Israeli West Bank barrier
The Israeli West Bank Barrier is a barrier not yet completed and built by the Government of Israel, which extends approximately 20% along the Green Line and the remaining 80% along the West Bank territory, extending into it up to 22 kilometers in some places, in order to include densely populated Israeli settlements, such as Ariel, Gush Etzion, Immanuel, Karnei Shomron, Guiv'at Ze'ev, Oranit and Maale Adumim. When completed, approximately 10% of West Bank territory will remain on the Israeli side of the barrier and will be cut off from the rest of the West Bank. The final draft estimates its total length at 721 kilometers (June 2006).
The Israeli barrier in the West Bank is a highly controversial project that has generated significant criticism of the Israeli government by various organizations such as the United Nations and human rights organizations, as well as an advisory opinion issued in 2004 by the International Court of Justice that declared its illegality and urged its total dismantling. In August 2008, 58% of the total 721 kilometers of the barrier project were already built; 9% were being built and the remaining 33% remained as projected even though construction had not started.
General information
The construction of the barrier was approved by the Israeli government on June 23, 2002. It consists of a system of fences and wire fences along approximately 90% of its route, and in the remaining 10% it adopts the shape of a precast concrete wall up to seven meters high, created with individual modules, arranged one next to the other and interspersed every certain interval with turrets for military control. The concrete parts were erected to prevent attacks from the buildings on the Palestinian side against vehicles driving on the Israeli side.
Once the whole project is completed, the concrete part will be 6%, about 30 km. The barrier complex consists of the following main components: a fence with electronic sensors designed to alert Israeli military forces from infiltration attempts; a ditch (up to 4 meters deep); a paved two-lane highway for patrols; a tracking track (paved sand path to detect footprints) that runs parallel to the fence; six stacked coils of barbed wire marking the perimeter of the compound. The entire assembly has a width of between 50 and 70 meters on average, although it can measure up to 100 meters in some places. A planned complementary element is the "depth barriers," which are secondary barriers that branch off from the main barrier to the east. There are two depth barriers that are part of the planned layout in the central West Bank. The number of gates open to Palestinians with the appropriate permits is 45 (out of a total of 84).
The barrier is a highly controversial project. Its supporters claim that the barrier is a necessary tool to protect Israeli civilians (Arabs and Jews) against Palestinian terrorism, especially suicide bombings. On the legal issue, the Israeli government argues that it is protected by the right to self-defense recognized in international law and that its sole purpose in building the barrier is to prevent terrorists from entering population centers, given the increase in attacks. after the Al-Aqsa Intifada (more than 1,000 people killed since September 2000) and therefore not plotted for political or annexationist purposes. Israel also alleges that the barrier was erected only after trying other options, which failed to prevent the deadly terrorist attacks, and once it was verified that the Palestinian National Authority did not meet its commitments in the fight against terrorism. On why it does not always follow the route of the armistice line prior to 1967 (the so-called "Green Line"), which is the main objection to the barrier, Israel argues that it is built where it can be most effective and has remained in inside the Green Line route when security needs can be ensured. Defenders of the barrier finally maintain that its efficiency is confirmed by the drastic decrease in the number of suicide terrorist attacks and argue that it is no different from those of other countries (such as Spain or the United States) that build fences to defend their territory.
Its detractors, including the Israeli pacifist and human rights organizations Peace Now and B'Tselem, and multiple international organizations such as Amnesty International, Intermón-Oxfam, Human Rights Watch and UNICEF, affirm that the construction of the barrier on what they consider occupied Palestinian territory, together with other measures carried out by the Israeli Government (such as the construction of new settlements and roads that cross the West Bank territory, or the increase of checkpoints at the entrance and leaving the cities and villages) creates a de facto reality that would prevent a viable Palestinian Arab State, establishing serious doubts about its territorial continuity and notoriously degrading the standard of living of the Palestinian populations adjacent to it, both for the destruction and annexation of agricultural land essential for the survival of the towns and for the isolation in which the population has been left entire lations of the rest of the Palestinian territory. They affirm that the right of Israel to defend itself must be compatible with the right to a dignified life of the Palestinian population, that there are other measures that can achieve the same objective and that, in case of building a barrier, this should take place inside Israel and not in the West Bank.
