Formalizing Israel’s Land Grab
by Chris Hedges
Time is running out for Israel. And the Israeli government knows it.
The Jewish Diaspora, especially the young, has a waning emotional and
ideological investment in Israel. The demographic boom means that
Palestinians in Israel and the occupied territories will soon outnumber
Jews. And Israel’s increasing status as a pariah nation means that
informal and eventually formal state sanctions against the country are
probably inevitable.
Desperate Israeli politicians, watching opposition to their apartheid
state mount, have proposed a perverted form of what they term “the
one-state solution.” It is the latest tool to thwart a Palestinian state
and allow Israel to retain its huge settlement complexes and land
seizures in East Jerusalem and the West Bank.
The idea of a single state
was backed by Moshe Arens, a former defense minister and foreign
minister from the Likud Party,
in a column
he wrote last month in the newspaper Haaretz asking “Is There Another
Option?” Arens has been joined by several other Israeli politicians
including Knesset Speaker Reuven Rivlin.
The Israeli vision, however, does not include a state with equal
rights for Jewish and Palestinians citizens. The call for a single state
appears to include pushing Gaza into the unwilling arms of Egypt and
incorporating the West Bank and East Jerusalem into Israel. Palestinians
within Israeli-controlled territory, however, will remain burdened with
crippling travel, work and security restrictions already in place.
Palestinians in the occupied territories, for example, cannot reclaim
lost property or acquire Israeli citizenship, yet watch as Jews born
outside of Israel and with no prior tie to the country become Israeli
citizens and receive government-subsidized housing.
Palestinians in the
West Bank live in a series of roughly eight squalid, ringed ghettos and
are governed by military courts. Jews living in the West Bank and East
Jerusalem, like all full Israeli citizens, are subject to Israeli
civilian law and constitutional protection. Palestinians cannot serve in
the armed forces or the security services, while Jewish settlers are
issued automatic weapons and protected by the Israel Defense Force.
If Israel sheds Gaza, which has 1.5 million Palestinians, the Jewish
state will be left with 5.8 million Jews and 3.8 million Arabs. And, at
least in the near future, Jews will remain the majority. This seems to
be the main attraction of the plan.
The landscape of the West Bank and East Jerusalem, known as “facts on
the ground,” has altered dramatically since I first went to Jerusalem
over two decades ago. Huge fortress-like apartment complexes ring East
Jerusalem and dominate the hillsides in the West Bank. The settler
population is now more than 462,000, with 271,400 living in the West
Bank and East Jerusalem, and 191,000 living in and around Jerusalem. The
settler population has grown at the rate of 4.6 percent per year since
1990 while the Israeli society taken as a whole has grown at 1.5
percent.
The net effect of the Israeli seizure of land in East Jerusalem,
which includes recent approval for an additional 9,000 housing units,
and the West Bank is to promulgate a form of administrative ethnic
cleansing. Palestinian families are being pushed off land they have
owned for generations and evicted from their homes by Israeli
authorities. Dozens of families, tossed out of dwellings they have
occupied in East Jerusalem for decades, have been forced onto the
streets. Groups such as Ateret Cohanim,
an ultra-Orthodox Jewish private organization that collects funds from
abroad, purchases Palestinian properties and pursues legal strategies to
evict families that have long resided in East Jerusalem. Israel’s
judicial system and police, in violation of international law,
facilitate and enforce these evictions and land seizures.
Heavily armed settlers carry out frequent unprovoked attacks and ad
hoc raids and house evictions to supplement the terror imposed by the
police and military. They are the civilian arm of the occupation.
“This acquiescence in settler violence is particularly objectionable
from the perspective of international humanitarian law because the
settlers are already unlawfully present in occupied territory, making it
perverse to victimize those who should be protected—the
Palestinians—and offer protection to those who are lawbreakers—the
settlers,” said Richard Falk when we spoke a few days ago. Falk is the
U.N. special rapporteur who was denied entry into the occupied territories by the Israeli government.
Falk said that incorporating Palestinians in East Jerusalem and the
West Bank into a single Israeli state would see Israel impose gradations
of citizenship.
“If the Palestinians in pre-’67 Israel enjoy second-class
citizenship, those in the West Bank and East Jerusalem will be given a
third-class citizenship,” Falk said. “The real proposal, the envisioned
outcome of this kind of proposal, is an extension of Israeli control
over the occupied territory as a permanent reality. It is presently a de
facto annexation. The creation of a single state would give the
arrangement a more legalistic cover. It would seek to resolve the issue
of occupied territory without the bother of international negotiations.”
