Home > Govt criticised for West Bank barrier vote
The Democrats and the Greens say Australia has undermined its international standing by voting against a UN resolution demanding Israel dismantle its West Bank barrier, but the Government has defended its stance.
Labor says Australia should have joined the 10 countries that abstained from the vote, because of the complex issues involved.
United Nations secretary-general Kofi Annan says Israel should take note of the General Assembly resolution for it to pull down part of the barrier.
The UN resolution was drafted after the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled the barrier illegal for cutting into Palestinian land.
It was passed with the backing of 150 nations but Australia voted against it alongside Israel, the United States and three other countries.
Democrats Senator Natasha Stott Despoja says that is unfortunate.
"I think there’ll be a lot of countries that view Australia’s position with concern, if not contempt," she said.
Greens Senator Kerry Nettle says the decision is embarrassing.
"It does nothing for our standing in the international community," she said.
Prime Minister John Howard says Australia was right to vote against a U-N resolution demanding Israel dismantle its West Bank barrier.
"We may have been in the minority but we are right," he said.
"Israel does have a right to protect herself and you can’t hope to have any kind of lasting settlement in the Middle East until there is an understanding that those suicide attacks have got to stop."
Foreign Minister Alexander Downer also says Australia did the right thing.
"It isn’t reasonable to tell the Israelis that they can’t erect a security barrier to protect the people of Israel from suicide bombers," he said.
Speaking in New York, Mr Annan pointed out that though the ICJ’s decision was not legally enforceable, it had a moral bearing on what Israel does.
"Obviously they don’t like it, but the Israeli (Supreme) Court itself also came up with a decision on the route of the barrier, and asked them to change it because of its impact on the Palestinians," he said.
"So one cannot say that the international court was entirely wrong, I think they should heed and pay attention to the court’s decision. Even though it is not enforceable, it has some bearing on what they do."
Palestinian spokesman Saeb Erakat welcomed the UN’s vote and called on the body to follow it up with action.
"The wall cannot stand and we hope that the international community will exert every possible effort to have the Israeli government comply with this resolution," he said.
Israel has brushed off the criticism and said it would continue constructing the 700 kilometre long barrier, which the Government said had cut Palestinian attacks by 90 per cent.
Israeli spokesman Dore Gold, a senior advisor to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, says the resolution is a dangerous one.
"One has to understand what this new UN decision does, it essentially is telling Israel to remove the shield protecting its citizens while doing nothing tangible about the lethal sword of terrorism that has been drawn by the Palestinian groups," he said.
Forum posts
24 July 2004, 02:05
I praise the Austrailian Prime Minister and Austrailia itself for its stance against terror. In time history would look back and say that Austailia was one of the few brave strong countries to take a decisive stance.
24 July 2004, 04:07
Australia is to be congratulated for not running with the hounds but making an independent assessment of what occurred before the International Court of Justice (ICJ).
The ICJ decision and the dossier of documents given to the ICJ for its advisory opinion by the Secretary General of the UN Kofi Annan both completely ignored the existence of Jewish rights to settle in the West Bank arising under international law created by Article 95 of the Treaty of Sevres 1920 and the Mandate for Palestine 1922.
These rights have been preserved by article 80 of the United Nations Charter, which stipulates the continuing validity of earlier international instruments such as the Mandate for Palestine.
Those 150 countries that allowed themselves to follow a fundamentally flawed decision of the International Court of Justice are in breach of the UN Charter. Their bias has effectively disqualified them from having any effective role in the implementation of the Road Map.
The Court’s decision and the subsequent UN vote based on that decision will give credence to the perception of a biased and anti-Israel United Nations and a Court that cannot be trusted to properly consider legal issues referred to it by the United Nations in a fair and impartial manner.
There is a body of international law supporting the legal right of the Jewish people to live in the West Bank and to take all reasonable measures to protect their lives from deadly attacks involving ambushes, drive by shootings, home invasion and suicide bombings carried out by their Arab neighbours contrary to the right to life of every human being.
The fact that the ICJ and the UN have both failed to spell out that message loudly and clearly because of their own prejudice and lack of moral clarity will be the lasting legacy of two decisions which bind no one yet have the power to affect so many.