EIN DRINGENDER AUFRUF AN UNSERE LESER DEM BEISPIEL EINIGER WENIGER ZU FOLGEN....  
 Honestly-Concerned ist auf die Spenden aller unserer Leser und Freunde angewiesen. Wir haben derzeit keine größeren Sponsoren, die unsere Mailings finanziell unterstützen. Wir alle erbringen unsere Leistungen ehrenamtlich ohne Ersatz von Kosten oder Aufwendungen. Wir sind komplett auf uns selbst angewiesen, d.h. auf Euch - auf unsere Leser und Freunde. Somit sind wir für jede Hilfe dankbar. Das nachfolgende Konto ist ein speziell für Honestly-Concerned eingerichtetes Unterkonto von unserer "Schatzmeisterin" Noemi Staszewski, die eingehende Spenden vorerst für uns verwaltet. Für Eure großzügige Unterstützung sind wir dankbar.....  Hier die Kontodetails: Kontoinhaber: N. Staszewski, Bank: Dresdner Bank, Konto.Nr. 06 360 002 02, BLZ 500 800 00, Verwendungszweck: honestly-concerned.org

 
 
NAHOSTKONFLIKT 
FOLLOW-UP SONDERAUSGABE

MEHR INFORMATIONEN UND REAKTIONEN ZUM URTEIL DES  INTERNATIONALEN
GERICHTSHOFS IN DEN HAAG ZUM ISRAELISCHEN SICHERHEITSZAUN....



President of the Court Shi Jiuyong (2NDR) reads the verdict during the public sitting of the International Court of Justice in The Hague July 9, 2004.
The International Court of Justice determined the legal consequences of the construction of the controversial Israeli wall in the occupied Palestinian Territory. REUTERS/Paul Vreeker

Die erste Sonderausgabe mit vielen Hintergrundartikelm, Fakten und mehr, zum Thema "Zaun" und "Urteil", ist unter folgenden Adresse zu finden:
http://honestly-concerned.org/other/SONDERAUSGABE-Sicherheitszaun-9-7-2004.htm

  1. TEIL 1 - LINKS zu empfohlenen Artikeln & Webseiten aus der Presse
    1. Weitere Hintergrundinfromationen...
    2. Reaktionen auf das Urteil...
    3. Aktuelle Artikel zum Urteil und zum Thema Zaun...
    4. Kommentare und Meinungen...
  2. TEIL 2 - Leserbriefe... 
     
Ein Archiv der bisher an die Mailingliste verschickten eMails stehen Euch jederzeit Online, unter
zur Einsicht zu Verfügung.
 
Weitere Informationen über Honestly-Concerned, inkl. Leserbriefen, unserem Gästebuch  
und anderen Hintergrundinformationen über unsere Gruppe haben, stehen Euch Online unter
zu Verfügung.

  1. WEITERE HINTERGRUNDINFORMATIONEN...
    1. Morgenpost - Stichwort: Haager Gericht - Von Nobert Jessen
      Seit 1945 ist der Internationale Gerichtshof (IGH) im niederländischen Den Haag das höchste Richtergremium der Vereinten Nationen. Das Gericht kann Streitfragen zwischen Staaten auf der Grundlage des Völkerrechts entscheiden, wenn die betreffenden Staaten die Zuständigkeit des Gerichts akzeptiert haben. Dann fällen die 15 Richter des IGH Urteile. Sie werden auf neun Jahre von der UN-Vollversammlung gewählt. Vorsitzender ist zurzeit der Chinese Schai Dschiujong. Ein zusätzlicher Arbeitsbereich besteht in der Ausstellung juristischer Gutachten. Im Fall der Sperranlage Israels hatte UN-Generalsekretär Annan das Gutachten in Auftrag gegeben. Urteilssprüche sind bindend und es gibt keine Berufungsmöglichkeit. Gutachten sind nicht verpflichtend. Sie dienen aber den Institutionen der UNO als Richtlinie. So können sie durchaus politische Folgen haben. Sanktionen müssen dabei aber vom Sicherheitsrat verhängt werden. Untergebracht ist der Gerichtshof, der nicht mit dem 2002 gegründeten Internationalen Strafgerichtshof zu verwechseln ist, im Haager Friedenspalast. Dies ist ein 1913 eröffnetes Zentrum zur friedlichen Lösung internationaler Konflikte.       

    3. Zwei Vergleiche zu anderen Zäunen auf der Welt:
      Take-A-Pen -       http://www.take-a-pen.org/english/Articles/Lets%20remove%20all%20fences.pdf
      IMRA - http://www.imra.org.il/story.php3?id=21439 
       
    4. AFP - US-Richter hält Empfehlung zu Israels Sperranlage für unglaubwürdig
      Den Haag (AFP) - Der US-Richter Thomas Buergenthal hat gegen die Empfehlung des Internationalen Gerichtshofs (IGH) zur israelischen Sperranlage im Westjordanland gestimmt, weil er sie nach eigenen Worten für "unglaubwürdig" hält. Das Gericht habe "die Natur der Angriffe" aus dem Palästinensergebiet sowie ihre Auswirkungen auf Israel und seine Bevölkerung "nie wirklich ernsthaft untersucht", hieß es in Buergenthals Begründung seiner Gegenstimme, die das Gericht am Freitag zusammen mit der Empfehlung veröffentlichte. Die Schlussfolgerungen des Gerichtshofs seien daher "auf rechtlicher Ebene" nicht zu rechtfertigen. 

    5. International Court of Justice/COP - ICJ Dissent of Judge Thomas Buergenthal (USA) (International Court of Justice)
      Since I believe that the Court should have exercised its discretion and declined to render the requested advisory opinion, I dissent from its decision to hear the case.
      To reach [a] conclusion with regard to the wall as a whole without having before it or seeking to ascertain all relevant facts bearing directly on issues of Israel's legitimate right of self-defense, military necessity, and security needs, given the repeated deadly terrorist attacks in and upon Israel...to which Israel has been and continues to be subjected, cannot be justified as a matter of law.
      Article 21 of the International Law Commission's Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, declares: "The wrongfulness of an act of a State is precluded if the act constitutes a lawful measure of self-defense taken in conformity with the Charter of the United Nations."
      Article 51 of the Charter provides that "Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations."
      The Court fails to address any facts or evidence specifically rebutting Israel's claim of military exigencies or requirements of national security. 
       
    6. IDF - The Anti - Terrorist Fence
      The Anti-Terrorist Fence is important tool for the I.D.F. in its mission to prevent terrorism. Below our links are two presentations and a short film highlighting the effectiveness and rationale behind the Anti-Terrorist Fence. This film of the security fence against terror is a compilation of questions and answers elating to the process of constructing the fence and the considerations that led the State of Israel to build it.

