tv Inside Story 2019 Ep 190 Al Jazeera July 10, 2019 3:32am-4:01am +03
they're buying tremendous amounts of military equipment including planes and they're buying commercial planes as you know very large numbers of commercial planes from boeing and we very much appreciate it we're going to be signing a document in very large transaction you're going to be invited to the signing it's a transaction that will be purchasing a lot of boeing jets and a lot of money spent in our country and that means a lot of jobs and internet connections are being restored in sudan following a court ruling the military council cut the internet more than a month ago saying the blackout was needed to protect a transition deal reached with the opposition however as opposition figures say the military was just trying to hide evidence of its violent break up of a sit in outside military headquarters killed more than 100 people and with that you are up to date with the headlines here on al-jazeera inside story starts right now.
it was declared illegal 15 years ago but israel separation wall still stands and continues to affect the lives of palestinians in the occupied west bank israel argues it's protecting its security but at what cost to peace this is insight story . hello and welcome to the program i'm hala mohit in 15 years ago the international court of justice ruled against israel's separation wall it said the state cannot
use the right of self-defense to build and maintain the barrier for palestinians it's a symbol of military occupation and an attempt by israel to grab more land once completed the wall will stretch through the occupied west bank and east jerusalem that's a length of over 700 kilometers it's affected the lives of hundreds of thousands of palestinians and the number over illegal israeli settlements has gone up in the meantime we're bringing our guests in just a moment but 1st need to abraham sets up our discussion from. the town of be in a bell and northeast of jerusalem has been living in the shadow for 15 years. its economy was booming in the 1990 s. when the town in jerusalem to many cities in the occupied west bank. it looks more like a ghost town now. since the israeli government ordered the building of the separation 12002 the wall has blocked the town's main road limiting access to people and
products hundreds of shops have closed their doors and thousands of people have left. carpenter is one of a few who decided to keep his business open but it's very different to when he entered the workshop in the year 2009. no the only carpenters there are him and his partner like the town's economy their business has been cut back. this is one of the most vivid areas. were a few meters away from an israeli industrial area this area was bustling with businesses and people going back and forth now we rely on a few customers the contrast between the 2 sides of the wall can be seen vividly here and also heard on the israeli side there is the loud noise of construction works on the palestinian side. as palestinians are being pushed out on their side of the wall because of land confiscation more israelis are taking advantage such as
a. in the north of the occupied west bank and israeli military order confiscated palestinian lands there for building the wall israelis build a stable on it. palestinian fears have increased since israel's prime minister benjamin netanyahu announced plans to annex parts of the west bank if you die who will head the main goal in the israeli agenda is to grab more lands push more people out especially those living in east jerusalem the wall helps israel build more settlements extending existing ones and consolidate them in the palestinian territory our own 65 percent of the israeli separation wall is complete the rest is under construction and when it's finished is expected to take up to 10 percent of all land in the occupied west bank many palestinians say the main purpose of israel's policy is to make life so unbearable they have no option but to leave me deborah him as the occupied west bank.
