Separation Barrier
Every nation should have the right to protect it’s citizens. In the case of the separation barrier that Israel is building, Israel claims that the wall is for security purposes, particularly against terrorists wanting to come in from the West Bank. Israel has a right to build a wall if it chooses to. However, it does not have a right to build a wall in the way that it is building it and the wall has been deemed illegal in a court ruling of the International Court of Justice in 2004.
Below is an except from “B’tselem – The Israeli Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories” on the separation barrier:
In June 2002, the government of Israel decided to erect a physical barrier to separate Israel and the West Bank in order to prevent the uncontrolled entry of Palestinians into Israel. In most areas, the barrier is comprised of an electronic fence with dirt paths, barbed-wire fences, and trenches on both sides, at an average width of 60 meters. In some areas, a wall six to eight meters high has been erected in place of the barrier system.
The construction of the barrier has brought new restrictions on movement for Palestinians living near the Barrier's route. Thousands of Palestinians have difficulty going to their fields and marketing their produce in other areas of the West Bank . Farming is a primary source of income in the Palestinian communities situated along the Barrier's route, an area that constitutes one of the most fertile areas in the West Bank . The harm to the farming sector is liable to have drastic economic effects on the residents - whose economic situation is already very difficult - and drive many families into poverty.
Israel has built gates along the completed sections of the Barrier , through which permit holders are allowed to pass. However, requests of many Palestinians for permits to enter their land are rejected, either on grounds of security, or on the contention that the applicant has not provided sufficient proof of ownership of the land or family relation to the landowner. Also, a permit from the Civil Administration does not guarantee that the holder will be allowed to pass through the gate: when the army declares comprehensive closures on the Occupied Territories , the permits do not apply. Furthermore, many residents have to travel long distances, usually along unpaved roads, to get to their gate. The difficulty and expense in gaining access to their land have turned farming into an unfeasible venture, and many residents do not exercise their right to go to their land and work their primary source of livelihood.
In setting the Barrier's route, Israeli officials almost totally ignored the severe infringement of Palestinian human rights. The route was based on extraneous considerations completely unrelated to the security of Israeli citizens. A major aim in setting the route was de facto annexation of land: when the Barrier is completed, some nine percent of the West Bank, containing 60 settlements, will be situated on the western – the “Israeli” – side. Another reason for building the Barrier inside the West Bank was to avoid the political price to be paid if the Green Line were set as Israel's border.
The overall features of the Separation Barrier and the considerations that led to determination of the route give the impression that Israel is once again relying on security arguments to unilaterally establish facts on the ground that will affect any future agreement between Israel and the Palestinians. In the past, Israel used "imperative military needs" to justify expropriation of land to establish settlements and argued that the action was temporary. The settlements have for some time been facts on the ground. It is reasonable to assume that, as in the case of the settlements, the Separation Barrier will become a permanent fact to support Israel 's future claim to annex additional land”.
Israel has the right and duty to protect its citizens from attacks. However, the building of the Separation Barrier as a means to prevent attacks inside Israel is the most extreme solution that causes the greatest harm to the local population. Israel preferred this solution over alternate options that would cause less harm to the Palestinians. Even if we accept Israel 's claim that the only way to prevent attacks is to erect a barrier, it must be built along the Green Line or on Israeli territory.