“The effect is to fragment the Palestinian people in such defining
ways as to make it almost impossible to envision the emergence of a
viable Palestinian sovereign state,” said Falk. “The longer it
continues, the more difficult it is to overcome, and the more serious
are the abridgement of fundamental Palestinian rights.”
Falk, who taught international law at Princeton University, will
issue a report to the United Nations this fall in which he will assert
that the Israeli process of colonialism and apartheid has accelerated
over the past three years. He will call in the report for the U.N. to
consider unilaterally declaring Palestine an independent state, as it
did with Kosovo. Falk cites as examples of Israeli colonialism the
official 121 Jewish settlements, as well as roughly 100 “illegal
outposts” in the West Bank, and the extensive network of roads reserved
exclusively for Jews that connects the settlements to one another and to
Israel behind the green line.
He estimates, when “all restrictions on Palestinian control and
development are taken into account,” that Israel has effectively seized
38 to 40 percent of the West Bank.
The punishing conditions imposed by the Israeli blockade of the 1.5
million Palestinians living in Gaza have been replicated for the roughly
40,000 Palestinians who live in “Area C,” the 60 percent of the West
Bank that remains under complete Israeli military control. Save the
Children, UK (STCUK), in a recent report called
“Life on the Edge”
argues that Israeli policies of land confiscation, expanding
settlements, lack of basic services such as food, water, shelter and
medical clinics are at “a crisis point.” The report concludes that food
security problems are even
worse than in Gaza. According to the
report, “ ... Seventy-nine percent of communities surveyed recently
don’t have enough nutritious food; this is higher than in blockaded Gaza
where the rate is 61 percent.”
Palestinian children growing up in Area C
experience, according to the report, malnutrition and stunted growth at
double the level of children in Gaza. Forty-four percent of these
children were found to suffer from diarrhea, often with lethal effects.
STCUK writes that “Israel’s restrictions on Palestinian access to and
development of agricultural land—in an area where almost all families
are herders—mean that thousands of children are going hungry and are
vulnerable to killer illnesses like diarrhea and pneumonia.”
“Children are being forced to cross settlement areas and risk
beatings and harassment by settlers, or walk for hours, just to get to
school ... many children are losing hope in the future,” Jihad
al-Shommali of the Defense for Children International Palestine Section
was recently quoted as saying with reference to the problems of children
in Area C.
Falk said, “This overall pattern suggests systematic violations by
Israel of Article 55 of Geneva IV and Article 69 of the First Geneva
Protocol of 1977 that delimits Israel’s obligations to ensure adequate
provision of the basic needs of people living under its occupation,
especially in Area C where it exercises undivided control.”
The annexation of Palestinian territory has been reinforced by the
construction of 85 percent of the separation wall—256 of a planned 435
miles has been completed—on occupied Palestinian territory. The barrier
cuts the West Bank off from Israel and has been built in a configuration
which plunges deep into the West Bank. The settlements and the land to
the west of the wall, which makes up 9.4 percent of the West Bank, have
already been absorbed into Israel. The seizure of nearly 40 percent of
the West Bank includes Israeli control of most of the Palestinians’
water supply. The Jewish settlers in the West Bank are allotted per
capita four to five times the amount of water allotted to Palestinians
by the Israeli government.
The settlements in East Jerusalem and the West Bank violate Article
49(6) of Geneva IV, which prohibits the transfer of the population of an
occupying power to the territory temporarily occupied. Israel’s
stubborn rejection of the demand of Security Council Resolution 242 that
it withdraw from Palestinian territories it occupied in 1967 creates,
as Falk said, “a background that resembles, and in some dimensions
exceeds, in important respects the situation confronting the government
of Kosovo.”
“Lengthy negotiations have not resolved the issue of the status of
Palestine, nor do they give any reasonable prospect that any resolution
by negotiation or unilateral withdrawal will soon occur,” he said.
“Under these circumstances, it would seem that one option available to
the Palestine Liberation Organization [the Oslo Agreement empowered the
PLO to negotiate international status issues] acting on its own or by
way of the Palestinian Authority under international law would be to
issue a unilateral declaration of status, seeking independence,
diplomatic recognition and membership in the United Nations. The recent
Kosovo advisory opinion of the World Court in The Hague provides a
well-reasoned legal precedent for such an option.”