or let's bring in our panel in ramallah we have. assistant minister for multilateral affairs at the palestinian foreign ministry in west jerusalem we have a senior fellow at pico hellat policy forum and a professor of law at bar iran university and in beirut we're joined by the professor president rather of the sensor for defending civil rights and liberties and a former reach officer for the arab region at the international criminal court said like to extend a welcome to all 3 of you to start this discussion this comes of course on the 15th anniversary of that just judgment from the i.c.j. if i could start with you what has changed effectively since that judgment was passed. more violations of course of international law and international humanitarian law has been committed in the palestinian territories by the israeli
governments more persistence of the veto holders on a backing in these violations by blocking any efforts to issue sanctions against israel for violating over 30 years old you sharon of condemnation and criticism for its policies within the palestinian terrorists it's clear that international justice will not be achieved by simply establishing international justice is the dishes systems and entities political will is a necessity in the veto system ok if i could come to you know i have the bow of what would you say this has changed in the 15 years since that judgement or unfortunately very little i think that the what the judgment was was an opportunity for the court to reject political interpretations of international law and give a professional legal opinion particularly on the illegality of palestinian terrorism instead what the court did was it gave
a free pass to palestinian terrorists and announced that israel had no legal right to defend its citizens from being murdered which is a prosperous conclusion unfortunately we're still seeing an i.c.j. that is politicized and palestinian terrorist comes continue to enjoy impunity from international law. as they would you agree with thoughts i guess you would. certainly with on. terrorism the certainly what we see on daily bases in our streets by the settlers illegal settlers and colonial army that occupies us and has been denying us our rights for so long this is the real terrorism that our people live in and out every day but in relation to your earlier question in relation to the international court we think that the legal most prestigious and important legal body in the war has defied all the law is that israel has been spreading
for the international community about security and about its right to defend itself and came forth and said that what israel is doing is basically a land grab and more land theft from the palestinians and it has to bring an end this this kind of practice yes the wall of piñon has not formulated yet in a position whereby israel is being held accountable for its violations but it will come the time where this very important advisory opinion will be implemented palestine has moved in so many fronts legally in relation to that opinion but still the international world is absent and holding israel accountable at so many violations that it has been committing against our people is still a long path to walk but we will be walking that path and we will see all criminals
before international course being held accountable hopefully very soon if i could if i could comment on that point the where there seems to be a disconnect really between whether this is a judgment that is a political judgment or a legal judgment and if there is so much faith being placed in the legal system where it's up hold and he would implement this. yes i mean the court was very clear when it came to this judgment the court has put the answers on the occupying power of the colonial israeli regime to implement its duties by ending the building of the wall by compensating and rapper it in making reparation for the palestinians for the. damages that has been resulted from the building of this wall and to end all its illegal practices in the occupied palestinian territory the court also said and reminded
the world including israeli occupation that the palestinians right to self-determination is a go on this right in which all states vested interest in and can one thing the court further called on the international community not to recognize israel's illegal practices and ask them and this actually happened nobody recognizes and illegitimacy of any land grab or and its attempt to annex any palestinian land by israel including its illegal colonial settlement regime in the war or you can request i'm sorry to that you are sir and the general assembly i margins and i'm sorry to cut you off but you know these these judgments and mustang these reservations are passed but they are not being implemented so my my blunt question again is what is the points of relying on these judgments if there is if there is no one to if there is no one to enforce these judgments. i mean it depends
on what kind of 4 do you wish or we wish to live in these judgments have exactly the from now ca sion of what the law delineates in terms of rights and obligations and it doesn't mean the absence of application on the ground which we see now because of the sense of any kind of accountability top block your buying power is not being implemented that does not mean that this gives is really in the ouse of fright in the occupied palestinian that at the at the same level it does not deny the palestinians that right now when it comes to application it requires as has been said by your 1st guest it requires international and i think the international will is being built towards that and with the exception of for of course the current us administration but we are seeing so many movements around the world ready in the church which is holding israel accountable at so many levels and the basis upon which this is really. colonial regime is being held accountable
is the visor opinion international law and the basis of international human rights and international humanitarian law ok i'll let you give you a chance to respond to that i. well very briefly there's a gap here but it's not between israeli behavior and international law it's between the rhetoric of international law and the reality of it the reality is this that the palestinians can say up is down and down is up and the general assembly will vote yes and the i.c.j. will say yes and there are a large group of international institutions that don't matter what bizarre claim the palestinians make such as that they are allowed to murder israeli civilians with impunity and that a high invasion on a land of simply fair of people that is most certainly a claim that is being made that is a claim that was just made right now and that when he said that there is no
