The following are excerpts of a statement by Israel Ambassador Dan Gillerman delivered on December 8, 2003 to the UN General Assembly at the 10th Emergency Special Session -- "Illegal Israeli actions in occupied East Jerusalem and the rest of the occupied territories." The statement be found in its entirety at by clicking here.

"...We consider the resolutions adopted by this so-called 10th emergency session to be...an abuse of the powers of the General Assembly under the Charter...Let me be perfectly clear. This is the Arafat Fence. This is the fence that Arafat built. His terrorism initiated it, and made its construction inevitable. If there were no Arafat, there would be no fence!... 

The security fence is a temporary, proven, necessary and non-violent measure adopted, in accordance with international and local law, to defend the people of Israel from a continuing and vicious campaign of terrorism that has killed hundreds of innocent civilians and will kill thousands more, if not prevented. As long as the Palestinian leadership continues to flout its most basic obligations to fight terrorism, there is simply no alternative to it... 

Since the outbreak of the latest wave of Palestinian violence in September 2000 there have been literally thousands of separate terrorist attacks...directed against both Jewish and Arab citizens of Israel by Palestinian terrorist groups. The planning and preparation of such terrorist attacks, including mega-terror attacks against targets such as skyscrapers, fuel depots and chemical plants, continues unabated, and unrestrained by the Palestinian leadership and its security personnel. The silence of the Report on the threat posed by Palestinian terrorism, and the complicity of the Palestinian leadership, is incomprehensible given that the construction of the fence is a response to that threat. 

The question whether Israel's defensive measures are permissible depends on whether they are proportionate to the threat faced by Israel and its citizens. As numerous leading scholars and judicial bodies...have found, the determination that a defensive measure is disproportionate in any given circumstance is a particularly complex and delicate one, to be measured against the amount of force, or other defensive action, necessary to remove the threat that is posed. It requires legal, operational and security expertise and a close familiarity with the extent and the nature of the threat. 

And yet this fundamental principle of proportionality...sadly is quite absent from the Report itself. To the contrary, the Report's conclusion seems to rewrite the international law of self-defense in a quite alarming manner.

"I acknowledge and recognize Israel's right and duty to protect its people against terrorist attacks," the Report concludes. But it then goes on to qualify this principle, saying that not only must this duty be carried out in a way that is in accordance with international law, but also it must not "mak[e] the creation of an independent, viable and contiguous Palestinian state more difficult, or increase suffering among the Palestinian people."

In other words, any Israeli measure, however many innocent lives it may save, however much it may serve to release the stranglehold of terrorists on Palestinian society -- if it has any impact, even temporary, on the lives of Palestinians, it is unacceptable. 

This is not just bad law, it is bad morality. Let us be quite frank. There is no way of protecting the lives of the innocent from terrorists who hide in the heart of civilian areas without having some impact on the lives of those they have chosen to hide amongst and those that have chosen to offer them shelter.

At a time when every Israeli, and every Jew, is a declared target for Palestinian terrorist organizations, the question is how to allocate, humanely and effectively, the balance of hardships, between those who are blown up on buses and those who are held up at checkpoints or are otherwise disadvantaged. This is not an easy balance, and the painful dilemma it poses is one Israel struggles with every day. But it is one with which this Report seems not to have struggled with for one moment. 

The approach of this Report, like that of this emergency session -- ignoring the brutality of Palestinian terror, and which does not even mention the fundamental Palestinian obligation -- restated in every Israeli-Palestinian agreement, and at the very outset of the Road Map -- to fight terrorism and dismantle the terrorist infrastructure, is profoundly troubling. Not only will we not call on the Palestinian side to stop the terror, it tells us, but we will not allow you to do it yourselves.

...Given the abundant energy and resources devoted to examining Israeli defensive counter-terrorist measures, it may be instructive in this regard to consider the Assembly's response to other actions embarked upon by states in fighting terrorism.

In past decades, literally thousands of civilians, including Palestinian civilians, have been killed by certain Arab states in the Middle East, often in the name of fighting terrorism -- and yet, the Assembly has been silent...Whole cities have been razed to the ground, thousands have been killed, maimed or tortured by various countries around the globe -- and yet, the Assembly has been silent. 

This sacred silence has been broken only in the case of Israel. And each time the Assembly has been galvanized into action not to condemn the brutal acts of terrorism but to condemn Israel's response to it. After a two-state solution was rejected by the Palestinian side at Camp David; and after three years of unending terrorism, Israel has reluctantly adopted a non-violent defensive measure to protect its citizens from death.

It has done so while seeking to balance security and humanitarian considerations and exhibiting infinitely more concern for the welfare of innocent civilians than either the terrorists or other States that have been spared the scrutiny of this Assembly. 

The double standard is astounding...But [it] does not end there. If the professed concern of the Assembly for the welfare of Palestinian civilians were genuine we would have seen by now a plethora of resolutions condemning Palestinian terrorism, and requesting the Secretary General to submit detailed reports on such things as the misuse of funds by the Palestinian leadership, the incitement of children to suicide terrorism, Palestinian human rights violations, and the policy of encouraging and funding terrorist groups adopted by regimes in the region... 

The ridiculous nature of the resolution presented today is highlighted by the fact that the draft resolution pretends to seek guidance from the ICJ on the very issues on which the General Assembly has already determined its response...What guidance is sought here?...And how is it fair or just to purport to seek legal advice on a non-violent defensive measure adopted by Israel to protect against terrorism, while ignoring the terrorism itself that destroys lives in cold blood and without discrimination? 

This is an abuse of the ICJ...and it constitutes a dangerous precedent for all states. The politically biased text...makes a mockery of the Court and threatens to undermine its status. Moreover it raises a question that directly relates to matters fundamentally in dispute between various parties in the region, when the parties have already agreed, and the Road Map itself affirms, that these issues can only be resolved by negotiations. 

At a time when there is hope for renewing the negotiating process through the Road Map, this proposal and the attempt to involve a new actor in the conflict is especially counterproductive. It will severely complicate, undermine and delay, if not halt altogether, current efforts to restart the implementation of the Road Map. Indeed, it contradicts the very letter and spirit of the Road Map, and the UN's role as one of its main sponsors. 

Either the Palestinian side can finally get serious about complying with their obligations, or they can continue to abuse multilateral forums to try to score political and propaganda points. They cannot keep doing both. It is our genuine hope that...the Palestinian side will finally act to confront terrorism and end incitement.

The moment they do so, they will find in Israel a willing partner. Until then, the Arafat Fence -- the fence that Arafat's actions necessitated -- will stand to protect our children from further terrorism.

...Peace, prosperity and security for both Palestinian and Israeli people will not be found in this Hall or in any other organ of the United Nations. It is only the end of the morally bankrupt strategy of terror, that glorifies murder as martyrdom, which would obviate the need for Israeli security measures, including the security fence, pave the way for peaceful negotiations and concessions, and end the suffering of both peoples. 

No amount of UN debate, distorted texts, or abusive diplomatic maneuvers can alter that basic reality. No one-sided resolution, no ill-conceived and harmful attempt to request an advisory opinion, and no report can substitute for it, unless, miraculously, we find the courage to change. We all have the opportunity to start doing so, today, by rejecting this cynical resolution!