Since 2002 countless articles, reports and op-eds have been written on the Wall by international, Palestinian and Israeli organizations and activists. Nearly all focus on the intrusive route of the current Wall into the West Bank and its various devastating effects on the Palestinian population.

However, no report has systematically and comprehensively studied the project of the Wall as such: in other words, the very notion of a Wall regardless of its route. Consequently, the vast majority of existing reports end up promoting -- explicitly or implicitly -- the 'alternative' of a 'Green Line Wall,' that is, a Wall relocated to the 1949 Armistice Line between Israel and Jordan. In so doing, international, Israeli and even some Palestinian statements and reports tacitly accept the basic legitimacy of the Wall phenomenon itself.

The question emerges: why is it that so few critics of the Wall have been willing to publicly and unequivocally denounce this monstrous project as illegitimate in its totality irrespective of its route?