terrorism that is being carried out by the palestinians by the way just a day after a jerusalem district court held the palestinian authority for terrorist attacks that murdered hundreds of israeli civilians in the years before that barrier was was created so as long as the palestinians keep trying to turn upside down international law and disobey ng it they're not going to get any results israel has the there's a very strong political current in israel to abate international law but when there are international institutions that use international rhetoric international law rhetoric in an upside down fashion which they pronounced down up and up down there is less and less respect not only in israel but around the world for these international institutions there's less respect for international law and there's certainly much less chance of reconciliation instead of telling themselves instead of palestinians tell it telling themselves and they have the right to do anything that they want to do that they can murder anyone that they want they can claim
anything that they want and if instead they start actually listening to what international law requires and start thinking that if these are really rules they have to apply universally then we might get somewhere but then they answer national law as it stands says that you cannot it doesn't say you can't build. barrier but you cannot build a barrier on occupied lands which would you agree with that's no there is no such international rule and there is a reason that the court deliberately avoided giving any of its statements in general rules that apply elsewhere so when it said for example that israel has no right to defend itself against palestinian terrorism it didn't claim that it could apply this rule universally and in fact there is no other place in the world since the pinion were anyone has used that judicial opinion to say oh a country does not have a general right to protect itself against terrorism nor have been frankly has there been any case where a court has ruled that a country does not have
a right to protect itself against terrorism by building a barrier none of these are universal rules all of them are rules the response civically made up in distortion of international law against israel and that's why you don't see them of being applied anywhere else the other show how the end beirut's why is it that israel cannot build a wall to defend itself under international law the decision of the i.c.c. was very clear clear on this matter they said that is they could not rely on the right of self-defense whether against so-called terrorists and or any acts of aggression. to justify the barrier not only because the barrier is built on occupied territories but also because of the barrier violated the international law when by violating the sense that any nation of the palestinian people but we just heard i don't know is that it's not ok so i'm sorry we've just heard from avi bell but that's not the case there is there is no precedence according to
a bell in west jerusalem for not being able to build on occupied land while the combat is not in. it is a precedent to build a barrier on occupied territories the president is in palestine in that ok by by the sign when we compare this upper tide war with our other countries the main difference is that is being built on non suffering territory's of the state that has built its actually one of the it is very interesting. to come in they sense on how to exit q this decision was reflected by one of the pro a palestinian cause no menfolk in stein who called for the massive aliens in palestine to go and cheer down the walls by themselves because this would only produce crimes against humanity if the israeli government was to block such an action we haven't seen this unfortunately i i hope this would happen one day maybe
in the next generation or care about you were trying to come in there to what was it you were trying to respond to or i was simply trying to give an example of barriers built in occupied territories non-sovereign territories morocco has has a barrier and western sahara which it has been illegally occupying since 1974 there are barriers in other disputed and occupied territories throughout the world including in cyprus and in armenia and elsewhere that the only way to sustain the claim that israel is violating international law here is by pretending that there is no other law anywhere else in the world that everywhere else has an entirely different rule and there's one rule that applies to the jewish state and another rule that applies to everyone else in the world now that frankly is not law that's politics. i'm on his own see what would you say it's about that this isn't a legal issue this is
a political one. well if you take the same rhetoric that has been used by all war criminals and those who commute violations of international law it's almost exactly the same what we heard just now from your guest from israel the reality is that the court has looked at the whole situation the context of the situation and what is really the occupying power the colonial occupying power in palestine has been doing all along and it found out that israel has had the appetite of annex in parts of the occupied palestinian territory including relating to is jerusalem and this is why the court has specifically said including in east jerusalem the wall building is illegal and the court has found that the route of the wall is meant to in compas this appetite which is meant to annex and steal and then put its hand or no more palestinian land so the
colonial attent by israel to grapple the senior land is what has been very obvious busy before the court yes there has been cases where other wars has been built and there has been cases where others has trends grest on others land and the court has specifically said that no one has the right to do something that is beyond legal donation it's legal to a nation to do such practices and israel is doing exactly that and this is why the court in line with international humanitarian law align with international law and in line with international practice and in line with so many other precedents and international more has made that determination crying wolf and saying that. israel is the only one targeted by this is a game that israel always tries to to play in relation to international israel refuses to implement or respect any. court of law that the civilized nations
