INTERNATIONAL LAW

International law is much in the news these days. The legality (or not) of the Iraq war, the fight against terrorism and Guantanamo Bay, the prosecutions and possible prosecutions of present and former Government leaders for war crimes (Sudan, Rwanda, Bosnia), the International Criminal Court.

Yet there seems to be a certain ambivalence, if not hypocrisy, in its application. Tony Blair's main justification for removing Saddam Hussein was that he did not comply with U.N. security council resolutions over a long period of time. Not so far from Baghdad is another country that has not complied with U.N. security council resolutions over a long period of time; Israel. Israel annexed East Jerusalem in 1967, and is, therefore, an occupying power under international law. As such, it has no right to build settlements on that territory, though it has done so virtually ever since.

Israel's recent approval of 1600 new homes for ultra-Orthodox Jews in East Jerusalem was roundly condemned as illegal by both visiting U.S. Vice-President Joe Biden and U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon. However, in contrast to Iraq's earlier flaunting of international law, this one is highly unlikely to lead to military intervention.

All Europeans should feel a strong sense of humility and shame about what happened to the Jewish people during the 20th century. But this is not about the Jewish people, it is about the state of Israel and how it interacts with the rest of the international community. It is high time that the only outsider with real clout within the country - namely the U.S. - started putting serious pressure on Israel to change its ways.

Walter Blotscher