Cornell International Law Journal


Palestinians, Partition, Land Settlement, International Law, article, Security Policy, Israel, Territoriality, International law, Self-determination, National, Human rights, Political aspects


A former UN official & staff lawyer for the International Court of Justice (ICJ) reflects on that courts ruling on Israels construction of a wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. It is emphasized that the Court's primary focus was upholding international law. The case was not about Israels right to build a protective structure on its own territory but about the course of the West Bank barrier that extends past the Green Line designated in the 1949 Armistice Agreement. Key pronouncements of the landmark opinion are examined, including condemnation of the settlements that Israel had established in Palestinian territories; the rejection of Israel's security defense; & steps required to implement the ICJ ruling. It is maintained that the ICJs opinion has become the yardstick for measuring Israel's compliance with international law & an important reminder that questions related to Palestine are subject to that law. The opinion is neither pro Palestine nor anti-Israel since there would have been no case if Israel had built the Wall entirely on its own territory along the Green Line. J. Lindroth

Included in

Law Commons