      The Right to Live - English
      The Right to Live - Espanol
      The Right to Live - Deutsch
      The Right to Live - Francais
      The Right to Live - Russian
      The Right to Live - Arabic
      The Anti-Terrorist Fence - Facts and Figures
      The Right to Live - pdf

    7. AFP -       Israelis demonstrate in favor of the Israeli separation barrier in the outskirts of the West Bank village of El-Zaim on the edge of Jerusalem.(AFP/Gali Tibbon) 
       

    8. AFP - Palestinians throw stones at Israeli vehicles patrolling the 'separation barrier' in the West Bank city of Bethlehem. The Gulf states welcomed the world court's ruling against the West Bank barrier.(AFP/File/Musa Al-Shaer) 
    9.  
      A group of Orthodox Jews protest against Zionism protest in The Hague (news - web sites) July 9, 2004. The protest was in advance of the public sitting of the International Court of Justice concerning the legal consequences of the construction of an Israeli wall in the occupied Palestinian Territory. 
       


    11. IDF - BACKGROUND INFORMATION Attributed to "security sources" (From IDF Spokesperson) 7 July 2004
      The impact of the Security Fence on the operational capability of the terror infrastructure in the Northern West Bank
      1.    It is clear that the security fence, built to save lives, has proven to do exactly that- it saves lives, every single day. A close look at the statistics regarding the terrorist attacks carried out by the terror infrastructure in the Northern West Bank prior to the erection of the fence, compared with the attacks carried out by the same infrastructure following the completion of the fence, illustrates a sharp decrease in terrorist attacks carried out against innocent Israeli civilians.
      2.    Over the past 11 months, from August 2003 to June 30, 2004, the terrorist infrastructure in the Northern West Bank managed to carry out three suicide attacks carried out in Israel (all of which occurred in the second half of 2003), killing 26 Israelis and wounding 76, (on two occasions the terrorists infiltrated through areas in the Northern West Bank in which the fence is yet to be completed. On the third occasion the suicide bomber infiltrated Israel through the Bartah crossing using a Jordanian passport. She managed to do so due to tendency of the soldiers to be more lenient with Palestinian women.
      3.     In comparison, prior to the erection of the fence, in the 34 months since the beginning of the conflict, this terror infrastructure succeeded in carrying out 73 attacks, in which 293 Israelis were killed and 1,950 were wounded. Comparing these facts and figures establishes several important points:
      …       A sharp decrease of aproximately 90% in the number of successful terror attacks- from an average of 26 attacks per year prior to the establishment of the fence, to three the year following the completion of the fence.
      …       A sharp decrease of approximately 70% in the number of casualties from terror attacks- from an average of 103 Israelis murdered a year prior to the establishment of the fence, down to 28 the year following the completion of the fence.
      …       A sharp decrease (roughly  85% ) in the number of wounded- from an average of 688 Israelis wounded a year prior to the establishment of the fence, to 83 the year following the completion of the fence.
      4.     During the abovementioned period, the Israeli security forces thwarted dozens of planned attacks in the final stages of their implementation. As a result of the successful thwarting of these attacks and following the arrests of the terrorists and the heads of terror, Israeli security forces uncovered 24 explosive belts and charges intended to be used for these attacks.
      5.    It is now clear that the reason, to a great extent, for the sharp decrease in the number of suicide bombings in Israel is the result of the security barrier. This, alongside the daily operations aimed at thwarting attacks enables us to save lives.
      6.    Following the success of the security barrier, we are now witnessing a phenomenon of which terrorists attempt to launch their attacks and infiltrate from areas to the South and to the places where the fence has not yet been completed.(Mainly through Jerusalem and Ramallah). Nevertheless, all attempts to infiltrate through the south have been thwarted since the fence was erected, due to our knowledge that terrorists must move south to carry out attacks.       …       Between October 2000 and July 2003, (prior to the fence): 293 Israelis were murdered in 63 attacks.
      …       Between August 2003 and June 2004, 26 Israelis were murdered in three attacks.
      …       In the year 2002, the Israeli home front suffered 46 suicide attacks murdering 213 Israelis and wounding 1,342. Seventeen of these attacks took
      place in Jerusalem.
      …       In the year 2003, the Israeli home front suffered 17 suicide attacks murdering 138 Israelis and wounding 701, five of the attacks took place in
      Jerusalem.
      …       In the first six months of 2004 the Israeli home front suffered four suicide attacks, two of which took place in Jerusalem.
      These figures show that the security fence saves lives. 
       
    12.   (Mit vielen Artikeln, Hintergrundinformationen, Karten, Fakten, Kommentaren und Meinungen) 
       
    13. Ha'Aretz - New fence route to run close to the Green Line
      The IDF and the Defense Ministry will present within two weeks the new route for the separation fence to replace the one that was rejected by the High Court of Justice.
      (06/07/04) 
       
    14. JPost - ICJ opinion can influence rules of warfare
      Defensive measures taken by countries engaged in warfare outside their borders could be endangered should the International Court of Justice issue, as is expected, a negative opinion on the legality of Israeli's security fence, said international attorney David Rivkin, in an interview with The Jerusalem Post on Thursday. While it's true that that many people are also looking to see how the advisory opinion will speak of Israel's presence in the territories, that position is not central to the case, said Rivkin, who served as a legal advisor to both former presidents Ronald Reagan and George Bush.
      "The real question is whether the rules of belligerent occupation apply to Israel in the territories," said Rivkin.
      "To the best of my knowledge the ICJ has never ruled on an issue of this magnitude relative to state practice in this area," said Rivkin.
      To state that the fence is illegal, "would be another example of the erosion of traditional legal rules that allow states engaged in warfare to do reasonable things to protect their security," said Rivkin.
      Such an opinion would have implications beyond the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and could be used as the basis of legal decisions in other conflicts, said Rivkin.
      He added that it would not only be a slap against Israel, "but at reasonable civilized states that are dealing with difficult threats."
      "It would continue to erode age old norms of international law, that would be bad for Israel and for the United States," said Rivkin. He added that it could have implications for defensive actions that the United States might take while in Iraq. Rivkin said that the Israeli High Court of Justice was correct under the guidelines of international law when it ruled last month that the government had a right to build a security fence to protect its citizens as long as it also took care not to cause undue harm to the Palestinians. Rivkin said that under international law there is a basic proposition that an occupying power has a right to take what ever reasonable measure necessary to insure the safety of civilians, that includes building walls and ditches. The loss of nearly 1,000 citizens in suicide bombings and terror attacks since September 2000 speaks to the necessity of such a fence, said Rivkin. Construction of a passive defense such as a wall or a trench saves both Israeli and Palestinian lives, said Rivkin. He noted that it also reduces the number of civilian casualties as allows for a more discriminate use of firepower on the part of the Israelis, said Rivkin. But Susan Akram, who teaches law at Boston University, said that the question
      here is not whether Israel has the right to defend itself, but whether it has taken the route of less harm.
      "There is a principal that allows occupying powers to take certain measures based on necessity, but those measures are very limited," said Akram. In issuing its opinion, the court will consider whether another action could have been taken that would have caused less harm and in this case, such an alternative exists, said Akram. If Israel had constructed the fence purely within the pre-1967 borders, it's unlikely the case would have been referred to the ICJ, said Akram. The existence of that option, negates the argument of self defense, said. 
       