live by israel is the vote the most violator of more the largest number of international resolutions for a national orms including international human rights law which the court asked is really to demand why does the occupation deny the palestinian people their rights their human to the basic human rights and that's a question that israel should be asked why does israel moves its own population into occupied territory and tries to grab the land and the next is jerusalem ok let me let me say matt i'm sorry to cut you off that we are running short on time abby bell if i could raise that point with you we heard that the suggestion that it's not security which is the reason debtor for this war it's annexation of or key pipelines how would you respond to that. well there's some very simple
statistics on this in the years before the barrier was created roughly in the 4 years beforehand palestinian terrorists murdered roughly a 1000 israeli civilians in hundreds of different attacks all those attacks were violations of international law not only were they violations of the laws of war they were crimes against humanity and according to the special tribunal. from lebanon there's a also violated international customary crime against. terrorism and since the barriers been constructed the number of successful palestinian terrorist attacks is down drastically there is nowhere near the number that there were beforehand so it's very clearly affective as a security measure now it's true that palestinian critics like to imagine all sorts of parades of horribles about future plans of things to horrible things that israel intends to do these future terrible things that israel tends to do don't seem to ever materialize and i think that's maybe because they are only in their heads but
if they in people's heads the fact that this war has been built not on the at the the the greens a fight in line from the 1967. borders but it is in fact encroaching at well in salon that should be under palestinian jurisdiction where is the justification for for for shifting in lifting the barriers around settlements in strategic areas of the west bank well as you know israel didn't construct a very for political reasons did so for security reasons and has a security route rather than a political geo political route that said i have to say there's also a longstanding dispute between the palestinians and israelis which for all of your viewers i'm sure know about the standing of the 194-1967 armistice lines are they in fact borders as the palestinians selectively either claim yes or no depending on where they are or are they simply cease fire lines as
a. israel claims now once of one of the interesting things is that in the palestinians have since filed a nother claim with the i.c.j. just in the last year in which they've claimed that the 946449 armistice lines do not constitute a boundary which is why according to their claim the none of jerusalem can be claimed as part of israel it's inconsistent but one of the things about making palestinian claims on behalf of the palestinian authority legal claims by have the palestinian authority is that you don't have to be consistent ok we were down to the final minutes of this discussion i want to put the same question to all 3 of you we're at this point. just a species when it comes to the small not least the legal definitions of what validates a valid claim but i want to know what the end point is where do you see this going what do you see is the end point for this discussion does the ball stay up and remain and territory remains on these on these bones or is or is there or d.c.
this moving somewhere else and if you keep your answers fairly brief please let me start with you start with you dale ashanti obviously only a political will when will be the mean to executive decisions did decisions we've seen this at the level of the international criminal court where even state parties to the i.c.c. did not comply with decisions should by the by the by this court such as the warrant of arrest for this with annie's. previously president of. the she had so in the absence of political will of the major players at the level of the security council no international justice the beauty of the achieves so hopefully this could be. more willing fully discussed through a political peace process agreement in the future ok if i could turn to you now i'm a has i see what's the end point with this c.c. international law being implemented at some stage. yes we do and we think that the
twisted logic and the bent justification that israel tries to sell to the war is coming to an end its colonial enterprise is very obvious one does not have any interest in peace it has enjoyed impunity for over and this will come to the end of the line when the international community and the whole war will find that this is a threat to international peace and security and will start doing with it as such when israel is held accountable just like any other state that on the ward then we think this is the way forward ok the why is continuing to justify its own gail practices by hiding behind certain aspects is not going to sell anymore and that matters as i am afraid with that we have run out of time i'd like to thank all 3 of my guests for taking part in this discussion i'm a jazzy avi belle and heidi thank you to you for watching you can see the program
again any time by visiting the website al-jazeera dot com this is a question continues online to take part head to our facebook page at forward slash e.g. inside story or join the conversation on twitter our handle is at a.j. inside story on to you directly at how much he did for me and the entire team here in doha it's by phone i. i. i.
but you know. some of it i like. i'm kemal santa maria here in doha with the headlines on al-jazeera the united states says it's attempting to form a military coalition to protect shipping off the coast of iran and yemen the trumpet ministrations blamed tehran and its proxies for several attacks on tankers in the gulf in the past 2 months earlier a commander in iran's revolutionary guard issued new threats against u.s. military assets in the region john hendren with more from washington this plan is so early on it's not even in its infancy it is pre embryonic it's really just an idea at this stage general joseph dunford is the highest ranking u.s.