Controversies about its name
The name of the building is controversial and politically marked. The official name that the Government of Israel gave to the construction is that of "Security Fence" (security fence in English), and for this reason the Israelis usually call it "Separation Fence", "Near security" (in Hebrew גדר ההפרדה, gader ha'hafrada ) or also "Anti-terrorist fence". العنصوري yidar al-fasl al-'unsuri), “New Wall of Shame” or “Apartheid Wall” (Apartheid Wall), in reference to the old racist South African regime, This name is also used by some critics of the barrier. The name "West Bank Wall", or simply "Wall", is used by some human rights organizations, including UNICEF and Amnesty International. In the international media, the English term barrier is often used, and in Spain, the media The media and the political class tend to call it the "West Bank Wall". Israeli diplomacy has deplored this practice, which it considers "disqualifying" by the Spanish media.
In summary, its detractors put the emphasis on the part that has a "wall" (approximately 10% of the layout) and its defenders on what it has as a "fence" or "fence" (the remaining 90%)., while "barrier" is the name chosen by those who seek to express themselves in a more neutral way, although both terms are sometimes used interchangeably, mainly from the media.
Current Barrier Status
According to a report by the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Aid of the UN in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OCHAOPT) of May 2008, 57% of the total 721 kilometers of the barrier project were already built, which which means 409 km. 9% (66 km) was under construction and the remaining 34% (248 km) remains projected although its construction has not yet begun. Of the sections already completed (in 2006, with 51% built), 42 km are precast concrete (12% of the 362 km built so far), while 320 km (88% of the total built) consist of a system of steel fences and Israeli army patrol roads, approximately 50m wide.
Effects and consequences
Effects on Israel's security
Israeli statistics indicate that the Barrier has considerably reduced the number of Palestinian infiltrations into Israeli territory, as well as the number of attacks against Israeli civilians, both inside Israel and in its settlements, and Israeli officials say that when Once its construction is complete the Barrier will be even more effective.
Effects on the Palestinian population
According to the reports presented by United Nations organizations and human rights organizations such as Amnesty International, the construction of the Barrier hinders movement between populations, and has caused the Palestinian population to lose land, increasing their difficulty to access health care in Israel, increased checks by the Israeli army, and negative effects on Palestinian demography and economy.
East Jerusalem
According to the report presented in July 2007 by the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, the barrier that separates East Jerusalem from the rest of the West Bank has caused a series of damages to the lives of the Palestinian inhabitants of Jerusalem and adjacent cities, which can be summarized as:
- 50 per cent of Palestinians visiting the specialized hospitals in Jerusalem, as a result of the difficulty in obtaining the necessary permission to access them, issued by the Israeli authorities.
- Whole families have been divided by the Barrier. Husbands have been separated from their women and the children of other relatives.
- Muslim and Christian Palestinians cannot freely visit the holy places of Jerusalem, due to the growing difficulty in obtaining the permits that would allow them to access them.
- Students and university students must face the Israeli army-controlled border posts every day in order to access the educational centres that have been left on the other side of the Barrera.
- Whole communities, like the 15,000 people living in the villages of the Bir Nabala enclave, have been completely surrounded by the Barrera. The movement between this enclave and Ramallah occurs through a tunnel that passes under a restricted highway for the exclusive use of Israeli vehicles.
