In this paper, I address the relevance of the normative dimension ofinternational relations against the background of the Advisory Opinion ofthe International Court of Justice of July 9, 2004, with reference to thelegality of the security barrier/fence being erected by the Israeligovernment since March of 2002. I examine different approaches to the studyof norms in international relations, focusing upon the Grotian approach,which represents a middle ground between the extreme Hobbesian (Realist) andKantian (idealist) traditions of international relations. According to theGrotian approach, international norms affect the foreign policy ofindividual countries through their institutionalization in the internationalsociety, usually through multilateral instruments of international law. Inthis sense, both the ruling of the Israeli Supreme Court of June 30, 2004,and the Advisory Opinion of the ICJ of July 9, 2004, represent and reflectthose instruments. The International Court of Justice is the major legalinstitution of the United Nations, which is the embodiment of ourinternational society. Hence, even if its ruling is considered biased ordistorted (by Israel), it still carries an important normative and politicalbaggage, by underlining paramount norms such as self-determination andprotection of human rights.