    15. Honest Reporting - Sonderausgabe zum Zaun
      ... By omitting these statements, news outlets implied that the ICJ ruling was broadly accepted, which it certainly was not. Alan Dershowitz, in an important response to the ruling, adds that virtually every democracy voted against that court's taking jurisdiction over the fence case, while nearly every country that voted to take jurisdiction was a tyranny. Yet most readers were left with the false impression that the ICJ condemnation of Israel represented broad-based 'international opinion.' ... 
       
    16. PEACEWATCH THE WASHINGTON INSTITUTE'S SPECIAL REPORTS ON THE ARAB-ISRAELI PEACE PROCESS
      Number Four Hundred and Sixty-Five               July 8, 2004
      UNILATERALLY CONSTRUCTED BARRIERS IN CONTESTED AREAS  - By David Makovsky and Ben Thein
      The International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague is expected to issue
      an advisory opinion this Friday, July 9, on the international legality of
      Israel's security fence.       >>

    17. BICOM - International Court of Justice issues advisory opinion on Israel’s security fence

      On 9 July 2004, the International Court of Justice (“ICJ”) handed down its advisory opinion regarding the legality of Israel’s security fence. The Court determined that the West Bank security fence breaches international law, that it must be dismantled, and that Palestinians whose land was used for the construction of the fence must be compensated. In finding that the fence is not permitted under international law, the Court failed to realise that the fence is first and foremost a defensive security measure instituted to protect the lives of Israeli civilians. In areas where the fence has been constructed, the ability of terrorists to infiltrate Israel has been significantly weakened. This has led to a sharp decrease in the number of successful terror attacks, and thus a great decline in the number of Israeli deaths from terror. Now that the ICJ has read its advisory opinion, the issue will likely be referred back to the UN General Assembly, which may pass a resolution requesting that the Security Council impose sanctions on Israel.[1] This would cause considerable delay toward advancing the peace process. With this latest development, it is imperative to understand both the background of the ICJ case and the effect that the security fence has had on protecting Israeli lives.

      Background to the ICJ decision on the security fence

      • On 8 December 2003, the UN General Assembly passed a resolution in which the International Court of Justice in The Hague, the highest judicial body of the UN, was asked to issue an advisory opinion as to “the legal consequences arising from the construction of the wall being built by Israel, the occupying power, in the occupied Palestinian territory.”[2] Less than half of the General Assembly’s 191 countries actually supported the motion, which was adopted by a vote of 90 in favour, eight against, and 74 abstaining.[3] The wording of the question itself reveals the politicisation of the request and the bias imminent in the resulting advisory opinion.
      • Israel’s case, which was submitted to the ICJ in a 131-page document on 30 January 2004, rejected the authority of the ICJ to hear the matter for several reasons, including that discussing the matter before the Court would undermine efforts for a political resolution. Israel believes that the appropriate procedure for resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is to proceed with the Road Map peace plan, as created and endorsed by the diplomatic Quartet - the EU, the UN, the US, and the Russian Federation.[4]
      • Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom has noted that the request for an ICJ judgment is effectively an abuse of the ICJ’s mandate for political goals.[5]
      • Israel’s stance was effectively endorsed by the major western democracies, all of whom followed suit and declined to send representatives to testify at the hearings. The EU - including the ten European countries then awaiting accession - the UK, the US, Canada, Australia, Russia, and South Africa and various other countries instead submitted arguments to the ICJ which rejected the authority of the Court to rule on the fence.
      • Brian Cowan, President of the Council of Ministers of the European Union, submitted the EU’s written statement to the Court, which stated that “the EU believes that the proposed request for an Advisory Opinion from the International Court of Justice is inappropriate. It will not help the efforts of the two-parties to re-launch a political dialogue.”[6]
      • The British written statement to the Court was equally clear, asserting that the Court should refrain from hearing the matter. It said that the Road Map peace plan should be adhered to as the way to achieve peace in the conflict. It further stated that a Court opinion would more likely hinder, rather than help, the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. Additionally, it remarked that with one of the parties not consenting to the Court’s jurisdiction, relevant information necessary to determine a prudent opinion on the issue would not be submitted as evidence before the Court.[7]
      • Israel decided not to appear at the ICJ’s oral hearings held in February, citing that the ICJ lacked the jurisdiction to examine the issue of the security fence, as it affects Israel’s basic right of self-defence. It also considered the position of other major countries, including the world’s leading democracies, which opposed the ICJ’s authority on this matter. Israel decided that its written statement submitted to the ICJ in January would suffice.[8]
      • On the other hand, some of the world’s harshest authoritarian dictatorships sided with the Palestinians at the ICJ. During the oral hearings, which took place between 23-25 February 2004, statements were given by the Ambassador of the Permanent Observer of Palestine to the United Nations, Algeria, Saudi Arabia, Cuba, and the Sudan, among others. The League of Arab States and the Organisation of the Islamic Conference also gave oral statements to the Court.[9] This only added to the routine condemnation of Israel by regimes noted for their brutality.
      • The advisory opinion from the ICJ is non-binding. However, the issue of the security fence can now be brought back to the UN General Assembly, which could pass a resolution requesting that the UN Security Council impose sanctions on Israel. It is expected, though, that the US would use its power as a permanent member and veto such a resolution in the Security Council.

