Professors for a Strong Israel (PSI), in a statement of response to the Hague court's ruling against Israel's counter-terrorism fence, notes that those who object to the partition also object to Israel's right to settle in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. PSI therefore suggests that the response of the government of Israel should have been that both the fence and the Jewish communities in Yesha are legal for the same reasons.
"According to international law," writes PSI, "Jews only were given political rights in... the whole of Western Palestine [from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River - ed.]. Jewish national rights explicitly include the duty to settle the land with a dense Jewish population, and to encourage Jewish immigration into the land... A trivial byproduct of these national rights is the right to build roads everywhere in the regions of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza. It follows that the right to build life-saving
devices such as a fence is even more justified."
"According to international law," writes PSI, "Jews only were given political rights in... the whole of Western Palestine [from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River - ed.]. Jewish national rights explicitly include the duty to settle the land with a dense Jewish population, and to encourage Jewish immigration into the land... A trivial byproduct of these national rights is the right to build roads everywhere in the regions of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza. It follows that the right to build life-saving
devices such as a fence is even more justified."