder or any related equipment, unless otherwise provided
for in Annex I.
It is also difficult to understand what alternative is open to Israel in
countering terror attacks especially in view of the PA's violation of its
obligation under Article XXII to abstain from incitement, take legal
measures to prevent such incitement and to ensure that their respective
educational systems contribute to the peace between the Israeli and
Palestinian peoples and to peace in the entire region.
If we were living in a rational fair-minded world, the ICJ would have
welcomed, not only this non-violent ATB, but the fact that by reducing the
incidence of terror attacks, it will hopefully minimize, if not avoid the
need for violent incursions into PA controlled territory. It would also
have considered in-depth, the PA actions which motivated the ATB. |