      Important facts on the security fence

      • Israel decided to begin the construction of a security fence after facing over 19,000 terror attacks, which resulted in over 900 deaths and thousands more wounded.[10] The fence is a non-violent means by which Israel can protect its citizens. Israel’s President, Moshe Katsav, has remarked, “It is a security fence, not a border. It has no political meaning. It is only for security purposes, it is intended to keep the Palestinians from killing us.”[11]
      • The number of successful terror attacks originating from the northern West Bank has decreased sharply since the commencement of construction of the security fence in the region. In the 34 months from the beginning of violence in September 2000, through to July 2003 with the installation of the first contiguous segment of the fence, terrorists carried out 73 attacks on Israelis through the use of suicide bombings, shootings, and car bombings, killing 293 Israelis and injuring 1,950. However, in the 11 months since the beginning of the fence’s construction in the northern West Bank, terrorists have managed to carry out only three attacks within Israel, killing 26 Israelis and injuring 76. This demonstrates a successful decrease of more than 90% in the number of terror attacks emanating from areas where the fence is in place.[12]
      • Additionally, the security fence has led to a 70% decline in the number of casualties resulting from terror attacks, from an average of 103 Israelis killed each year before the fence to an average of 28 in the year following the completion of the fence’s northern segments. Furthermore, following the construction of the security fence in the northern West Bank, there has been an 85% decrease in the number of Israelis wounded in terror attacks, with the average of 688 Israelis injured per year before its installation now reduced to an average of 83 per year following the completion of the northern section.[13]
      • A security fence has existed around Gaza since 1994. Very few terrorists have managed to infiltrate Israel since its implementation.[14]
      • As Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom explains, the security fence has been implemented solely as a defensive measure, as it has been found to be the most effective method of protecting the lives of Israelis from terrorist attacks. As a temporary measure, the fence is not intended to constitute any sort of permanent border, and it can be dismantled easily. FM Shalom has noted that when circumstances have improved between Israel and her neighbours - with Egypt, Jordan, and Lebanon, for example - Israel has moved existing security fences to reflect the updated situations.[15]
      • Israel has sought to complete the route of the fence in a way which keeps the disruption of life to Palestinians to a minimum. After hearing petitions from Palestinians, Israel’s High Court recently called for the alteration of certain sections of the fence, in order to strike the appropriate balance between minimising the hardship on Palestinians and protecting Israelis. The High Court has also issued two interim injunctions, which halt the construction of the fence in areas where this balance is to be re-evaluated. Israel’s Ministry of Defence has announced that “the replanning of these sections will be based on the principles set by the High Court, namely the proper balance between security and humanitarian considerations.”[16] Hence, the rulings of Israel’s High Court indicate both the democratic way in which Palestinian needs are considered before the judicial authority, as well as the consideration which Israel attaches to finding a suitable equilibrium between Israeli and Palestinian needs.
      • On 22 February, the day before the opening of the ICJ oral hearings in The Hague, eight people were killed and 72 injured in a suicide attack on a Jerusalem bus. The suicide bomber, who was a member of the al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades - a faction of Yasser Arafat’s Fatah movement - was physically able to enter Jerusalem because the southern portion of the security fence had not yet been erected. This incident directly points to the timely necessity of the fence.
      • It is regrettable that the ICJ, whilst ruling against the fence, has not similarly moved to condemn Palestinian terror perpetrated against Israel and its citizens. A Foreign Ministry spokesperson commented, “It fails to address the essence of the problem and the very reason for building the fence - Palestinian terror.”[17]

      Conclusion

      The question posed to the ICJ regarding the legality of Israel’s security fence made no mention of the Palestinian terror and incitement to violence which has caused the fence’s necessity.[18] Whilst the fence was condemned as a human rights violation before the ICJ, the fence’s absence has been exploited to organise terror attacks against Israeli civilians. It is impossible to separate the security fence’s construction from the fact that the fence saves Israeli lives. In areas where the fence has been constructed, there has been a dramatic decrease in the number of terror attacks on Israelis, as well as number of Israelis killed and wounded. Until Israel finds a partner for peace in good faith with which to conduct negotiations, the security fence provides the best defence against Palestinian terror attacks.


  2. REAKTIONEN AUF DAS URTEIL...
    1. Kurze Übersicht zu Reaktionen aus MT-Updates: 
       

      1. PA
        Arafat hails World Court opinion on West Bank fence as victory for Palestinian people (Reuters)
        Palestinian Prime Minister Ahmad Qurei: “There will be no peace at all as long as this wall exists; it must collapse like the Berlin wall. It has nothing to do with security. It is built to grab land.”
        PA Minister of Negotiations Saeb Erekat: "The Palestinians intend to fully respect the ICJ's ruling on the legality of the wall. This is a historic day for the Palestinian cause. The PA will appeal to each of the 189 member-countries of the United Nations to state clearly whether it respects international law or whether it is against it." (CNN)
        Chief aid to Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, Nabil Abu Rudeina: "The decision of the court is a victory for the rights of Palestinians and for international legitimacy. It is a victory for international law and a real blow for Israel. This decision will lead to the isolation of Israel, and the international community should impose sanctions against Israel, for it is violating the law and international relations." (AFP)

      2. ISRAEL
        Israel: ICJ ruling completely ignores root of problem, and the reason the wall was erected - Palestinan terror.         Solution to Mideast conflict won`t be found in Hague, Manhattan, but in Ramallah, Gaza, where terror originates (Haaretz)
        Israel Justice Minister Yosef Lapid: "There are now restrictions on the security fence imposed by our own High Court. We will respect the decisions of our High Court, and not those of the ICJ, which is made up of European Union countries who cannot be accused of being overly supportive of Israel." (The Jerusalem Post)
        Israel Foreign Ministry legal adviser Alan Baker: "Countries that care about the functioning of the United Nations should say, 'Enough is enough, there is a diplomatic process, enough with these games.'" 
         
      3. EU
        European Commission Spokesman Jean Christophe Filori: "...the European Union continues to call on Israel to remove the barrier from inside the occupied Palestinian territories, including in and around East Jerusalem." 
         
      4. USA
        White House spokesman Scott McClellan:         "We do not believe that that's (ICJ) the appropriate forum to resolve what is a political issue. This is an issue that should be resolved through the process that has been put in place, specifically the road map." (Reuters)
        New York senators Hillary Clinton and Charles Schumer announced that they will deliver statements against the International Court's decision in front of the United Nations building in New York City. 
         
      5. National Director of the Anti-Defamation League, Abe Foxman: "We though for a moment the court would rise above prejudice, but as it turns out, it didn't." 

         
    2. REAKTIONEN DER PA UND ARABISCHER STAATEN...


      1. SPIEGEL Online - KUREI ZUM IGH-URTEIL: "Ein historischer Tag für Palästina"
        Erleichterung und Freude beim palästinensischen Ministerpräsidenten Ahmed Kurei. Er hat das Gutachten des Internationalen Gerichtshofs in Den Haag gegen die von Israel gewünschte Mauer zwischen Israel und dem Westjordanland begrüßt.
        Jerusalem - Kurei sprach von einem "historischen Tag" für das palästinensische Volk. "Dies zeigt den Israelis, den Amerikanern und der ganzen Welt, dass die Mauer illegal ist, weil sie auf besetztem Land gebaut wurde", sagte er in seinem Büro in Abu Dis nahe Jerusalem, von dem aus er die Sperranlage sehen konnte. Die "Hass-Mauer" müsse nicht nur gestoppt, sondern zerstört werden, forderte er. Die Entscheidung des Gerichtshofs in Den Haag, den er als "das wichtigste Gericht der Welt" bezeichnete, sei "ein Schlag ins Gesicht der Rassisten".
        Präsident Jassir Arafat sprach von einem Sieg für das palästinensische Volk. Sein Berater forderte eine Bestrafung und Isolierung Israels durch die UN-Vollversammlung und Sicherheitsrat. "Von heute an sollte Israel als ein gesetzloser Staat betrachtet werden", erklärte Nabil Abu Rudeine. 
         
