ICC hICCups

The discussion of whether Israel should engage in the ICC’s formal investigation of the situation of the “State of Palestine” (“Is the ICC a threat to Israel? Revealing what is at stake,” March 30) brought to mind my experience as a student at a leading American law school years ago.

While writing a research paper on Israel’s use of administrative detention for security reasons, I contacted both Israeli and Palestinian officials to ask for their views on this practice.

The Israeli officials responded with voluminous printed materials and a clear statement asserting justification for the practice. The Palestinians responded with a single letter stating that since I was working under the guidance of a Jewish pro-Israel professor, I could not possibly be objective or fair-minded. They therefore refused to engage on the issue in any way.

The Palestinian response guaranteed that my paper would contain quotes and observations from one side, with very little from the other. There was no way for me to include much – if any – source material from the Palestinian side.

No doubt Palestinian officials reading my finished product would say that it justified their refusal to participate because it was so one-sided. They would not admit that their own refusal to contribute virtually guaranteed that outcome. Others reading my paper would have no idea why there was a paucity of information presenting the Palestinian position.

A similar scenario played out regarding the UNHRC’s 2009 investigation into Operation Cast Lead headed by Richard Goldstone. While Israel’s hesitation to participate in the process was understandable in light of the UNHRC’s previously demonstrated anti-Israel bias, its absence made the negative findings inevitable.

Few people who read the Goldstone report recognized that Israel had not participated on principle. Those who knew of Israel’s absence could well take it as an admission of guilt. After all, if Israel had a convincing defense to the charges, why not shout it from the rooftops?

Much as it pains us to take part in what may be an exercise in futility, we cannot hope to win anyone over to our side if we do not defend ourselves forthrightly at every opportunity. Our failure to make the case forcefully opposing unjust actions taken against Israel encapsulates much of what has been wrong with Israel’s halfhearted, grossly underfunded “hasbara” for so many years.

EFRAIM A. COHEN, FORMER ASST. PROFESSOR OF LAW