Israel's position
The Government of Israel maintains that the barrier is a legitimate means of defense against Palestinian terrorism, which has caused more than 1,000 Israeli fatalities (civilian and military included) since September 2000, an unbearable wave of terror for any nation, in the opinion of the Israeli government. He maintains that in almost all cases, the terrorists infiltrated from the West Bank, since the absence of physical barriers made it easier for them to enter. As proof of the effectiveness of this method, they point out that no Palestinian terrorist has infiltrated from the Gaza Strip, where an electronic barrier has already been in place in recent years. The drastic reduction in the number of terrorists who attack Israeli urban centers in those areas where the fence is finished would also support this thesis. According to data from Israel, the wall as such has so far caused 0 fatalities or injuries.
Israel also argues that this method has been adopted after verifying the ineffectiveness of others and, especially, the absence of measures by the Palestinian Authority to enforce the international commitments acquired to stop terrorism from the territory it administers.
Regarding criticism it has received for carrying out construction mostly inside the West Bank, the Israeli government maintains that the sole purpose of the Barrier is security, so it is erected "where it is necessary to prevent terrorists from infiltrating population centers”, so having built it along the Green Line “would have served only as a political statement, without having anything to do with the security needs of the citizens of Israel".
On September 15, 2005, 9 judges of the Supreme Court of Justice of Israel decided in proceedings "Zaharan Yunes Mujamad Mara'ba against the State of Israel and others" (7957/04), that International Public Law and in particular the Hague Treaty of 1907, allow the construction of the barrier for security reasons, although it ordered, for the second time, to correct the route of the barrier around the settlement of Alfei Menashe, indicating that the current route overwhelms the Palestinian civilian population more than is required for the security and topographical reasons mentioned. The Israeli Supreme Court of Justice disregarded the decision of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague, considering that it ruled on the issue without an adequate factual basis regarding the situation on the ground and without giving adequate weight to security reasons cited by the State of Israel.
The position of the Palestinian National Authority
The Palestinian National Authority has always criticized the construction of the barrier: "it is an illegal wall" that "leaves the Palestinian territories as floating islands in the sea of Israeli colonies, Something like Swiss cheese, with holes in it all over the place. In this way, the formation of a Palestinian state is avoided". Palestinian territories". Abbas has also asked the United States for help in bringing about an end to the construction of the barrier in the West Bank.
According to the Negotiations Affairs Department (NADPLO), under the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), the barrier annexes de facto Palestinian agricultural and water resources, limits freedom of movement, separates Palestinians from schools, health centers and jobs and deprives thousands of Palestinians of the ability to earn a living. It also claims that approximately 47.6% of the occupied West Bank (with approximately 88% of the Israeli settlers) will be de facto annexed by Israel, thus ensuring not only the continuation of the settlements but also their expansion, and that around 249,000 Palestinians will be trapped between the barrier and the Green Line. According to NADPLO, Israel's strategy is to annex as much Palestinian land as possible. NADPLO further asserts that, once construction is complete, the indigenous Palestinian population will be confined to ghettos constituting less than 12% of Palestine. while Israeli settlers will be able to travel freely throughout the occupied Palestinian territory.
On October 2, 2003, the Israeli army issued the Security Regulations (Judea and Samaria) Order (No. 378), 5730-1970, Declaration regarding the closure of a space no. S/2/03 (buffer zone), which declared all West Bank land between the barrier and the Green Line as closed (sections 1, 2 and 3 of the order). Free access to the closed area would only be granted, according to the NADPLO, to Israelis, defined as Israeli citizens, Israeli residents and any person authorized to immigrate to Israel, that is, any person who is Jewish (sections 1 and 4a1). NADPLO asserts that the order requires Palestinian residents of the closed area to obtain permits to live in their homes, work their farmland and to travel (section 5a), and that nothing in the order guarantees that the permits will be grant or be respected if granted. According to NADPLO, Palestinians who do not reside in the closed area but whose farmland or jobs are there must apply for a permit to farm their land or go to work (section 4a2). NADPLO also claims that the barrier violates Oslo Accords, since, according to NADPLO, Article XI of Chapter 2 of the Interim Agreement establishes the obligation to preserve the territorial integrity of the Occupied Palestinian Territory and IX of Annex I of the Interim Agreement prohibits restrictions on freedom of movement.