      2. NWZ - Aktuell - Palästinenser feiern UN-Rechtsgutachten gegen Sperranlage als PR-Sieg
        9. Juli 2004 Tel Aviv/Ramallah/dpa - Nach ersten Berichten über das Rechtsgutachten des Internationalen Gerichtshofes zur israelischen Sperranlage feierten die Palästinenser bereits ihren klaren Sieg auf dem nahöstlichen PR-Schlachtfeld. Ein Berater des Präsidenten Jassir Arafat sprach am Freitag noch vor der offiziellen Verlesung in Den Haag von einem „Sieg für das internationale Recht“. Für die israelische Regierung sei es „ein Schlag ins Gesicht“, frohlockte Nabil Abu Rudeineh in Ramallah. Das Gutachten werde „Israel weiter isolieren“. ... 
         
      3. Die Presse - Palästinenser fordern UN-Sanktionen gegen Israel
        Die Regierung in Jerusalem lehnt den Richterspruch kategorisch ab.
        JERUSALEM. Der Spruch des Internationalen Gerichtshofs ist Wasser auf die Mühlen der Palästinenser. Sie fordern jetzt dezidiert UN-Sanktionen gegen Israel. Nabil Abu Rudeinah, ein Berater von Palästinenser-Präsident Jassir Arafat, erklärte, man werde sich für eine Resolution des UN-Sicherheitsrats gegen den Bau des israelischen Sperrwalls einsetzen. Durch ihr Veto haben die USA in dem Gremium eine Entschließung gegen Jerusalem jedoch stets abgewendet. Auch Arafat selbst begrüßte das Urteil. "Ich bin sicher, dass der Haager Gerichtshof den Bau des Zauns, der unser Volk zerstört, aufhalten kann." ...
        Siehe auch:
        AP -                 Palästinenser wollen UN-Resolution zu israelischer Sperranlage 

      5. Ha'Aretz - Palestinians to seek UN General Assembly backing on ICJ decision
        Palestinians will ask the United Nations General Assembly next week to adopt a nonbinding resolution affirming the International Court of Justice ruling against the West Bank separation fence, Arab envoys said on Friday. The Palestinians later intend to take their case to the 15-nation Security Council, where the United States last October vetoed a resolution that sought to bar Israel from extending the security barrier into the Palestinian West Bank. The assembly resolution is expected to ask UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan to report on the implementation by Israel of the court's decision, Arab envoys said. Resolutions in the assembly are not binding on the 191 members but can have international impact.
        "The General Assembly now will be called upon to look into this matter," Yahya Mahmassani, the ambassador from the League of Arab States told reporters. In a response to the ruling of the International Court of Justice on the West Bank separation fence, Israel said Friday that the court had failed to address the issue of "Palestinian terror" in determining that the barrier is illegal.
        "It fails to address the essence of the problem and the very reason for building the fence - Palestinian terror," a Foreign Ministry spokesman said at a news briefing Friday. The key to resolving the conflict in the Middle East won't be found in The Hague or in Manhattan, but in Ramallah or Gaza, where terror originates, the spokesman said.
        "I believe that after all the rancor dies, this resolution will find its place in the garbage can of history. The court has made an unjust ruling denying Israel its right of self-defense," said Ra'anan Gissin, a senior advisor to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.
        "This is a dark day for the international court of justice and the international legal system," Dan Gillerman, Israel's ambassador to the United Nations, said Friday. "It is shocking and appalling that in all 60-plus pages of the opinion, the court failed to address the essence of the problem and the very reason for building the fence - the indiscriminate and murderous campaign of terror that Israelis are facing," he said. Finance Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also condemned the ruling as unjust.
        "What's going to happen now. This is going to go to the UN General Assembly," Netanyahu said. "They can decide anything there. They can say that the earth is flat. It won't make it legal, it won't make it true and it won't make it just." Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat hailed the ruling as a victory for his people.
        "This is an excellent decision. We thank the court in The Hague," Arafat told reporters from his compound in the West Bank city of Ramallah. "This is a victory for the Palestinian people and for all the free peoples of the world." Though the ruling is only advisory Arafat compared it to the international will that led to the fall of the Berlin wall in 1989.
        "This wall will be removed to build our own state," Arafat said. The International Court "decided clearly today that this racist wall is illegal to the root and Israel should stop building it and take down what has already been built of this wall. We welcome this decision," Palestinian Prime Minister Ahmed Qureia said.
        "This is a historic day and a historic decision," he said. The Hamas militant group hailed the court's decision, saying it "proves that Israel is just a renegade entity that violates all international laws and resolutions."
        "The ruling is clear evidence that this raping entity is a reason for the troubles and terrorism in the region and shows that this entity (Israel) is trying all the time to create atmospheres of wars and tensions," a leaflet by the group said.
        The "apartheid wall represents the real picture of the Zionist entity that lives the illusion of security and hiding all the time behind walls, lookout posts and heavily protected installations," it added. Justice Minister Yosef Lapid said earlier Friday that Israel will not follow the ICJ ruling on the West Bank separation fence. The ICJ ruling on the legality of the West Bank separation fence states that the fence contravenes international law, that it must be dismantled, and that compensation must be paid to the Palestinian owners of property confiscated for its construction. Lapid said Israel would honor only its own court rulings, such as the June 30 High Court of Justice ruling ordering the defense establishment to reroute a 30-kilometer stretch of the separation fence northwest of Jerusalem. The High Court held that the fence was a security barrier rather than a political one, but that Israel must balance security considerations against the needs of local residents.
        "Now, of course, there is the limitation the High Court of Justice imposed in Israel, and we will comply with our High Court decisions, and not with the panel of European Union nations, which are not exactly suspected of excessive sympathy for Israel," Lapid told Army Radio.
        "The Palestinians recruit seemingly enlightened individuals to condemn Israel, but the fence provides the best security for Israeli citizens," Ya'alon said at a conference in Tel Aviv on Friday. Palestinians will seek UN sanctions against Israel, a senior Palestinian official said.
        "The next step is to approach the UN General Assembly and Security Council to adopt resolutions that will isolate and punish Israel. As of today Israel should be viewed as an outlaw state," said Nabil Abu Rudeineh, senior adviser to Arafat.
        "We hope the United States today will see to it that they will work to have Israel comply with the (court's) resolution," Palestinian Cabinet Minister Saeb Erekat said. Ahead of the ruling, IDF Chief of Staff Lieutenant General Moshe Ya'alon said Friday that international legislation on matters concerning war are outdated and irrelevant. According to Ya'alon, the use of civilians in a combat zone necessitates the building of the fence, and that in most sections, the fence allows for complete prevention of attacks.
        "It's a great decision. We are thrilled. It very clearly delegitimizes the wall and demands that it be pulled down," said Jamal Juma, coordinator of a Palestinian group called The Anti-apartheid Wall Campaign. On Friday morning the Israeli-Arab Hadash party submitted a no-confidence motion to the government in the wake of reports of the ruling against the fence. Faction head MK Mohammed Barakeh said Israel could not ignore the ICJ ruling, or else it will continue to be an international pariah, Army Radio reported. Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom was to hold a meeting with ministry officials Friday afternoon to discuss an Israel reaction to the ruling, and Sharon will be holding meetings on the issue on Sunday, according to Army Radio. Government spokesman Avi Pazner said Israel will be ready to discuss the fence route after implementing the disengagement plan, Israel Radio reported.         
         
