Action Alert--Senate Resolution Condemning ICJ Opinion on Wall
TAKE ACTION NOW:
Call you Senators today and urge them to oppose Senate
Resolution 408 which supports Israel’s wall in the West Bank and condemns the
International Court of Justice (ICJ) for its advisory opinion ruling that this
wall is illegal. The Senate is likely to vote on this resolution before it
adjourns for its summer recess on Friday.
Contact information for your Senators can be found at our Congressional Report
Card at the following web link:
http://www.endtheoccupation.org/article.php?list=type&type=59
YOUR EFFORTS MAKE A DIFFERENCE! Last week the House passed a similar resolution.
However 58 Members of Congress voted against it or abstained. For some of these
Members of Congress this was the first time they voted against a resolution
introduced by supporters of Israel’s military occupation. Several Congressional
offices acknowledged that it was thanks to your phone calls that they voted no
or abstained and some even encouraged us to organize more pressure on them so
that they would feel empowered to vote against these types of resolutions in the
future.
PETITION DRIVE:
On a related note, the US Campaign will deliver a petition to these courageous 58 Members of Congress next week thanking them for their votes. So far more than 65 organizations have endorsed this petition.
PLEASE BE SURE TO
ENDORSE THE PETITION BY THIS FRIDAY AT THE FOLLOWING WEB LINK:
http://www.endtheoccupation.org/petition.php?pid=3.
It’s imperative that these Members of Congress receive support and encouragement
for their votes.
TALKING POINTS FOR SENATE RESOLUTION 408:
* This resolution is one-sided and unproductive. It calls attention to Israeli
civilian casualties but fails to mention the far greater number of Palestinian
civilian casualties. This resolution suggests no positive steps to bring about a
just and lasting peace between Israelis and Palestinians based on human rights
and international law.
* This resolution incorrectly implies that Israel’s security concerns trump
Palestinian human rights and that the ICJ advisory opinion diminishes Israel’s
right to self-defense. In fact, the ICJ opinion stated that Israel “has the
right, and indeed the duty, to respond in order to protect the life of its
citizens.” The court noted, however, that the “measures taken are bound
nonetheless to remain in conformity with applicable international law”
(paragraph 142), which the wall does not.
* This resolution contradicts the ICJ advisory opinion on the responsibilities
of all states. According to the ruling, “All States are under an obligation not
to recognize the illegal situation resulting from the construction of the wall
and not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by such
construction” (paragraph 163(D)). By actively supporting the wall, the Senate is
violating the ICJ advisory opinion.
* This resolution further isolates US policy toward Israel and Palestine from
the international consensus. On July 20, the United Nations General Assembly
voted 150 to 6 with 10 abstentions to demand that Israel comply with the ICJ
advisory opinion to dismantle its illegal wall in the West Bank. The only
countries voting no were the United States, Israel, Australia, Micronesia, the
Marshall Islands, and Palau. The United States must work with the international
community to implement a just and lasting peace based on human rights and
international law.
* This resolution undermines human rights, international law, and international
institutions. The ICJ rendered an advisory opinion after the proper submission
to it of a legal question by the United Nations General Assembly. The advisory
opinion was based on sound principles of human rights and international law.
Senate rejection of this advisory opinion signals to the world U.S. contempt for
human rights and international law and the deliberations of international
institutions that play a vital role in the pacific resolution of disputes.
* This resolution draws several false analogies. It mentions Israel’s “security
fence” that surrounds the Gaza Strip and cites it as a positive example of
reducing acts of terrorism. The resolution fails to mention that the Gaza fence
is built on the border between Israel and the Gaza Strip. The resolution also
mentions “security fences” created by the United States, Korea, and India but
fails to mention that these too are situated on recognized borders. The wall
Israel is building in the West Bank cuts deeply into Palestinian territory. Good
fences make good neighbors only when the fence is situated on one’s own
property.
* This resolution is factually inaccurate. It states that the “security fence”
is permitted by the Oslo peace process when in fact the sponsors of the
resolution do not cite one clause in any agreement signed by Israel and the PLO
that permits Israel to unilaterally confiscate land to build a wall on
Palestinian territory.
TEXT OF SENATE RESOLUTION 408:
SENATE RESOLUTION 408--SUPPORTING THE CONSTRUCTION BY ISRAEL OF A SECURITY FENCE
TO PREVENT PALESTINIAN TERRORIST ATTACKS, CONDEMNING THE DECISION OF THE
INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE ON THE LEGALITY OF THE SECURITY FENCE, AND URGING
NO FURTHER ACTION BY THE UNITED NATIONS TO DELAY OR PREVENT THE CONSTRUCTION OF
THE SECURITY FENCE
Mr. SMITH (for himself, Mr. ALEXANDER, Mr. BOND, Mr. BUNNING, Mr. CHAMBLISS,
Mrs. CLINTON, Mr. COLEMAN, Ms. COLLINS, Mr. CORZINE, Mr. CRAPO, Mrs. DOLE, Mr.
