EU: "Israel must stop building barrier"
Arjan El Fassed, The Electronic Intifada, 11
February 2004
Israel's Separation Barrier cutting the streets
of Abu Dis near Jerusalem (Photo: Melanie
Bartels, 2004)
Today, the EU presented its position regarding the hearing at the ICJ. In
Strasbourg, Irish Foreign Minister Dick Roche, on behalf of the Council of
Ministers, said that Israel must stop building this barrier and he deplored the
“regrettably uncompromising” attitude of the Israeli government. The EU’s
abstention during the vote at the UN General Assembly did not bring into
question the fact that the EU was opposed to the wall, which is a violation of
international law.
The EU, however, doubted whether bringing the case before the ICJ would be
useful. However, after the fourth meeting of the Association Council on November
18, the European Union issued a statement, saying its wanted Israel to halt the
construction of its wall through the West Bank. The EU was particularly
concerned by the route marked out for the so-called security fence in the
Occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem.
"The envisaged departure of the route from the 'green line' could prejudge
future negotiations and make the two-State solution physically impossible to
implement. It would cause further humanitarian and economic hardship to the
Palestinians. Thousands of Palestinians west of the fence are being cut off from
essential services in the West Bank, Palestinians east of the fence will lose
access to land and water resources. In this context the EU is alarmed by the
designation of land between the fence and the "green line" as a closed
military zone. This is a de-facto change in the legal status of Palestinians
living in this area which makes life for them even harder. Hence, the EU calls
on Israel to stop and reverse the construction of the so-called security fence
inside the occupied Palestinian territories, including in and around East
Jerusalem, which is in departure of the armistice line of 1949 and is in
contradiction to the relevant provisions of international law."
In this week's debate in Strasbourg, Irish MEP John Cushnahan (PPE-DE) said:
“the strategy of building this wall is morally wrong, as well as being
counter-productive. Like many of Mr Sharon's other counter-terrorist strategies,
this fails to tackle the root causes of terrorism. Palestinian land has been
confiscated to build the barrier; thousands of Palestinian farmers and traders
are cut off from their land and means of economic survival.”
British MEP Caroline Lucas (Verts/ALE) was highly critical and said: “Those
people who say that instead we should be relying on European pressure on Israel
should tell me when European pressure alone on Israel has ever yielded any
results - it has not. Yet, when there is an international multilateral forum
that exists to address this issue, we turn our backs upon it. Palestinians
rightly point to the inconsistency of our position of urging them to give up
violence, while simultaneously denying them the chance to seek redress through
international legal institutions. Moreover, there are compelling humanitarian
reasons to act. The Israeli claim that this is something to do with security is
completely undermined by the fact that the wall does not follow the 1967 'green
line'. Instead, as people have said, it cuts deep into Palestinian land.”
Calling the wall “intolerable, illegal and immoral” Lucas continued that
“by failing to support the ICJ as a forum to consider it, the Council has been
reckless and irresponsible.”
Spanish Socialist Emilio Menendez said that the “wall of shame” made the
establishment of a Palestinian state “impossible”. He considers the wall as
a “smokescreen” which hardly conceals how difficult it is to establish a
Palestinian state as long as there are Israeli colonies. British Liberal
Democrat Sarah Ludford referred to the context of the shooting and subsequent
death of her constituent Tom Hurndall. Luisa Morgantini from Italy showed
evidence of the humanitarian impact of the wall on daily life. German MEP Daniel
Cohn-Bendit supported the procedure begun at the ICJ. He said that the current
location of the wall is in fact “annexing territory”. Danish MEP Ulla
Sandbaek felt that one should compel Israel’s Prime Minister to comply with UN
resolutions by setting an ultimatum as had been done for Saddam Hussein.
Responding to comments made by European parliamentarians, Dick Roche said:
“The Irish presidency will strongly hold to the view that the current
situation is unacceptable. Members of this House know that I come from a small
island where we know something about divides and walls and separation.” More
specifically, Roche said that the Union “cannot accept that a fence or wall
built on Palestinian land would best serve Israel's long-term security”,
adding that “the appropriation of land in the West Bank or Gaza is illegal, it
is contrary to international law and it fuels tension.”