Matching Grant Challenge
BruceMatch
We’re slowly making headway in our annual fund drive, but not nearly fast enough to meet our make-or-break goal.  On the bright side, a generous CounterPuncher has stepped forward with a pledge to match every donation of $100 or more. Any of you out there thinking of donating $50 should know that if you donate a further $50, CounterPunch will receive an additional $100. And if you plan to send us $200 or $500 or more, he will give CounterPunch a matching $200 or $500 or more. Don’t miss the chance. Double your clout right now. Please donate.
 unnamed

Yes, these are dire political times. Many who optimistically hoped for real change have spent nearly five years under the cold downpour of political reality. Here at CounterPunch we’ve always aimed to tell it like it is, without illusions or despair. That’s why so many of you have found a refuge at CounterPunch and made us your homepage. You tell us that you love CounterPunch because the quality of the writing you find here in the original articles we offer every day and because we never flinch under fire. We appreciate the support and are prepared for the fierce battles to come.

Unlike other outfits, we don’t hit you up for money every month … or even every quarter. We ask only once a year. But when we ask, we mean it.

CounterPunch’s website is supported almost entirely by subscribers to the print edition of our magazine. We aren’t on the receiving end of six-figure grants from big foundations. George Soros doesn’t have us on retainer. We don’t sell tickets on cruise liners. We don’t clog our site with deceptive corporate ads.

The continued existence of CounterPunch depends solely on the support and dedication of our readers. We know there are a lot of you. We get thousands of emails from you every day. Our website receives millions of hits and nearly 100,000 readers each day. And we don’t charge you a dime.

Please, use our brand new secure shopping cart to make a tax-deductible donation to CounterPunch today or purchase a subscription our monthly magazine and a gift sub for someone or one of our explosive  books, including the ground-breaking Killing Trayvons. Show a little affection for subversion: consider an automated monthly donation. (We accept checks, credit cards, PayPal and cold-hard cash….)

pp1

or
cp-store

To contribute by phone you can call Becky or Deva toll free at: 1-800-840-3683

Thank you for your support,

Jeffrey, Joshua, Becky, Deva, and Nathaniel

CounterPunch
 PO Box 228, Petrolia, CA 95558

Undercutting Internation Court's Ruling on the Wall

Sharon’s Ignores Tragic Jewish History

by NEVE GORDON

Even though three years have passed since 9/11, most political leaders have failed to seriously probe the implications of the horrific attacks.

One of the key questions that could have been asked following 9/11 is how the absence of certain international institutions helps engender conditions whereby groups and states resort to horrendous violence. Questions like this do not intend in any way to condone terrorism but rather to stimulate an investigation of how the creation and strengthening of international institutions might help prevent terrorism by providing non-violent alternatives through which people can channel their grievances. A few institutions of this kind already exist whereas others still need to be established.

One such institution is the International Court of Justice (ICJ) whose unequivocal ruling regarding Israelís separation barrier was published on July 9th. The Palestinians presented their grievances to the Court and after extended deliberations the judges declared that Israelís construction of the barrier in the Occupied Territories, including in and around East Jerusalem, is in violation of international law. The judges further stated that:

1) Israel is obligated to terminate its breaches of international law and therefore must cease the construction of the barrier;

2) Israel must dismantle the barrier that has already been built and repeal all legislative and regulatory acts relating thereto;

3) Israel must make reparation for all damage caused by the construction of the wall in the Territories;

4) The United Nations, and especially the General Assembly and the Security Council, should consider what further action is required in order to bring the illegal situation resulting from the construction of the wall to an end.

Last week, exactly two months after the unambiguous verdict was published, the Israeli daily Haíaretz reported that Prime Minister Sharon decided to continue building the separation barrier deep inside Palestinian territory, thus defying the International Court. Sharon announced that the barrier will be built around Jewish settlement blocs located in the Palestinian West Bank — settlements like Ariel, Ma’aleh Adumin and Gush Etzion — regardless of the fact that the barrierís construction will violate the basic rights of over 875,000 Palestinians, 38 percent of the West Bank population.

As if to make matters clear, the Israeli military began assembling the concrete slates in A-Ram, which sprawls across the northern border of Jerusalem. Ultimately, A-Ramís 60,000 Palestinian residents, the majority of whom have Israeli identity cards, will be surrounded by a wall and live in a ghetto of sorts. They will be cut-off from their jobs, medical care will not be accessible, and children will be unable to reach schools.

While sovereign states tend to resist the enforcement of international law in territories under their control, Sharon is, nonetheless, making a critical mistake by refusing to comply with the ICJís ruling. The U.S. and several other countries, in turn, are making just as serious a mistake by supporting his actions.

The crux of the matter is that by disregarding the ruling, the international community is undermining the legitimacy of the ICJ, the very Court which was established in the wake of the worldís revulsion at the crimes perpetrated against Jews and other minorities. It was, after all, the Holocaust which led the international community to realize the urgency of creating a judicial body that could judge unlawful actions carried out by sovereign states against people living within their territory and under their jurisdiction.

NEVE GORDON teaches politics at Ben-Gurion University, Israel. He is currently a visiting scholar at the Human Rights Center and Center for Middle Eastern Studies at the University of California, Berkeley. His book From the Margins of Globalization: Critical Perspectives on Human Rights is scheduled to appear next month (Rowman and Littlefield). He can be reached at neve_gordon@yahoo.com