Criticism of the construction of the Barrier
Since the presentation of the project and subsequent construction of the Israeli Barrier in the West Bank, it has received multiple criticisms that, from various fields and organizations, and for different reasons, have publicly opposed its construction. Here are some of the most relevant:
From the UN
The United Nations Organization, from several of its dependent agencies, has criticized on multiple occasions the construction of the Barrier, either through resolutions, an advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice and various reports from its Office for the Coordination of UN Humanitarian Aid in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OCHAOPT). Resolutions have also been approved in the Human Rights Commission in which Israel was urged to dismantle the Barrier.
Resolutions of the General Assembly
The General Assembly of the United Nations approved on October 21, 2003 (with 144 votes in favor, 4 against and 12 abstentions) a non-binding resolution proposed by Jordan urging Israel to stop construction of the barrier and to proceed with the dismantling of the finished part, considering it "illegal". In this resolution, ES-10/13, it was "demanded" that "Israel stop and reverse the construction of the wall in the occupied Palestinian territory, including in and around East Jerusalem, which departed from the 1949 armistice line and was inconsistent with the relevant provisions of international law (para. 1). In paragraph 3, the General Assembly requested the Secretary General to report "regularly on compliance with the (...) resolution" and to submit the first report on compliance with paragraph 1 of said resolution within one month." On November 24, 2003, the report prepared by the Secretary General in compliance with this resolution was published. A resolution similar to the previous one was previously presented to the UN Security Council, although it was not approved by the United States veto.. According to some, this is one more of the many resolutions approved by the General Assembly and other bodies dependent on the UN condemning actions of the State of Israel. According to others, the United Nations has serious prejudices in favor of Israel.
Opinion of the International Court of Justice
The General Assembly of the United Nations decided, through resolution ES-10/14, approved on December 8 of 2003, to request the International Court of Justice (ICJ), by virtue of articles 96 of the Charter of the United Nations and 65 of the Statute of the Court, to urgently issue an advisory opinion (with a non-binding character), on the following question: "What are the legal consequences of the construction of the wall by Israel, the occupying Power, in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem and its surroundings, as described in the report of the Secretary-General, taking into account the norms and principles of international law, including the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 and the relevant resolutions of the Security Council and the General Assembly? The Israeli government considered the Assembly resolution inappropriate due to the partisan language used ('occupying power', 'wall', 'occupied Palestinian territories'), which prejudged the situation and for being adopted without having the majority of members (90 votes in favor of a total of 191 members, 74 abstentions, 8 votes against and 19 countries that did not vote) and because, in the opinion of the Government of Israel, The International Court of Justice "totally ignored Article 36 of the Statute of the Court", which stipulates that contentious matters (ignoring that the procedure was not contentious, but advisory) can only be brought before the Court with the consent of all parts. In this case, always according to the Israeli government, the matter "was not only contentious, but the parties had already agreed on appropriate mechanisms to resolve this type of matter between them."
Finally, after four months of deliberation, on July 9, 2004 the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued an advisory opinion, which by its nature is always "non-binding". The opinion, with the vote of 14 judges in favor and one against, included in paragraph 163 of the opinion, consisted of five points: «1) the construction of the wall that Israel, the occupying Power, is building in the Palestinian territory occupied, including and around East Jerusalem, and its related regime, are contrary to international law, 2) Israel has an obligation to end its violations of international law; has an obligation to immediately stop construction work on the wall it is erecting in the occupied Palestinian territory, including in and around East Jerusalem, to immediately dismantle the structure located there, and to immediately repeal or nullify all legislative acts and regulations related to it, in accordance with paragraph 151 of this opinion, 3) Israel has an obligation to make reparation for all damages caused by the construction of the wall in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem and its surroundings, 4) the United Nations, and especially the General Assembly and the Security Council, should consider what additional measures are necessary to put an end to the illegal situation resulting from the construction of the wall and the related regime, taking due account of this Advisory Opinion. »
Upon hearing the opinion of the highest judicial body of the United Nations, Kofi Annan, then Secretary General of the Organization, directed it to the General Assembly –the body that originally requested the intervention of the ICJ– so that it could determine how it would proceed before this conflict. On July 20, 2004, the General Assembly adopted (150 votes in favor, 6 against, and 10 abstentions) resolution ES-10/15, calling on Israel to comply with the legal obligations of the advisory opinion.
