Palestinians say they may have no choice but to take Israel to Hague court

UNITED NATIONS Wed Jan 23, 2013 3:40pm EST

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - The Palestinians declared Wednesday that they will have no choice but to complain about Israel to the International Criminal Court if the Jewish state proceeds with plans to build housing on land the Palestinians want for a future state.

Speaking to reporters after a meeting of the U.N. Security Council on the Middle East, Palestinian Foreign Minister Riad Malki said his government's decision will largely depend on what the Israelis do with the so-called "E1" area outside the Arab suburbs of East Jerusalem.

"If Israel would like to go further by implementing the E1 (settlement) plan and the other related plans around Jerusalem then yes, we will be going to the ICC," he said. "We have no other choice. It depends on the Israeli decision."

The Palestinians have previously suggested that bringing their various disputes with Israel to the Hague-based court was an option, but Malki's remarks on Wednesday were the most direct threat his government has made against the Jewish state to date.

The International Criminal Court prosecutes charges of genocide, war crimes and other major human rights violations. The Palestinians must first apply to join the court, and once a member they could refer Israel for investigation.

The Palestinians became eligible to join the ICC after the U.N. General Assembly upgraded the Palestinians' status at the world body in November from "observer entity" to "non-member state," a move that was widely seen as a de facto recognition of an independent Palestinian state.

After the November 29 vote - on the 65th anniversary of the adoption of U.N. resolution 181 that partitioned Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab states - Israel announced it would build 3,000 more settler homes in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, which are areas the Palestinians want for a future state, along with Gaza.

E1 covers some 12 square km (4.6 square miles) and is considered particularly important because it not only juts into the narrow "waist" of the West Bank, but also backs onto East Jerusalem, where Palestinians want to establish their capital.

Approximately 500,000 Israelis and 2.5 million Palestinians live in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. The United Nations deems all Israeli settlements in the West Bank to be illegal.

'STATE OF PALESTINE'

U.N. Special Coordinator of the Middle East Peace Process Robert Serry, told the 15-nation Security Council settlements were contrary to international law and "increasingly an obstacle to peace." But he also warned the Palestinians against pursuing international action.

The council meeting on the Middle East represented its first public debate on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict since the Palestinian U.N. status upgrade. Malki and a number of council members referred to the "State of Palestine" in their speeches.

The words "State of Palestine" were also emblazoned on the name plate for the Palestinian delegation.

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice made clear to the council that such public references to the "State of Palestine" do not make it a sovereign state.

"Any reference to the 'State of Palestine' in the United Nations, including the use of the term 'State of Palestine' on the placard in the Security Council or the use of the term 'State of Palestine' in the invitation ... do not reflect acquiescence that 'Palestine' is a state," she said.

The United States, Israel and seven other members of the 193-nation General Assembly voted against the Palestinian U.N. status upgrade in November.

The White House on Wednesday renewed its call for a resumption of long-stalled Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations in the wake of Israeli elections in which Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu emerged the winner but with a weaker-than-expected showing for his right-wing bloc.

(Additional reporting by Michelle Nichols; Editing by Cynthia Osterman)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (6)
DeanMJackson wrote:
The caption reads, “The Palestinians declared Wednesday that they will have no choice but to complain about Israel to the International Criminal Court if the Jewish state proceeds with plans to build housing on land the Palestinians want for a future state.”

Well, according to the League of Nation’s “Palestine Mandate” (1922), the legal document that affirms the limits of the Jewish Homeland, the West Bank and Gaza are Jewish territories. Property rights, however, has never stopped international “Courts of Justice” from siding with the side that has oil. Of course, since the International Criminal Court has no enforcement powers, Arabs living in the West Bank and Gaza will continue to suffer, and this will bring us to the next Act in this 48-year long Arab Government’ play:

Arabs living in the West Bank and Gaza will be told to change their strategy from a “Two-State Solution” to a “One-State Solution”. You see, in 1964 Arab governments signed on to the “new” “Long-Range Strategy” towards Israel: The “One-State Solution”.

Why did Arab governments have to revise their strategy towards Israel in January 1964 (at the Arab League’s first summit in Cairo, Egypt), you ask? Because in 1963 Israel was rumored to have either acquired its first atomic bomb or tested one.

Jan 23, 2013 6:22pm EST  --  Report as abuse
UnderRated wrote:
An israeli former cabinet member once stated, when asked about the future of the ‘state of palestine’, “When we are done, they can call what they have left a sovereign state, or they can call it fried chicken.” The palestinians will be fighting a guerilla war for as long as they can survive. Let the innocent party throw the first stone, that’s what I say. What? There is no innocent party? Shocker!

Jan 23, 2013 7:05pm EST  --  Report as abuse
What’s the point??? The Hague court was designed in such a way as to be completely toothless… There are several Americans wanted by the ICC but they will never see “justice”, because the balance of powers will never allow for them to be even arrested, much less tried…

The ICC is a joke of the global impotence in the face of imperialistic and economic interests…

Jan 23, 2013 10:44pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.

Full focus