Press Release of Ambassador Dan Gillerman, Permanent Representative of Israel
to the United Nations, July 9, 2004.
“This is a dark day for the International Court of Justice and the international
legal system,” Ambassador Dan Gillerman, Permanent Representative of Israel
to the United Nations, said today, 9 July 2004, in response to an advisory
opinion on the question of Israel’s security fence.
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 it had the authority to deal with political disputes between Israel
and the Palestinians.
It is shocking and appalling that in all 60 plus pages of the opinion 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.
According to Ambassador Gillerman, “This fence is the “Arafat Fence” – the
fence that Arafat built. The fence will remain as long as Arafat’s terror
remains.”
As long as the terrorism continues, Israel will have no choice but to
defend its citizens. This is our moral and legal obligation.
Since the fence has been in operation, the number of casualties has decreased
dramatically. The fence is reversible, whereas the lives taken by terrorism are
not. Moreover, the fence works. It is a temporary, nonviolent security measure
and it saves lives. The real barrier between Israelis and Palestinians is not the
fence, but the terrorism that made necessary.
There can be little credibility to a process that speaks only of Palestinian rights
and Israeli responsibilities, as if there were no Israeli rights and no Palestinian
responsibilities.
Israel respects the rights of its neighbors, but Israelis and Jews also have
rights, primary among them the right to live.
Here this right has been totally ignored. This opinion places the victims
of terror on trial, instead of the terrorists.
Furthermore, in addition to its multitude of other flaws, the opinion consistently
claims to be the logical conclusion of law from the facts at hand, but is in
reality deduced from the wrong facts. Israel continues to seek the necessary
balance between protecting the lives of its citizens and the humanitarian needs
of the Palestinian population, in accordance with the rulings of our Supreme
Court, which alone has the capacity to fully address all aspects of this matter.
While Israel has begun the bold and courageous initiative of disengagement
from the Gaza Strip and northern West Bank, this opinion casts doubt on the
international community’s ability to be helpful in this process.
Any interference is likely to derail us from the road to peace. Nations
that really care about peace in our region should not lend credence to this
opinion and be diverted from the window of opportunity presented by the
disengagement plan.
The only way to resolve the differences between Israel and the Palestinians,
including the dispute over the fence, is through direct negotiations, as
stipulated by UN Security Council resolutions and the Road Map. The solutions
to the problem lie in Ramallah and Gaza, from where the terrorism is directed,
not in the Hague or Manhattan.
Israel calls on the Palestinian side to end its campaign of terrorism and to 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.
