Using, misusing the courts

HOWARD KOHR

In an unfortunate decision, the United Nations International Court of Justice issued an advisory opinion condemning Israel's security fence as a violation of international law and demanded that Israel dismantle it. The court's advisory opinion is just that - advisory - and is not in any way legally binding.

Regardless of the opinion of the court, the issue should not have been referred to the ICJ in the first place. This misuse of the court is the latest attempt by opponents of Israel to denigrate the Jewish state in international forums and sets a dangerous precedent for other nations, making it possible for countless controversial political matters to be referred to the ICJ.

Israel does not need permission to build a much-needed security barrier to defend its citizens against Palestinian terrorism - particularly after four years of suicide bombings and other attacks that have murdered hundreds of Israelis in cafes, buses, on their streets and in their homes.

The recent landmark decision by Israel's Supreme Court that an 18-mile segment of the barrier must be rerouted to reduce the impact on the Palestinian population, demonstrated that the democratic institutions in Israel - the only ones of their kind in the Middle East - are perfectly capable of dealing with issues arising from the fence's construction.

In its ruling, the Israeli court reaffirmed that the construction of the fence was a security rather than political decision, and noted that Israel has "a legal duty to balance properly between security considerations and humanitarian ones."

Perhaps most importantly, the fence has already demonstrated its effectiveness in saving innocent lives. Terror attacks emanating in the northern West Bank, from which terrorists easily entered nearby Israeli population centers, have been reduced by 90 percent. Now the origin points for terrorism have moved south where the fence's construction has not yet been completed.

The international com-munity, especially the European nations, should not participate in the effort by Israel's detractors to use the court's advisory opinion to damage Israel's international standing through anti-Israel U.N. resolutions. Instead, they should play a constructive role by supporting Israel as it takes bold steps toward peace - implementing Israel's plan to break the current impasse by withdrawing from the Gaza Strip and parts of the West Bank.

Howard Kohr is the executive director of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee in Washington, D.C., www.aipac.org.

Home