Israeli Map Says West Bank Posts Sit on Arab Land
The New York Times is leading today's edition with a headline stating that 39% of the land on which Israeli settlements are built in the West Bank is actually owned by Palestinians according to figures leaked from inside the Israeli government.
They state:
Israel has long asserted that it fully respects Palestinian private property in the West Bank and only takes land there legally or, for security reasons, temporarily.I personally regard this as a bit of a side show and an attempt to change the argument from the basis of the UN resolution 242 settlement. The original UN partition designated land to the Israelis and the Palestinians, and the designation of that land prior to the 1967 Israeli invasion remains the framework from which any future peace deal can be negotiated.If big sections of those settlements are indeed privately held Palestinian land, that is bound to create embarrassment for Israel and further complicate the already distant prospect of a negotiated peace. The data indicate that 40 percent of the land that Israel plans to keep in any future deal with the Palestinians is private.
Introducing the concept of ownership is a red herring.
The land remains Palestinian no matter who owns it, in the same way that I could buy a piece of land in California but have no right to declare that land as part of the UK.
We are dealing with a smokescreen here, an attempt to change the terms of the debate into who owns the land as opposed to which state the land resides in. These are two entirely different matters.
But in this report they are being deliberately confused:
The implication here is that by selling the land the Palestinians have "collaborated". In other words, they have sold the land to become part of Eretz Israel.Shlomo Dror, a spokesman for the Civil Administration, said he could not comment on the data without studying it.
He said there was a committee, called the blue line committee, that had been investigating these issues of land ownership for three years. “We haven’t finished checking everything,” he said.
Mr. Dror also said that sometimes Palestinians would sell land to Israelis but be unwilling to admit to the sale publicly because they feared retribution as collaborators.
This is nonsense. I could sell land in Essex to an American without making that land part of the USA.
The simple truth is that all Israeli settlements are built on Palestinian land and all Israel's settlements are in direct violation of the Fourth Geneva Conventions which deem it illegal for any country to transfer any part of it's civilian population on to any territory taken by force.
UN Security Council resolutions 446, 452, 465, and 471 call on Israel to remove its colonists from the occupied territories.
The question of the legality of the settlements has already been decided. The introduction of the question of ownership is an attempt to have this issue fought again on different terms.
Whilst appearing to be critical of Israel, this argument actually opens up a red herring that is very useful to the illegal settlers.
This false talking point deserves to be seen as the nonsense that it is, before it is allowed to develop any further.
Click title for full article.
tag: Israel, Palestine, ownership,
10 comments:
Smoke screen tactics are the hallmark of Israel and zionists. Do you know what is their biggest smoke screen until now ? Iraq. Since the US invaded Iraq, eyes are turned at everyday atrocities there and Israel is having its usual heavy hand in managing the further occupation of the land and the slow extermination of the Palestinians. No wonder why Olmert was the only one to see a positive outcome to the Iraq war.
Yesterday, I watched a documentary made by Israeli filmmaker Avi Mograbi on the daily harrassements of the Palestinians while israel presents itself to the world as a democratic and free nation home to those early jews who resisted the roman empire and their descendants. Mograbi makes irony with the cult of Samson in the movie where families and tourists are led to SamsoN,s cave and told the story of Samson over and over again.
It is surreal that the descendants of the Jews of Masada, who killed themselevs in order to escape roman tyranny, and present day Israeli jews, who worship the cult of Samson, are actually unable to understand the Palestinians, unable to understand thier own cult of absolute force and the consequent Samsonian point of no return to which they are heading at full speed.
I will try to report on this excellent docu tomorrow on my blog.
I just read the title in Le Monde about the subject and it says: 'Nearly 40% of Israeli settlements are illegal'. The first thing that struck me in this short sentence is it ciontains an enormous contradiction: Aren't settlements by essence illegal ? So how come only 40 % of them are illegal. This is an oxymore and pure sophistry.
The report is significant in the sense that, even by Israeli law, 40% of the settlements are illegal. By international law, of course, all of them are. I agree that media coverage has conflated the two, perhaps deliberately and certainly misleadingly, but its still important because whilst many Israelis do not respect international law, they do Israeli law.
Of course, it's outrageous and not surprising at all. The Civil Administration, quoted by the NYT, has often overlooked illegality like this in the occupied territories due to ideological sympathies with the settlers.
But yes, the fundamental truth is this: all the settlements are illegal. Fact.
Sophia,
I look forward to reading what you have to say about this documentary. What's it called and is it possible to view it anywhere?
And the fact that Le Monde are saying 'Nearly 40% of Israeli settlements are illegal' is exactly the point I was hoping to make. This news - reported in this way - is deliberately introducing an element of doubt into matters of international law that have already been settled.
Highlander,
I take your point about Israelis caring only about Israeli law which is, in itself, a disgrace.
However, as this was printed in the New York Times, my worry is that an American audience are being primed to view the settlements through a new prism and ignore international law altogether.
It's a gigantic red herring and should be seen as such.
The notion of who owns the land is irrelevant to which state it belongs to. I simply about worry how many Americans will make that distinction.
Sorry, I'm an arse. That should have read Heathlander!
:)
Yes, you're absolutely right that some MSM outlets are trying to use this report (published, incidentally, by the Israeli peace group Peace Now) to distort the true facts about the (il)legality of all of the settlements, and its good that people like you are calling them on it.
Heathlander,
Yesterday in the UK even the Guardian carried the story almost verbatim leaving the clear implication that 61% of West Bank settlements are either state owned or owned by the Jewish settlers themselves.
The entire story is a red herring.
I think the story is probably more important in Israel than the rest of the world. Under international law, all the settlements are illegal, full stop.
But now it is revealed thaat almost half the settlements are in violation of Israeli law. This is significant, especially at a time when Peretz has expressed a desire to get rid of "illegal outposts" (another red herring). Does that mean he wants to get rid of almost half the settlements?
I think it serves as a useful reminder to many Israelis of the reality of the settlement programme. Plus, as I said before, many Israelis respect Israeli law far more than international law.
But yes, the MSM has largely done a terrible job covering the story and so it has perhaps harmed more than it has helped.
Heathlander,
I hope you are right and that most Israelis are woken up to the fact that these settlements are illegal.
Although I read recently that even the "illegal" settlers in Gaza received government compensation, something the government had always said they would not be entitled to.
I am finding it hard to find any Israeli differentiation between legal and illegal settlements.
Post a Comment