The Government of Israel rejected the ruling of the Court because it considered that it was "another part of the political campaign that the Arabs and their supporters in the UN continue to defame Israel and that this campaign was politically prejudiced, focusing on the result (the barrier) without dealing with the cause (Palestinian terrorism)". For this reason, Israel continues its construction today, because, in addition to not being a binding resolution, considers that the ICJ ruled on the issue without adequate knowledge on the ground and without giving adequate weight to Israel's security reasons.
OCHA OPT reports
The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Aid in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OCHAOPT) estimates that, if the construction is completed following its latest modifications, it will leave 60,500 Palestinians from the West Bank between the Barrier and the Green Line, or in other closed areas without contact with the rest of the West Bank. Palestinians who are already in this situation must obtain a permit from the Israeli authorities to be able to cross the barrier, and in this way have access to the fundamental services of education, health, work and the possibility of making purchases in the West Bank area. on the other side of the wall.
Of these 65,000, some 31,400 Palestinians from 12 villages would be totally surrounded between two different sections of the barrier. Additionally, 124,300 Palestinians living in 28 villages would be surrounded on three sides by the barrier, and controlled on the fourth by a physical barrier that will separate them from the rest of the West Bank. These areas are the city of Qalqiliya, and the areas of Biddya and Biddu. In addition, these populations are isolated from their lands, mainly used for agriculture, which makes it even more difficult for these peoples to survive.
About a quarter of Palestinians who hold Israeli residence permits for Jerusalem are located on the eastern side of the barrier, resulting in long queues daily at any of the four Jerusalem access checkpoints for work or activities of daily living. The construction of the wall around Jerusalem and the Ma'ale Adumim settlement bloc would prevent the movement of Palestinians towards Jerusalem and between the north and south of the West Bank, as it would block the main Palestinian highways.
Commission on Human Rights
The UN Commission on Human Rights approved on April 15, 2004 in Geneva (by 27 votes in favour, 24 abstentions and 2 votes against) a resolution urging Israel to halt the construction of the Barrier in the West Bank, to demolish the sections built and to reverse its policy of occupation and settlements in the Palestinian Territories. The president of the UN Committee for the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People declared after the approval of the resolution that "the Barrier causes serious harm to the Palestinian population", and urged Israel to respect the norms of international law as the occupying power. The Israeli ambassador in Geneva called the resolution a "unilateral exercise that confirms Israel's doubts about the impartiality of the UN on Middle East-related issues".
Amnesty International, Red Cross and other non-governmental organizations
The International Committee of the Red Cross described the barrier in February 2004 as "a flagrant violation of international humanitarian law" and affirmed that "the construction of the wall clearly exceeds the powers granted to the occupying powers by the Geneva Conventions" and that, according to delegates from the organization who verified the situation on the ground, "thousands of Palestinians have been isolated and lack access to water, health and education.".
On June 5, 2007, Amnesty International released a report entitled Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories: 40 years of occupation, no security, no basic rights in which it denounced abuses that, according to the organization, they have been committed against the Palestinian population since the Six-Day War, among which the construction of the Barrier stands out, which according to this report "is causing enormous damage to Palestinian life, whose The effects will be felt for a long time, and it is undermining the ability of people living in dozens of towns and communities to realize many of their human rights", adding in another paragraph that "if the intention was simply to prevent Palestinians willing to commit suicide bombings from entering Israel, the barrier should have been built along the Green Line, which marks the border between Israel and the West Bank".
