144 (Entire world) to 4 (Israel, US, and two de facto US territories) is beginning to look like an awfully familiar score for our terrific foreign policy on Israel. NOTHING ELSE unites the world so consistently like condemning Israeli policies (at least not since the end of apartheid). It's simply amazing. And an indictment on just how skewed U.S. policies on Israel are. Israel's response: immediate rejection. The lesson to the rest of the world: if you've got nukes and a nice political lobby in washington, you can do whatever you want. world opinion be damned. Looks like the Arabs are catching on fast. ------------------------------- UN condemns West Bank 'wall' http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3212430.stm The UN General Assembly has overwhelmingly passed a resolution demanding that Israel halt construction of a huge barrier in the West Bank. The resolution also calls for existing stretches of fence to be removed. It says the barrier contravenes international law, but falls short of meeting Arab-led demands that the entire matter be referred to the International Court of Justice in the Hague for a legal ruling. But Israel's Deputy Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said construction of the barrier would continue. He told Israel Radio: "The fence will continue being built and we will go on taking care of the security of Israel's citizens." Palestinians view the barrier as a wall that is encroaching on more Palestinian land and making a number of Israeli settlements in the border areas permanent. The BBC's Greg Barrow at the UN says that although the resolution sends a clear message to Israel, General Assembly resolutions are not legally binding, and carry less weight those passed in the Security Council. The vote was passed with 144 in favour, 4 opposed and 12 members abstaining. One month report Meanwhile, Russian officials at the UN say they have circulated a new Security Council resolution calling on both Israel and the Palestinians to fulfil their obligations under the internationally-backed peace plan, known as the roadmap. UN Secretary General Kofi Annan now has to report back in a month's time on Israeli compliance with the demand that work on the barrier be reversed. If the situation has not changed, then Mr Annan is tasked with suggesting what further actions should be considered. The vote came after lengthy negotiations between nations representing the European Union and the regional grouping of Arab countries. Arab diplomats had initially called for two resolutions, one urging an end to construction of the security barrier and the second seeking a legal opinion on the barrier from the International Court of Justice. But a number of EU nations along with other UN member states expressed concern that if the matter was taken to The Hague this could lead to charges that the court itself was being politicised. Eventually Arab nations were persuaded to drop the demand for a legal judgement, although the possibility of further action coming once the UN Secretary General has submitted his report does not rule this out as an option for the future. 'Humiliating' Before the vote the Israeli ambassador to the UN, Dan Gillerman, was scathing in his criticism, describing the resolution as divisive to the United Nations and the cause of peace. He called the discussions "a humiliating farce". Israeli officials have insisted that the barrier is a simple security measure designed to block suicide bombers from entering Israel and they say it will be dismantled once a peace agreement reached. A senior UN official urged Israel to abandon the barrier. Sir Kieran Prendergast said the fence would affect the lives of tens of thousands of Palestinians. Sir Kieran - the UN under secretary general for political affairs - said that the fence was a low point for the peace process after recent suicide attacks and Israeli retaliatory raids. "We cannot continue to lurch from crisis to crisis," he said, calling for an end to what he called the "cycle of violence, revenge and escalation".
How about it Israel backers, who say they want peace and a two state solution? Shouldn't the US back this resoluiton to give Israel a message on house demolition, settlement building and other destructive attempts to create "facts on the ground" that make the two state solution increasingly impossible? Is it going to be the usual that Israel, or in this case a distinctively Sharon policy, must always be backed no matter what it is actually doing? Compare this no-cost, no-violence approach to pressuring for peace aimed at Israel with the expensive bloody approach to peace aimed at the Arabs that the US is taking. Wistful statements condemning violence on both sides are not enough when we have such a clear non-violent step to take.
i think this time, even the most diehard israel supporters on this bbs have started to shake their heads. i mean arafat is understandably controversial, but building a berlin wall in occupied territories? what was dubya thinking? now they've got the wall going, i bet the next step is reinventing the ghettos. oh wait, they've already been doing it for the past thirty years.
Why should Israel or the US back a resolution that is guaranteed to get Israelis killed? If I were the Israelis I'd tell the UN to f* off too, and hurry up and finish that fence. And why is this a humiliation to the US? The resolution was nonbinding, and we voted our conscience. What a horrible thing! Voting for something because you believe it's the right thing to do! Oh, the horror!!!
And glynch - your "non-violent" step here involves supporting one side (Palestinians) squarely against Israel. You are siding with the suicide bombers, and essentially saying "Hey Hamas, your tactics are working, keep it up". Not exactly nonviolent.
And FWIW, the fence should not be on Palestinian land, but if the UN is going to appear unbiased, why not condemn terrorist groups? Have Palestinian terrorist groups ever been mentioned specifically and condemned by the UN?
One of the things that bothers me most in this conflict is that it seems to be a violent minority--the terrorists--who has the power to prevent peace. It bothers me that the terrorists are the ones winning this war. As long as they keep killing Jews, the hardliners in Israel can continue with their wall projects and in the process "prove" the terrorists points. treeman, do you know how much of the anti-Israeli violence is speculated as being instigated by non-Palestinians?
I wish they would. I wish they would just give us the middle finger, go in there, and take everyone's toys away. They all suck.
True. But the Israeli ultra-religious can be a hindrance too ... even if they don't run around blowing people up (just assassinating an Israeli PM, for instance).
Do we know that the Palestinian supporters of terrorism are in the minority? I believe some poll said some like 80% of them supported suicide bombing.
Down to 60%. I think about 80% still want the Israelis shoved into the sea. But I think the 'suicide bomber' number changes over time w/ circumstances. And as with most things in conflicts like these, everything is a chicken-and-egg type question. Although I find suicide-bombing reprehenisible and indefensible, it is not fair to indict the Palestinian people for feeling anger. Similarly, nor can you indict the Israelis for wanting a fence up (although where it's going is wrong).
So 80% want to throw Israel into the sea? Wow, that is terrible. Well then I guess the suicide number is low because they don't like losing their own, not because it's 1)reprehensible and 2)making things worse for them.
i'm with cohen on this. i think the poll results (listed in another thread here) will fluctuate over time. with peace will come hope. and with hope will come moderation. during the war on iraq, the vast majority of americans supported bush, but the numbers dropped dramatically the moment the fighting stopped. and i personally feel that israel can build that wall however high and wherever the hell they want, so long as it's not in occupied territories. the U.N. is saying as much.
you DO realise that the last 140-4 GA vote was on Arafat, don't you? world opinion seemed pretty damn unambiguous there.
israel CHOOSES to build settlements in occupied territories. then israel CHOOSES to build that fence to protect those settlements in occupied territories. whose fault is this? are you blaming the palestinians and the U.N.? all israel has to do is pull their settlers back within the borders of israel, and build whatever wall they like around her PROPER borders, the UN wouldn't utter a peep. the israelis had ALREADY "guaranteed to get their own people killed" when they started the occupation and sent settlers into the occupied territories. the UN is simplyt trying to prevent one injustice from leading to another.
