Daily Alert Archives

"Why Does It Matter What They Think in The Hague?"

(Ha'aretz) Yuval Yoaz - * A conversation with Prof. Jeremy Rabkin of Cornell University, a world-renowned researcher of national sovereignty, international law, and political thought, leaves the impression that the proliferating international judicial tribunals are nothing but diplomatic vanity: relating to them seriously would be a bit of an exaggeration. * The International Court of Justice "is actually an international arbitration institute," says Rabkin. "It was set up on the idea that if there is an international dispute and both sides are willing to have it arbitrated by the court, then such an institution is a good thing. But Israel did not authorize the transfer of the debate on the fence to arbitration by the court." * "If Israel accepts the [court's] decision, it will actually be allowing its security matters to be decided by a bunch of bureaucrats at The Hague, which is illogical....What does it matter what they think at The Hague? They will not ensure peace and security for Israel." * "Neither the ICJ nor the UN is a world government, and the simple fact that there is a majority of nations that think a certain way does not make it the law." * "It is important to view this as a political challenge and not as a legal challenge. The only reason Israel has to fear such a procedure is that it would cause it negative headlines in the international press." * "The U.S. is not prepared for other countries to judge American war measures, period....Everyone in the U.S. knows we will surely go to war again sometime, and when we do, we do not want anyone in The Hague telling us what to do."
2004-01-15 00:00:00
Full Article