FITZGERALD, Mr. LIEBERMAN, Mr. LUGAR, Mrs. MURRAY, Mr. SCHUMER, Mr. WYDEN, Mr.
DEWINE, Ms. MIKULSKI, and Mr. ALLARD) submitted the following resolution; which
was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations:
S. Res. 408
Whereas the United Nations General Assembly requested the International Court of
Justice to render an opinion on the legality of the security fence being
constructed by Israel to prevent Palestinian terrorists from entering Israel ;
Whereas, on February 23, 2004, the International Court of Justice commenced
hearings on the legality of the security fence;
Whereas, on July 9, 2004, the International Court of Justice issued an advisory
opinion that was critical of the legality of the security fence and that accused
Israel of violating its international obligations;
Whereas the security fence is a necessary and proportional response to the
campaign of terrorism by Palestinian militants;
Whereas, throughout Israel , the West Bank, and Gaza, terrorist groups have sent
suicide bombers to murder Israeli civilians in buses, cafes, and places of
worship, have used snipers to shoot at Israeli civilians in their homes and
vehicles and even in baby carriages, and have invaded homes and seminaries in
order to carry out acts of terrorism;
Whereas Palestinian terrorists routinely disguise themselves as civilians,
including as pregnant women, hide bombs in ambulances, feign injuries, and
sequence bombs to kill rescue workers responding to an initial attack;
Whereas a security fence has existed in Gaza since 1996 and that fence has
proved effective at reducing the number of terrorist attacks and prevented many
residents of Gaza from crossing into Israel to carry out terrorist attacks;
Whereas, from the onset of the Palestinian campaign of terror against Israel in
September 2000, until the start of the construction of the fence in July 2003,
Palestinian terrorists based out of the northern West Bank carried out 73
attacks in which 293 Israeli were killed and 1,950 were wounded, and during the
period since construction began, from August 2003 through June 2004, only 3
attacks were successfully executed, 2 of which were executed by terrorists
coming from areas where the fence was not yet completed;
Whereas this reduction in number of attacks represents a 90 percent decline
since construction of the security fence commenced;
Whereas, on June 30, 2004, Israel's High Court of Justice issued a dramatic
ruling that supported the need for the security fence to fight terror, but ruled
that its route must take into account Palestinian humanitarian concerns, thus
reinforcing the central role that the rule of law plays in Israeli society;
Whereas United Nations Security Council Resolution 242 (November 22, 1967) and
United Nations Security Council Resolution 338 (October 22, 1973) require
negotiated settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, including the
demarcation of final borders and recognition of the right of Israel to ``secure
and recognized boundaries'';
Whereas, according to international law and as expressly recognized in Article
51 of the Charter of the United Nations, all countries possess an inherent right
to self-defense;
Whereas the security fence and associated checkpoints are crucial to detecting
and deterring terrorists among the Palestinian civilian population;
Whereas there is concern that the International Court of Justice is politicized
and critical of Israel ;
Whereas construction of the security fence does not constitute annexation of
disputed territory because the security fence is a temporary measure and does
not extend the sovereignty of Israel ;
Whereas the security fence is permitted under the Declaration of Principles on
Interim Self-Government Arrangements, signed at Washington September 13, 1993,
between Israel and the P.L.O. (hereinafter referred to as the ``Oslo Accord'')
in which Israel retained the right to provide for security, including the
security of Israeli settlers;
Whereas the case regarding the legality of the security fence in the
International Court of Justice violates the principles of the Oslo Accord that
require that all disputes between the parties be settled by direct negotiations
or by agreed-upon methods; and
Whereas the United States, Korea, and India have constructed security fences to
separate such countries from territories or other countries for the security of
their citizens: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) recognizes Israel's right of self-defense against Palestinian terrorist
attacks, and supports the construction of a security fence, the route of which,
with the support of the Government of Israel , takes into account the need to
minimize the confiscation of Palestinian land and the imposition of hardships on
the Palestinian people;
(2) condemns the decision of the International Court of Justice on the legality
of the security fence; and
(3) urges the United States to vote against any further United Nations action
that could delay or prevent the construction of the security fence and to engage
in a diplomatic campaign to persuade other countries to do the same.
> Number of responses to congressional representatives from this alert = 3