New York Times

The International Court of Justice ruled today that it is against international law for Israel to build its barrier in the West Bank and that it should be dismantled. The advisory ruling by the World Court, in the Hague, is nonbinding. But it contributes to the debate surrounding construction of the network of fencing and ditches on lands that have been the focus of Middle East peace efforts. Israel says it is building the barrier as self-defense against attackers, but Palestinians call it an attempt to grab land. A copy of the ruling, posted on the Web site www.electronicintifada.net before the court began its reading of the decision, said that the construction of the wall is “contrary to international law.”

“The controversy started in 2001, when the survivors of the 1982 massacres at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps in Beirut by pro-Israeli Christian Lebanese militia filed a criminal complaint in Belgium against Israel’s prime minister, Ariel Sharon, who was minister of defense in the early 1980’s. Soon, the law that had won widespread praise was being attacked by lawyers, business leaders and foreign governments — in particular, the United States and Israel.” Daphne Eviatar, writing in The New York Times, gives a full and fair overview of recent developments in Belgium’s Universal Jurisdiction law and the ongoing battle against impunity for war crimes.

“A Web site started last week by a pro-Israel research and policy group, citing eight professors and 14 universities for their views on Palestinian rights or political Islam, has opened a new chapter in a growing debate over campus anti-Semitism. In a show of solidarity with those named on the Web site, nearly 100 outraged professors nationwide — Jews and non-Jews, English professors and Middle East specialists — have responded to the site by asking to be added to the list.” Tamar Lewin writes about Campus Watch in The New York Times [registration required].

The Electronic Intifada’s Ali Abunimah is quoted in this article about U.S. efforts to win hearts and minds in the Arab world. Free to read, but requires registration.

A consensus has emerged in the Middle East, among people of otherwise widely divergent views, on one point: something must be done for ordinary families in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. They face a crisis of such dimensions that it threatens everyone in the region.

The way the two sides choose to view yesterday largely will determine how they choose to behave tomorrow. And, if unchallenged, their respective interpretations will gradually harden into divergent versions of reality and unassailable truths - that Yasir Arafat is incapable of reaching a final agreement, for example, or that Israel is intent on perpetuating an oppressive regime. As the two sides continue to debate what went wrong at Camp David, it is important that they get the lessons right.

On any given day or night, 200,000 Israeli settlers move freely in and out of the West Bank and Gaza to go to work, shop, run errands and attend school or university. Israeli trucks supply their settlements with food, fuel and the necessities to keep these areas running, their gardens green and their supermarkets well stocked.

Intense public reaction to coverage of the violence of the Middle East conflict has prompted unusually harsh attacks on several news media outlets and has led to boycotts of The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times and The Washington Post.