The government of Israel is proceeding with planning and construction of a security wall to prevent Palestinian islamists from entering Israel and detonating explosives amidst Israeli citizens. The wall will eventually stretch some 425 miles separating Palestinians from Israel along an imposed boundary. The imposition of such a boundary, absent a peaceful settlement of the land dispute between Israelis and Palestinians is unfortunate but necessary. Israel has made good faith efforts in the past several years to peacefully resolve the dispute and establish a legitimate Palestinian state. The Palestinians, or more specifically Palestinian leadership, have not responded in kind. Ehud Barach in a deal brokered by former President Bill Clinton offered Yasir Arafat approximately 98% of the land demanded by Palestinians- an offer that was met by Arafat’s walking away from the negotiating table and initiating the second intifada- a wave of bloody violence by Palestinian islamists against Israelis. The highly effective result of the second intifada and Arafat’s clear demonstration of bad faith in negotiations is the security wall.
The Washington Post reported on Wednesday that Israel’s High Court acted on petitions filed by Palestinian villages and, “ordered that changes be made to the route of [the wall] to minimize hardships to Palestinians living in the area.” The Post today reported that Ariel Sharon, Israel’s Prime Minister, was, “prepared to move [the wall] closer to Israel where possible to avoid trapping Palestinians in fenced-in enclaves.” This is how the law should work, and this is why Israel occupies the moral high ground in the dispute. The elected Israeli government, with legal institutions that treat Palestinians and Israelis as equal under the law in such matters contrasts dramatically with the Arafat’s self-imposed government and legal vigilantism. For example, the New York Times today reported that a Palestinian accused of collaborating with Israel was machine gunned to death by the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, which is part of Arafat's Fatah movement. The Times wrote:
“Militants had hustled Daraghmeh into the square before assembled townsfolk and told them: “This man, as you know ... gave information to Israel on the whereabouts of our fighters. What should his sentence be?”
“Execution!” roared the crowd.
The militants gunned down Daraghmeh seconds later and residents both young and old cheered and chanted around his prone, bloodied corpse.”
Sadly, the Palestinian people suffer more from their self-proclaimed leaders and the disingenuous Arabs and Muslims who “support” them than from Israel. Were Arafat the least inclined to lead his people to statehood, the issue would be resolved and Palestinians would today control their destiny. Instead, Arafat continues to loot the Palestinian people, padding his net worth estimated in hundreds of millions of dollars, and islamist organizations and the Muslim world use them as an excuse to continue the violent bigotry and racism that permeates Islam and is rooted firmly in traditions stretching back through time and empire to Muhammad himself.
Posted by publius at July 2, 2004 08:14 AMThe court ruling balanced the needs of national security against the level of disruption to the Palestinians and found that security is not always the over-riding priority when alternatives exist (regarding the route of the wall.) It was quite a good ruling I thought.
Posted by: Jane at July 6, 2004 08:59 AMI agree with you Jane, it was a good decision and it plays well for Israel. There is something slightly comical about Palestinians opposing an Israeli withdrawal when for years they have been demanding exactly that.
Posted by: Publius at July 6, 2004 11:40 PM