|
The
Israeli Settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories
One of the main obstacles to peace between Israel and Palestine are
the Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, which have
been under the Israeli military occupation since 1967. There are over
200 Israeli settlements in the West Bank with a population numbering
around 250,000. Over the years, the Israeli government has also
constructed a ring of settlements, which are outside the municipal
borders of Jerusalem, but are considered part of the Jerusalem
metropolitan area. As the biggest and most populated settlement block,
(around 200,000 Israeli settlers living there) it covers 15% of the West
Bank and nearly splits the West Bank into two. These settlements are the
result of a deliberate policy of the Israeli governments intended to
create a “matrix of control” in the West Bank - isolating East Jerusalem
from the rest of the Palestinian West Bank by creating a ring of Jewish
population blocks around the city and maintaining access and control
over the major aquifers located in the West Bank.
Impact on the Palestinian population: The existence of illegal
settlements as part of the Israeli matrix of control over the
Palestinian territories has had deleterious effects on the Palestinian
population. Combined with a wide network of settler-only roads and
corresponding “security zones”, they confiscate large swaths of the
Palestinian lands within the Green Line. These impede the daily freedom
of movement of people and products and make the existence of a viable
economy and a Palestinian state with a contiguous territory almost
impossible to achieve. This is one of the reasons why over 60% of
Palestinians in the West Bank are unemployed and struggle to survive on
$2 a day. A sense of desperation contributes to a volatile climate in
the region and poses a great security threat to Israel.
Funding: The Israeli government funnels disproportional
amounts of resources to the settlements, encouraging its Jewish citizens
to settle there through a variety of incentives. This includes
government subsidies for housing construction in settlements, subsidized
loans and grants for settlers to buy houses, and extended investments in
education, health care and security that are far beyond what the
citizens in Israel proper enjoy. Funds are also allocated to buy armed
vehicles, to arm and train settler militias, and to “protect” the
settlers. On top of this, the Israeli government heavily subsidizes the
construction of by-pass roads connecting the illegal settlements. Again,
their rate of construction far exceeds that inside Israel. Settlers
enjoy a very high lifestyle compared to other Israelis. All in all, the
settlements receive more than double the equivalent per capita funding
provided to municipalities within the Green Line (when the security
costs are added, an average settler receives about $9,000 annually in
extra funds.) The cost of sustaining and protecting the settlers is
draining Israel’s resources; it limits Israel’s ability to provide vital
social services, build a stable economy and ensure peaceful coexistence
between the Jews and the Arabs of Israel. Despite the high economic,
security and moral cost of maintaining the illegal settlements, the
Israeli government has been able to continue its policy largely due to
the military, economic and diplomatic aid from the U.S.
International law: The U.S. government has been implicated in
the construction and maintenance of the illegal settlements. The
existence of these settlements are egregious violations of international
humanitarian law, especially of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which
states that, “The occupying power shall not deport or transfer parts of
its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.” The United
Nations Security Council has reaffirmed the illegality of settlements on
numerous occasions: Resolution 465 referred to it "as a flagrant
violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention." Despite its promise to
freeze the construction of the new settlements beyond Israel’s 1967
border, Israel continues to violate the commitments it has made as part
of the 2002 Roadmap to Peace. The most recent example of continued
expansion is a plan to build 300 new homes in the East Jerusalem
settlement of Har Homa. This is done in defiance of the official U.S.
position and the calls of the high ranking officials, such as Secretary
Condoleezza Rice, to refrain from such actions.
The detriment to Israel’s security: The Israeli settlement
policy not only goes against international humanitarian law, but it is
also detrimental to Israel’s security. Currently, there are more Israeli
soldiers stationed in the occupied territories than in Israel proper. In
addition to the violation of international law, the presence of settlers
in the occupied territories makes them vulnerable to attack and has
resulted in the loss of thousands of Israeli soldiers and civilians. The
continued presence of the illegal settlements prevents a viable solution
to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, breeds attitudes of anti-Semitism,
and compromises the moral integrity and standing of the state of Israel
which breaches the basic tenets of justice and international law and
order. In the eyes of the increasing number of people in the world, this
makes the state of Israel appear as a pariah rather than being “a light
to the nations” for embodying its ancient commitment to universal
justice and freedom.