The report proposes a series of recommendations to the Israeli government, explicitly urging it to "stop the construction of the fence/wall inside the West Bank and tear down sections already built there".
For its part, the Government of Israel, through the mouth of Deputy Prime Minister Simon Peres, defended itself against the report, alleging that "Israel has the right to seek the necessary means to defend itself against suicide attacks".
The government of Israel and some pro-Israel organizations such as NGO Monitor and CAMERA have accused Amnesty International and other pro-human rights organizations that criticize the construction of the Barrier (such as Christian Aid, Human Rights Watch, Intermón Oxfam or Doctors Without Borders) of lack of neutrality and of applying a systematic anti-Israel bias in their reporting on Israel.
The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) has strongly criticized the barrier in a report dated July 6, 2004. It states, among other things, that the barrier violates the rights of freedom of movement and privacy and to family life and economic, social and cultural rights. According to the ICJ, the barrier also implies confiscations of property and is discriminatory against Palestinians, in addition to hindering the latter's right to self-determination.
The World Council of Churches demanded the Israeli government in February 2004 to "stop and reverse the construction of the wall in the occupied Palestinian territories".
Criticism from the governments of other countries
The construction of the Barrier has received criticism from the governments of multiple countries. The Government of the United States, traditionally an ally of Israel, already criticized the construction of the Barrier by its president George Bush in 2003, calling it "a problem", estimating that it would hinder understanding between Israelis and Palestinians. same, also in 2003, the Adviser for the National Security of the United States, Condoleezza Rice considered it a "fait accompli" of a "political" that it has no place in the framework of the peace talks.
The European Union has criticized the construction of the barrier and has urged Israel to "remove the fence from within the Palestinian territories".
Criticism from within Israel
Israeli peace and human rights organizations Peace Now and B'Tselem oppose the Barrier for different reasons. Peace Now recognizes the right of the Government of Israel to defend its citizens, although it affirms that the Barrier should pass through Israeli territory, that is, within the limits prior to the 1967 war and therefore, without crossing the Green Line. Peace Now affirms that the route of the current Barrier responds to the intention of destroying any chance of reaching peace in the future with the Palestinians and of annexing as much territory of the West Bank as possible, saving Israeli lives but increasing the conflict between the two towns. The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories (B'Tselem) considers that the human rights violations of the populations near the Barrier are evident and that it has introduced new restrictions on the movement of Palestinians. It affirms that the Government of Israel has the right and the obligation to defend its citizens from attacks, but the construction of a barrier is the most extreme solution and that it causes the greatest damage to the Palestinian population, that there are other options that would have caused less damage to the population and that, if there is no other solution, the Barrier should be built on the Green Line or within Israeli territory, has also called into question the claimed security purpose of the barrier.
Some Israeli minority groups, such as Anarchists Against the Wall, oppose the construction, they say, "in defense of the human rights of the Palestinian people and to oppose the Bulldozers, the Army and the occupation", carrying out non-violent actions in cooperation with the Palestinians.
Finally, other Israelis criticize the Barrier for reasons opposite to those usually used by critics of Israel: because they fear that it constitutes a political recognition of the 1949 armistice line, the Green Line. The tens of thousands of settlers living in Israeli settlements in the West Bank who have been left outside the barrier also fear being left unprotected.
Artists
The Barrier that Israel is building in the West Bank has been the cause of protest by various groups linked to the world of art. Graffiti on the Palestinian side of the barrier consisting of concrete sections has become one of the best known forms of protest against its construction. Large areas of the wall contain messages in different languages left by activists and visitors. A group of Palestinians and Israelis created Artists Without Barriers to protest through art and nonviolence against the construction of the barrier.