(Jerusalem Post) Saul Singer - By limiting Article 51 of the UN Charter to the right of self-defense against attacks "by one state against another state," the ICJ logically implies that 9/11 did not trigger America's right to self-defense. The ICJ's second major contortion is defining the West Bank as foreign land with respect to the fence, but then claiming that attacks from the same land are not "international," and therefore don't trigger Article 51. The objective of the fence has to be not just defending Israelis, but also imposing a territorial price for the almost four years of unprovoked aggression the Palestinians have unleashed against us. This is particularly true in the context of a disengagement plan which, we must admit, is susceptible to portrayal as a withdrawal under fire. The fence, and particularly where it is built, are the key antidotes to the sense that the disengagement plan is a net Palestinian victory. When the Palestinians look back at their fruitless and unnecessary war, they will see that the route of the fence imposes the only diplomatic price they had to pay for their choice of terror and rejectionism.
2004-07-16 00:00:00Full ArticleBACK Visit the Daily Alert Archive