In Budrus, our strategies in our struggle against the Apartheid Wall are peaceful. We only confront the bulldozers that are uprooting the trees planted by our ancestors - trees that help us to feed our children. Although olive trees won’t make us rich, we won’t go hungry as long as we have them. The Palestinian people have tried large-scale peaceful civil resistance against the Israeli occupation at various times since 1967. Each time, non-violence was crushed by Israeli government-sponsored violence. When non-violence failed to bring freedom and independence, some people turned to violent struggle. Budrus resident Ayed Morrar explains where it’s all at. Read more about The Peaceful Fall of Israel's Wall 

The International Court of Justice has ruled Israel’s “Separation Wall” illegal and has called on Israel to dismantle the wall. Nineteen days ago I came to Israel to protest that wall and to bear witness to its devastating effects on the Palestinian population. Instead I was detained by Israel police upon arrival at Tel Aviv’s Ben Gurion airport and have since been held in immigration detention awaiting deportation. I have been labeled a threat to “security,” and the judge has called my camera a weapon. It seems to me the only threat I pose to Israel is a public relations one. Read more about Fighting Israel's Wall 

With the recent International Court of Justice (ICJ) Advisory Opinion regarding the consequences of the Apartheid Wall, the legality of this enterprise has been much discussed in almost all circles related to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. On the Zionist side, aside from the usual canard about the “anti-Semitism” of the United Nations and the like, many commentaries have pointed to the recent Israeli High Court of Justice (HCJ) ruling about the wall and declared, in so many words, that this is the only legal ruling that matters. John Sigler notes that if one actually reads the HCJ decision, it in fact makes a very strong case against the Wall in general though its ruling only regarded only one small 40 km stretch of the Wall. Read more about The Israeli High Court of Justice and the Apartheid Wall 

The International Court of Justice has determined that the present route of Israel’s West Bank Barrier is a serious and egregious violation of international law. In an interview given last weekend, Israeli Chief of Staff Moshe (Bogie) Ya’alon contested the applicability of international law. Such a system was appropriate for the conditions of World War II, he declared, but not for the present war on terror. Apparently, as Ya’alon envisions it, in this war the armed forces are bound only by their own law. Indeed, a battle is being waged in the world today over the status of international law. Tanya Reinhart comments. Read more about From the Hague to Mas'ha 

“On June 10th, 2004, the two clinics in Al-Zawiya treated 130 patients for gas inhalation. The patients were children, women, old people and young men. Dr. Abu Madi related that there was a high number of cases of [tetany], spasm in legs and hands, connected to the nervous system. Pupils were dilated… Other symptoms included shock, semi-consciousness, hyperventilation, irritation and sweating.” Thus reads a report by medical units serving the West Bank village of Al-Zawiya, where nonviolent resistance to Israel’s impending wall has been extraordinarily resolute. According to the medical report (procured by the International Middle East Media Center - IMEMC), “the gas used against the protestors is not tear gas but possibly a nerve gas.” James Brooks reports. Read more about Dispersing Demonstrations--Or Chemical Warfare? 

After much speculations whether the International Court would exercise its advisory function in the legal consequences of the construction of the wall by Israel, the court finally issued a detailed opinion. Azem Bishara looks at the possible consequences of this advisory opinion and actions that might be taken as a result of this opinion. He reviews comments made by various states, and the legal consequences for Israel, as a result of its violations of international law. He also looks at the course to be taken within the United Nations system and how the international community can deal with a possible US veto in the Security Council. Read more about The Court has spoken: What's Next? 

One of the biggest challenges amongst activists concerned with the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is a growing divide in the perspectives of peace advocates on one side and human rights advocates on the other. In attempting to explain or justify the use of violence, one can easily forget that that one party has a heavily fortified military with nuclear weapons capability; the other a population so oppressed and desperate, that some are willing to sacrifice their lives in order to claim casualties on the other side. Jeff Handmaker and Adri Nieuwhof critically examine whether these perspectives are reconcilable through promoting participation of Palestinian refugees. Read more about Israel as the powerful party should take the first clear step towards peace 

Recently Israeli President Moshe Katsav publicly stated that human rights are basic rights and cannot be based on obligations set by the state — in other words, these rights are inherent to being human and cannot be taken away or limited by the state. In Israel where the desire for the security of the state and its citizens is used as a pretext to limit the advancement of human and civil rights both in Israel and the Occupied Territories, this is enlightened thinking coming from the head of state. Am Johal reports. Read more about The State Cannot Legislate On Matters Of Love