      6. JPost - PA: US should force Israel to respect ICJ ruling
        In anticipation of a battle in the UN over the security fence, Israel has already begun lobbying the United States, Europe, and even Jordan and Egypt to support its claims. Foreign Ministry legal adviser Alan Baker said that over the past several weeks Israel has tried to convince nations around the world not to be dragged after another attempt by the Palestinians to divert the world's attention from the need for Palestinian action against terrorism and reform by focusing on the fence.
        "Countries that care about the functioning of the United Nations should say, 'Enough is enough, there is a diplomatic process, enough with these games,'" Baker said. Israel has sent two members of its legal department, Daniel Taub and Arthur Lenk, and three terror victims to deal with the press in The Hague. Israel's spokesmen are not expected to attack the court itself, or even deal with the details of the ruling, but rather argue that the whole affair is a "cynical political exercise" initiated by the Palestinians.
        Gideon Meir, the Foreign Ministry's deputy director-general for public affairs said "Israel's position is that the fence promotes peace by taking a weapon out of the hands of the Palestinians". Meir said Israel intends to downplay the story, and will not play into the hands of the Palestinians who want to move the issue of the fence, which in recent weeks has been shunted aside by the disengagement plan, back to the top of the international agenda. In February, Israel, the US, and many European countries boycotted the three days of oral proceedings at The Hague, claiming that the issue was outside the ICJ's purview, that it was political rather than legal, and interfered with the region's peace process. It did, however, submit a legal brief to the court. But Susan Akram who teaches law at Boston University said the fact that an issue is political doesn't mean that there isn't a need for a legal ruling.
        "The ICJ is the world's court. It does have particular authority to interpret legal issues for the bodies of the United Nations. If one believes that the UN has some relevance than one must conclude that the ICJ is relevant," said Akram.
        "The decisions of the ICJ are more widely cited than any other legal body and the court is generally considered to be a very deliberative body," said Akram. 
         
      7. JPost - Arab nations to ask UN to call for destruction of fence
        Arab nations will ask the UN General Assembly next week to call for the destruction of the fence Israel is building to seal off the West Bank following Friday's ruling by the International Court of Justice.
        "This decision calls on Israel to destroy this wall and desist from further actions," said Ambassador Yahya Mahmassani, the Arab League's representative at the United Nations. "Israel is in violation of international law, of international legitimacy, and the General Assembly now will be called upon to look into this matter." Mahmassani said Arab nations would be sending a letter either Friday or Monday to request a meeting of the General Assembly to implement the court's decision.
        "We'll ask what the court had decided - Israel has to destroy this wall," he said. "It is illegitimate. It's in violation of international law."
        At the Palestinians' request, the General Assembly asked the world court last December for its opinion on the legality of the fence - a 685-kilometer-long (425-mile-long) complex of high concrete walls, razor-wire fences, trenches and watch towers. About one-fourth has been completed, much of it close to the pre-1967 border, but some dipping into the West Bank. ... 
         
      8. AFP - Qatar, Bahrain, Yemen welcome ICJ ruling against Israel
        DUBAI (AFP) - The Gulf states of Qatar and Bahrain, along with Yemen, welcomed the world court's ruling against Israel's separation barrier in the West Bank but warned it must be heeded. Friday's ruling by the International Court of Justice was "a triumph for international rights," a Qatari foreign ministry spokesman said in a statement carried by the official QNA news agency on Sunday. ... 
         
      9. AFP - Saudi-Arabien bezeichnet Urteil zu Sperranlage als "historisch"
        Riad (AFP) - Der saudiarabische Außenminister Prinz Saud el Faisal hat die Entscheidung des Internationalen Gerichtshofs (IGH) zu Israels Sperranlage entlang des Westjordanlands als historisch bezeichnet. Wer für die Vorherrschaft des Rechts in den internationalen Beziehungen sei, müsse diese Empfehlung als historisch betrachten, sagte der Prinz am Samstag vor Journalisten in der saudiarabischen Küstenstadt Dscheddah. "Diese Entscheidung verdient mehr Lob und Unterstützung als Verurteilung und Vorwurf." Das oberste Gericht der Vereinten Nationen hatte am Freitag befunden, dass die Sperranlage gegen das Völkerrecht verstoße und abgerissen werde müsse. Für Israel ist die Empfehlung aber nicht bindend. 
         
      10. JPost - Egypt: Hague's fence decision is a great victory
        Egypt's foreign minister-designate returned to Cairo Sunday to take up his appointment and promptly hailed the World Court's finding that Israel should dismantle the barrier it is building in the West Bank.
        "The ruling is a great victory and the strongest decision in favor of the Palestinian question because it was based on international legitimacy and international law," Ahmed Aboul Gheit told reporters at Cairo airport. Egypt's Cabinet resigned Friday and President Hosni Mubarak named Aboul Gheit, 62, the ambassador to the United Nations, as foreign minister in the next government. He replaces Ahmed Maher, who served three years. The International Court of Justice in The Hague, Netherlands, ruled Friday that Israel's security fence in the West Bank is illegal and should be torn down. Israel says the fences, walls and razor wire are to protect it against Palestinian terrorist attacks. Security officials have noted a marked reduction in terrorist activity in areas where the fence is complete. But the structure severely disrupts the lives of tens of thousands of Palestinians, cutting them off from their land, jobs and schools. In a nonbinding judgment, the court said Israel should compensate the Palestinians who suffered economic losses because of the barrier, and it should return property confiscated for its construction. The ambassadors to the Arab League met Sunday in Cairo to discuss the court's finding. League Secretary-General Amr Moussa told reporters the 22-nation body would contact the United Nations, the European Union and the United States in a bid to "get the ruling enforced." Aboul Gheit also said Arab states were conferring over how to take the ruling further. 

      11. JP - Egypt: Hague's fence decision is a great victory
        Egypt's foreign minister-designate returned to Cairo Sunday to take up his appointment and promptly hailed the World Court's finding that Israel should dismantle the barrier it is building in the West Bank.
        "The ruling is a great victory and the strongest decision in favor of the Palestinian question because it was based on international legitimacy and international law," Ahmed Aboul Gheit told reporters at Cairo airport.
        Egypt's Cabinet resigned Friday and President Hosni Mubarak named Aboul Gheit, 62, the ambassador to the United Nations, as foreign minister in the next government. He replaces Ahmed Maher, who served three years....

