israel, the wall, and the joke that is the 'world court'

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I have no sympathy for either the Israelis or the Palestinians, as neither side seems interested in a reasonable peace.  There certainly will be no peace as long as either Sharon or Arafat is in charge.  However, the advisory didn't say that Israel couldn't build a wall, just that that couldn't build it on occupied territory.  The Israelis have a right to self-defense, but they have no right to grab leibenstraum at the expense of the Palestinians.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The ICJ (sometimes called world court, but it's not) was correct in this ruling, if we assume that the borders of Israel end at the Green Line (the West Bank border).

Well, the only other boundary that could be considered an internationally recognized boundary line would be the 1947 partion line, but I find it extremely doubtful that could ever be considered as the basis of an Israeli-Palestinean peace treaty by even the most dovish of Israelis, so the Green Line is what has to be considered as the de facto border between Israel and Palestine, even if it be not the de jure border.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

There is no need for de facto or de jure debates about borders.  All of that land is Israeli for the time being, and they can build whatever they want wherever they want.

This is not to say that I find the current state of affairs perfectly suitable, but there is no border between Israel and "Palestine" because there is no country called Palestine.

If all that land is Israeli, then all those people should be allowed to vote for the Knesset.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Well, then there goes Israel's claim to be a democracy if it tries to control the land but deny the inhabitants a voice.  Israel is in the uneviable position of the lady riding the tiger.  She can't afford to get off the tiger (i.e withdraw to the '67 borders without a treaty) or keep riding the tiger (occupy the West Bank and Gaza).  What she needs (if I keep this stupid metaphor going more than is warranted) is for the tiger to go to sleep so she safely get away (an Israeli-Palestinian treaty).  Unfortunately the tiger (Arafat) still hopes the lady will get off and the lady (Sharon) wants to keep riding.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The problem with the Puerto Rican analogy is that it is US policy as has been demonstrated by four seperate referenda in which it was given as an option that Puerto Rico can have independence any time it wants it.  Israel has never indicated that it would be willing to return to the '67 borders , and as they would require giving up the Wailing Wall, I don't expect that it ever would be willing.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Agreed.  At the time I thought Arafat was too scared he would be assassinated if he made peace (a not unreasonable fear in my opinion for anyone on either side who seriously proposes a peace that has a chance of working)  but since then I've come to the more cynical view that Arafat feels that he can only keep control if there is no peace deal.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Which 1948 borders?  There were several different truces in 1948 with the boundaries different each time.  If you mean the partition boundary that was announced in 1947, its probably best to refer to that as the partition line or the 1947 border, altho the split between Arab abd Isaeli-controlled territory never fell along those lines.  The partition line might be the de jure border (I don't know; I'm not an expert in international law.), but it never was and never will be the de facto border.  There is no way Israel would agree to the partion line now unless it was losing a war and there is no way that the Arabs would settle for it if they were winning a war.  The 1949-1967 border with some mutually agreed modifications is the only possible basis for peace in the region.  Unfortunately, the possible might be impossible as well.