In its ruling, the high court sidestepped the controversial issue
included in a petition by eight reservists who argued they had to
refuse to serve because the occupation violated international law.
"Yesterday the objection was to (military engagement in) Lebanon,
today it is to (the West Bank), tomorrow it will be to dismantling
certain settlements," the three-judge panel said, adding that
members of the Israeli armed forces are obliged to serve wherever
the army sends them.
In its decision the court said that accepting the reservists'
claims could further deepen the rift between opposing groups in an
already divided society.
"The recognition of selective conscientious objection might
loosen the links that hold us together as a people," the tribunal
said.
Supreme Court Judge Dorit Beinisch declared that Israel's "fight
against terrorism" outweighed the reservists' moral beliefs. "The
considerations of state security and the integrity of Israeli
society must be considered against the arguments of conscience and
belief," she wrote in the verdict.
The case came to a climax at a time when Israel and the
Palestinians are locked in a 27-month conflict that shows no signs
of winding down, souring many on both sides about the prospects for
peace, raising anger and calls for revenge.
The violence and breakdown of peace negotiations has dealt a blow
to Israeli peace groups, which have for years pressed for an Israeli
pullout from all or most of the West Bank and Gaza.
Palestinians also say that Israel's presence there is unlawful.
Israel has countered that the status of the West Bank was never
determined, and that its claim is as strong as the Arabs'. However,
even hard-liners like Prime Minister Ariel Sharon (news
- web
sites) acknowledge that eventually the Palestinians will have a
state of their own.
The eight petitioners are members of "Courage to Refuse," a group
of reserve soldiers who declined to serve in areas Israel occupied
in the 1967 Mideast War. They are not classic conscientious
objectors, as they are willing to serve in the military inside
Israel.
Founded in January, the group has since grown to 512 members.
Referring to Israel's continued occupation of Palestinian land, the
signatories have vowed they would "not continue to fight beyond the
1967 borders in order to dominate, expel, starve and humiliate an
entire people."
Michael Sfard, a lawyer for the group, said the decision was not
a total defeat because it acknowledged the role of the conscientious
objector. But he acknowledged he had expected the court to rule
against them.
"We didn't approach the court because we sought permission for
our moral values," said Sfard, who has spent time in military prison
because of his own refusal to serve. "No court of law can cause a
person to do something he ... morally objects to."
In their petition to the Supreme Court, the soldiers described
the occupation as "the collective penalization of the civilian
population," and accused the army of committing war crimes.
The petition was originally filed by paratrooper Lt. David
Zonshein, who has spent time behind bars for refusing to serve in
the West Bank and Gaza.
Zonshein was released from military prison until the high court
ruling. He said he would have to return to jail later Monday.
To return to prison "is the best and most important duty a
soldier in the army can perform today for Israel," Zonsheim said
after the ruling. "Our refusal to serve in the occupied territories
is the most Jewish and Zionistic ideal that can be upheld in this
situation."
__
On the Net:
www.seruv.org.il
Holiday Gifts! Deals
at uBid! | Get
Free DVD Rentals | 2002
Clearance | Free
Cell Phone 