         
    3. REAKTION DER UN... 
       

      1. Standard - Annan: Israel soll IGH-Entscheid respektieren
        UNO-Generalsekretär: Schutz der eigenen Bevölkerung hat in Einklang mit dem Völkerrecht zu stehen
        Bangkok/New York - Der Generalsekretär der Vereinten Nationen, Kofi Annan, hat Israel am Sonntag aufgefordert, das Erkenntnis des Internationalen Gerichtshofes (IGH) in Den Haag zur Sperranlage im Westjordanland zu respektieren. Annan erklärte am Rande der Internationalen Aids-Konferenz in der thailändischen Hauptstadt Bangkok: "Ich glaube, die Entscheidung ist eindeutig". Jeder respektiere das Recht und die Pflicht der israelischen Regierung, ihre Bürger zu schützen, sagte der Generalsekretär, jede Handlung müsse aber mit dem Völkerrecht in Einklang stehen. ...
        Siehe auch:
        Tagesanzeiger - Kofi Annan appelliert an Israel
        AFP - Annan fordert Israel zur Einhaltung von internationalem Recht auf
        See also:
        JPost - Annan: Israel should respect international law
        AFP - Israel und Vereinte Nationen auf Konfrontationskurs
        Jerusalem (AP) Der israelische Ministerpräsident Ariel Scharon hat am Sonntag heftige Kritik am Internationalen Gerichtshof in Den Haag geübt. Dessen Rechtsgutachten für die Vereinten Nationen zur Sperranlage im Westjordanland sei ein «Schlag ins Gesicht» für den weltweiten Kampf gegen den Terror, sagte Scharon. In dem Gutachten wurde der israelische Grenzwall für völkerrechtswidrig erklärt. Scharon gab nach einer Kabinettssitzung die Anweisung, den Bau der Anlage fortzusetzen. Unterdessen wurde beim ersten Anschlag in Israel seit Monaten eine Soldatin getötet, weitere 32 Menschen wurden verletzt.
        «Die mörderische Tat am Morgen war die erste mit Zustimmung des Weltgerichtshofs in Den Haag», erklärte Scharon. Die Entscheidung des Gerichts sei «ein verheerendes Signal, das den Terror ermutigt und alle Länder, die sich gegen ihn verteidigen, verurteilt. Ich möchte klarstellen, dass der Staat Israel die Entscheidung des Weltgerichtshofs in Den Haag völlig zurückweist. Wir sprechen über eine einseitige Entscheidung auf Grund politischer Überlegungen», sagte Scharon. ... 
         
      2. AP - Scharon übt harte Kritik an UN-Bericht zu Sperrzaun
        Jerusalem (AP) Der israelische Ministerpräsident Ariel Scharon hat am Sonntag den Berichts des Internationalen Gerichtshofs in Den Haag zum Sperrzaun scharf kritisiert. Das sei «ein Schlag ins Gesicht» des weltweiten Kampfs gegen den Terror, erklärte Scharon mit Bezug auf die Erklärung des UN-Gerichts, wonach der Sperrzaun illegal ist und gegen das Völkerrecht verstößt. Scharon äußerte sich kurz nach einem Bombenanschlag am Sonntagmorgen, bei dem eine Frau getötet und mehr als 20 Menschen verletzt worden waren. Dieser mörderische Anschlag sei das erste Ergebnis der Entscheidung des Weltgerichtshofs in Den Haag, erklärte Scharon. «Ich möchte klarstellen, dass der Staat Israel die Entscheidung des Weltgerichtshofs in Den Haag völlig zurückweist. Wir sprechen über eine einseitige Entscheidung auf Grund politischer Überlegungen», sagte Scharon.
        Siehe auch_
        dpa -         Anschlag laut Scharon «unter Schirmherrschaft» des UN-Gerichts 
         
        1. Reuters - Tel Aviv Bomb Kills 1, Proves Barrier Need -Sharon
          TEL AVIV (Reuters) - A Palestinian bomb killed a woman at a bus stop in Israel on Sunday in an attack Prime Minister Ariel Sharon (          news - web sites) said proved the need to continue building a West Bank barrier declared illegal by the World Court. 
           
      3. AP - Vollversammlung soll Israel zu Abbau von Sperrwall auffordern
        New York (AP) Die UN-Vollversammlung soll sich auf Antrag der arabischen Staaten in der kommenden Woche erneut mit der israelischen Sperranlage zum Westjordanland befassen. Israel müsse dem Gutachten des Internationalen Gerichtshofs entsprechend den Sperrwall wieder abbauen, forderte der Vertreter der Arabischen Liga bei den Vereinten Nationen, Jahja Mahmassani. Der israelische UN-Botschafter Dan Gillerman sagte dagegen, die Schutzvorrichtung bleibe bestehen, solange es Anschläge auf Israel gebe.
        Gillerman verwies darauf, dass es sich bei dem Gutachten des Internationalen Gerichtshofs (IGH) um eine nicht verbindliche Expertise handle. Diese Tatsache versuchten die Palästinenser zu verschleiern, sagte der UN-Botschafter. Der IGH hatte die Sperranlage am Freitag für völkerrechtswidrig erklärt. Die Richter forderten den Weltsicherheitsrat auf, auf einen Baustopp hinzuwirken. Das Gutachten war im Dezember von der UN-Vollversammlung angefordert worden. Laut Mahmassani wollen die arabischen Staaten am Montag eine Sitzung der Vollversammlung beantragen. «Israel muss diese Mauer zerstören, sie ist illegitim, sie ist völkerrechtswidrig», sagte Mahmassani. 

         
    4. REAKTION ISRAELS...


      1. Israel's UN Mission - Dark Day for International Court of Justice - Ambassador Dan Gillerman
        When the question was initially posed to the court, a result of maneuvers by politically motivated forces, Israel and over 30 leading democracies did not believe that the court had the authority to deal with political disputes between Israel and the Palestinians. The court fails to address the essence of the problem and the very reason for building the fence - the indiscriminate, murderous campaign of terror that Israelis are facing. Palestinian terrorism has taken the lives of nearly 1,000 Israelis in over 20,000 attacks over the last three and a half years. No other country would act differently in the face of such an evil campaign. This opinion places the victims of terror on trial, instead of the terrorists.
            As long as the terrorism continues, Israel will have no choice but to defend its citizens. This is our moral and legal obligation. Israel calls on the Palestinian side to end its campaign of terrorism and return to the path of negotiations. Israel calls on the international community not to lend its hand to the ongoing Palestinian attempts to use international forums to avoid fulfilling their own commitment to fight terrorism. (Israel's UN Mission)

      2. COP/Prime Minister's Office - Sharon: Terrorist Murder Occurred Under Auspices of Hague Court (Prime Minister's Office)
        Prime Minister Sharon told the Cabinet Sunday:
        • "An Israeli woman was murdered by criminal Palestinian terrorists and additional civilians were wounded....This morning's act of murder is the first to have occurred under the auspices of the opinion of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague....The State of Israel completely rejects the ICJ's opinion."
        • "The opinion completely ignores the reason for the construction of the security fence - murderous Palestinian terrorism. It deals only with the Israeli response - the construction of the fence, which is the most reasonable means in the face of this despicable terrorism."
        • "The Palestinians...know full well that the completion of the fence will make it very difficult for them to continue perpetrating acts of murder."
        • "The opinion sends a deadly message that encourages terror on the one hand and prevents countries from protecting themselves against it on the other."
        • "Today, all who fear the spread of terror must stand alongside Israel in demanding that this immoral and dangerous opinion pass from the world."