Policy recommendations:
First, the issue of the Israeli settlements has to be
resolved on the basis of the 4th Geneva Convention, the UN Security
Council resolution, and through negotiations between the Israeli
government and the Palestinian Authority. Any possible land swaps – such
as the one suggested in the 2003 Geneva Accords, which was well received
by the majority of the Palestinians – ought to be achieved through
negotiations with the Palestinian Authority and not through unilateral
actions by the Israeli government.
Second, Israel must immediately and unequivocally comply
with the Phase I of the Road Map which states that, "[The government of
Israel] freezes all settlement activity (including natural growth of
settlements)." The construction in so called “settlement blocks” is not
any exception, since neither the Palestinians nor the international
community (including the U.S.) recognize them as having any special
status, compared to other settlements. This has been reiterated recently
during President Bush's latest visit to the Middle East. When National
Security Advisor Steve Hadley was asked, for the umpteenth time, to
clarify U.S. policy regarding Israeli settlements, his response was
unequivocal: "There must be an end to settlement expansion, full stop."
No mention of settlement blocs. The U.S. should stand by this message.
Third, the Israeli government ought to reverse its
longstanding policy of offering financial inducements to Israeli
settlers in the West Bank and to redirect those funds to settlers who
are now willing to return voluntarily to Israel proper. Forth, to make
possible this massive relocation effort a generous foreign assistance
and solid contributions from the U.S. government, the European Union and
the U.N. must be solicited.
According to an Israeli opinion poll 35% percent of the settlers and
74% of the general public support the new 'evacuation-compensation' bill
that would enable those who wish to move out of their settlement to do
so, in return alternative housing within the Green Line. A 2002 survey**
revealed that 59% of settlers are prepared to accept a withdrawal from
the settlements in exchange for suitable financial compensation in the
context of a democratic decision by the Israeli government. Only 2%
would fight against the decision with illegal means. The survey also
found that 77% of settlers chose to live in settlements for “quality of
life” reasons and just 20% of settlers moved to the occupied territories
for religious reasons. (Brit Tzedek V’Shalom)
Why is the continuation of the present status quo in regard to the
illegal settlements damaging to the best interest of Israel,
Palestinians and the United States?
Today, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas is trying desperately to
demonstrate to his people that negotiations, not violence, are the route
to achieving Palestinian aspirations. Continued settlement expansion -
even in blocs - undermines him and his pro-peace position. In doing so,
it threatens the two-state solution, and conflicts with the fundamental
Israeli need to end the occupation and achieve real peace and security
for its people. It also embarrasses the U.S. and undermines its peace
efforts, while eroding goodwill toward Israel around the world. If
Israel is serious about wanting peace, the future of the West Bank must
be left to negotiations, not predetermined by unilateral acts.
…under the 2003 model peace agreement called the Geneva Accords,
negotiated by Israelis and Palestinians (many of whom were and remain
senior political figures), the Palestinians agreed to Israel's annexing
some settlements in exchange for land swaps of equal size from within
Israel proper. This experience illustrated that in the context of
serious peace negotiations, Israel will likely get much of what it wants
when it comes to settlement blocs. But it won't get everything, in large
part because "everything" - like the huge blocs Israel is unilaterally
expanding and de facto annexing today - is incompatible with the
establishment of a viable, contiguous Palestinian state. Getting from
the current reality on the ground to a negotiated agreement will require
mutual goodwill and strong, credible Palestinian leadership. If Israel
continues to build in settlement blocs, it will find itself with
neither, and will likely lose the best, and perhaps last, Palestinian
partner for peace it will see for a very long time.1
1 Friedman, Lara, and Ofran, Hagit.
"Settlement stumbling blocs.” Haaretz, May 17, 2008 |