      3. NEWSLETTER DER ISR. BOTSCHAFT - Offizielle Stellungnahme des israelischen Außenministeriums in Jerusalem zum Gutachten des Gerichtshofs in Den Haag

        Der Auftrag an den Internationalen Gerichtshof, sich mit dem Thema des israelischen Sicherheitszauns zu befassen, ist das Ergebnis eines tendenziösen und politisch indiskutablen Prozesses. Israel und mehr als dreißig demokratische Staaten haben sich davon distanziert. Der Internationale Gerichtshof in Den Haag ist nicht befugt, sich mit Themen zu befassen, die eine politische Auseinandersetzung zwischen Israel und den Palästinensern darstellen.

        Erwartungsgemäß und aufgrund der einseitigen Eingabe der UN-Vollversammlung, die beim Gerichtshof eingereicht wurde, ignoriert das Gutachten völlig den Kern des Problems und den Grund für die Errichtung des Zaunes: der palästinensische Terror. Ohne Terror gäbe es keinen Zaun.

        Dieser menschenverachtende Terror forderte in den letzten drei ein halb Jahren knapp 1.000 Tote, Zehntausende Verletzte, Hinterbliebene, Witwen und Waisen bei mehr als 20.000 Anschlägen.

        Angesichts einer solchen verbrecherischen Kampagne würde sich jeder andere Staat genauso verhalten.

        Seit Errichtung des Zaunes ist die Zahl der Opfer drastisch zurückgegangen. Der Zaun hat sich als Erfolg erwiesen. Er ist eine temporäre gewaltlose Sicherheitsmaßnahme, die Leben rettet.

        Solange es Terror gibt, wird Israel weiterhin seine Bürger schützen müssen. Das ist Israels rechtmäßige und ethische Pflicht.

        Israel ist fortwährend darum bemüht, ein angemessenes Gleichgewicht zwischen dem notwendigen Schutz vor dem Terrorismus und der Verteidigung seiner Bürger einerseits und den humanitären Bedürfnissen der Palästinenser andererseits zu finden. So wird Israel gemäß den Urteilen des Obersten Gerichtshofs in Jerusalem weiterhin vorgehen. Dies ist die einzige Instanz, die befugt ist, darüber zu urteilen. Die Involvierung des Obersten Gerichtshofs in Israel beweist, sofern überhaupt ein Beweis erforderlich war, dass kein Anlass zur Einmischung von außen besteht.

        Der einzige Weg, die Streitpunkte zwischen Israel und den Palästinensern, auch hinsichtlich des Zauns, zu lösen, sind direkte Verhandlungen zwischen den beiden Seiten. So wurde es in allen relevanten Beschlüssen des UN-Sicherheitsrates und der Road Map festgelegt.

        Unverzichtbare Voraussetzung für solche Verhandlungen ist das Ende des palästinensischen Terrors. Der Schlüssel zur Lösung liegt nicht in Den Haag oder in Manhattan, sondern in Ramallah und Gaza, denn von dort geht der Terror aus.

        Israel ruft die palästinensische Führung dazu auf, den Terror zu stoppen und an den Verhandlungstisch zurückzukehren.

        Israel fordert die internationale Gemeinschaft auf, die palästinensischen Versuche zu unterbinden, sich weiterhin durch überflüssige Agitationen in internationalen Foren ihrer Verpflichtungen zu entziehen. Stattdessen sollte sich die palästinensische Führung darauf konzentrieren, den Terror ernsthaft zu bekämpfen.

        Jerusalem, den 9. Juli 2004 (16.30 Uhr) 
         

      4. AFP - Scharon ordnet Weiterbau umstrittener Sperranlage an
        Jerusalem (AFP) - Ungeachtet eines Gutachtens des Internationalen Gerichtshofs (IGH) hat der israelische Ministerpräsident Ariel Scharon einen weiteren Ausbau der israelischen Sperranlage zum Westjordanland angeordnet. Scharon habe nach einer Beratung mit seinen Ministern am Sonntag angewiesen, die Bauarbeiten fortzusetzen, sagte ein Regierungsvertreter. Der IGH hatte die Anlage am Freitag für illegal erklärt und einen Abriss gefordert. 
         

      5. Ha'Aretz - Sharon to convene ministers Sunday to discuss ICJ ruling
        Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is to convene Sunday a special ministerial consultation on the International Court of Justice ruling that the West Bank separation fence is illegal and the implications of the ruling on Israel. Attorney General Menachem Mazuz and Justice Ministry officials are to attend the meeting, the radio said. Justice Minister Yosef Lapid said on Friday that Israel will not follow the ICJ ruling on the fence. The United Nations General Assembly is expected to hold an emergency meeting on Thursday or Friday to discuss the ICJ ruling. Nasser Al-Kidwa, the Palestinian observer to the UN, is expected to submit a draft resolution to Arab members affirming the ICJ ruling against the fence ahead of the meeting. The deputy chief of Israel's UN mission Arye Mekel said Saturday that Israel has started intensive talks with the Europeans to try to get them not to support any General Assembly resolution on the fence. 
         
      6. Die Welt - Scharfe Kritik in USA und Israel an Sperranlagen-Urteil
        Der Internationale Gerichtshof hatte die Sperranlage für völkerrechtswidrig erklärt. Die Richter forderten den Weltsicherheitsrat auf, auf einen Baustopp hinzuwirken
        Washington/Den Haag -  Die Entscheidung des Internationalen Gerichtshofs (IGH) zur israelischen Sperranlage im Westjordanland ist von den USA und Israel scharf kritisiert worden. Die Regierungen der beiden Staaten zogen am Freitag die Zuständigkeit des Gerichts in Zweifel.
        „Wir denken nicht, dass es angemessen ist, dass dieser Fall von dieser Instanz untersucht wird“, sagte der Sprecher des Weißen Hauses, Scott McClellan, in Allentown. Der demokratische Präsidentschaftsbewerber John Kerry äußerte sich „enttäuscht“ über den IGH-Spruch. Israels Justizminister Josef Lapid nannte das Gutachten einen „Akt antiisraelischer Propaganda“. Laut IGH verletzt die Anlage das Völkerrecht. Das Problem sollte durch den „in Gang gesetzten Prozess, speziell die Roadmap“ gelöst werden, sagte McClellan. US-Außenamtssprecher Richard Boucher warnte davor, dass die IGH-Entscheidung von der „politisch