Israeli settlements are Jewish communities in areas under Israeli control as a result of the 1967 Six Day War. The term does not distinguish between the small minority of re-established communities that had existed before the 1948 Arab-Israeli War and the majority of communities newly established after 1967.
Background
After the 1967 Six Day War, Israel built Jewish communities (typically referred to as settlements) in areas captured from Jordan, Egypt, and Syria (see West Bank, Gaza Strip, Golan). Some of the settlements were reestablished on sites of Jewish communities destroyed between 1929 and 1967. Without distinguishing between those that were new or reestablished, the United Nations Security Council and General Assembly have several times condemned Israel for constructing and expanding these settlements.
In spite of UN and internal condemnation of these settlements, Israel contends that the construction is legal under international law.
According to Israeli government statistics, just under 400,000 Israelis lived in territories captured during the 1967 war as of November 2000. This number is controversial, as it includes a large number of Israeli citizens who live in East Jerusalem, which was once planned by the United Nations as part of an international zone (former compromise proposal, Resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947, which the Arab states rejected); however, if the boundaries of that peace plan were used, then the number of Israeli settlers would be far greater, including inhabitants of the Galilee, Haifa, the southwest, and many other areas. Maps of these settlements [1] http://www.fmep.org/reports/2003/v13n4.html#map , [2] http://www.biu.ac.il/SOC/besa/publications/maps/settleme.htm . Since the Oslo Accords 1993 the settlers' number on the West Bank and Gaza (excluding East Jerusalem) has almost doubled, from 115,000 to 230,000.
The term "settlement" actually encompasses a wide variety of cities, suburbs, towns, and villages. Some settlements, such as Gilo , are, in effect, suburbs of Jerusalem; politically part of the municipality of Jerusalem, contiguous with the city, and indistinguishable from other non-"settlement" Jerusalem suburbs. Others, such as Ariel and Ma'ale Adummim are small cities, with populations ranging from 20,000 to 30,000. At the other end of the spectrum, some settlements consist of a few trailers on a hilltop, with populations of a few dozen people or even fewer.
1996 Map of Israeli settlements in the Golan Heights, Gaza Strip and West Bank
Communities established on the sites of previous recent Jewish communities
Some of the 323 settlements were established on sites that had been inhabited by Jewish communities during the British Mandate of Palestine. In at least one case, Hebron, the post-1967 settlers were condemned by an association of its pre-1929 Jewish inhabitants.
partial listing only
-
Jerusalem – various surrounding communities and neighborhoods, including
- Kfar Shiloah - settled by Yemeni Jews in 1882, Jewish residents evacuated in 1938, settled again in 2004[3] http://news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,9150753%255E1702,00.html
-
Gush Etzion communities - established between 1943-1947, destroyed 1948, reestablished beginning 1967
-
Hebron - Jewish presence since biblical times, evacuated 1929, settled in 1967
- Kfar Darom - established in 1946, evacuated in 1948, resettled in 1970.
- Nitzanim - established in 1943, expelled in 1948, reestablished after the war.[4] http://www.bambili.com/bambili_news_en/katava_main.asp?news_id=1976&sivug_id=6
Legal status of territories
Although all areas in question were captured by Israel in the 1967 Six-Day War, Israel claims that they fall into three different categories:
-
East Jerusalem was envisioned as an international area under UN administration in the 1947 partition plan. In 1948, it was split between Israeli and Jordanian rule.
- The Golan Heights were ceded by Britain to the French Mandate of Syria, in a move that Israel retrospectively considers illegal (despite the fact that Israel's own existence rests on another British cession of that period, the Balfour Declaration), and have been similarly annexed by Israel, without prejudice to a future peace treaty with Syria.
- The Gaza Strip and West Bank, a small subsection of the areas awarded by the UN to a prospective Arab state of Palestine, remained in Arab hands while the rest of that area was taken by Israel. The former was administered by Egypt while the latter was annexed by Jordan. Egypt supported Palestinian efforts against Israel, while Jordan regarded itself as the legitimate representative of the Palestinians.
Israel has signed peace treaties with Egypt (returning the Sinai Peninsula to Egyptian sovereignty), and Jordan (returning small sections to Jordanian sovereignty); there are currently no peace treaties governing Israel's borders related to the West Bank, Gaza, and Golan. Israel therefore asserts that the armistice lines (known as the Green Line) of 1949 have no other legal status.
Motivations for settlements
Complicating this issue, a number of reasons are cited from both sides for the establishment of settlements.
- Palestinians argue that the policy of settlements constitute an effort to pre-empt or even sabotage a peace treaty that includes Palestinian sovereignty, and that the settlements themselves are theft of land that belongs to Palestinians.
- The UN, various European governments, a vocal Israeli minority, and many NGOs view settlements similarly, arguing that they violate international law by making life difficult for Palestinians in the areas.
- Some religious Jews assert the historical Jewish connection to at least some of the areas in dispute, arguing that their claim is at least equal to that of the Palestinians
- Many Israelis argue that the settlements are of strategic and tactical importance, disrupting terrorist activities
As it turns out, the settlers themselves have varying reasons for living where they do. While some live in the territories out of religious or political idealism, others are attracted to tax incentives, more space, etc.
Land grab accusations
Israel claims that the majority of the land currently taken by the new settlements was either vacant, belonging to the state (from which it was leased) or bought fairly from the Palestinians, arguing that there is nothing illegal about acquiring land in these ways.
Further, Israel argues that these lands were conquered in a defensive war and are held legitimately as reparation. Opponents dispute at least one of these bases, saying that vacant land had either belonged to Arabs who had fled or was communal land, that had belonged collectively to an entire village. That practice had formed under Ottoman rule, although the British and the Jordanians have unsuccessfully tried to stop it since the late 1920s.
B'Tselem (an Israeli NGO) claims that the Israeli government used the absence of modern legal documents for the communal land as an excuse to seize it. Altogether, around 42% of the area of the West Bank (total of about 2,400 kmē) is controlled by Israelis (see Map http://www.btselem.org/English/Publications/Summaries/Land_Grab_Map.asp , MS Word format report http://www.btselem.org/Download/Land_Grab_Eng.doc ).
International and legal background
The Fourth Geneva Convention forbids an occupying country from moving its citizens into the territory in order to push out existing inhabitants. This tractate is frequently cited to establish the illegality of the settlements.
Israel argues that West Bank and Gaza have never been part of a sovereign state since the defeat of the Ottoman Empire and do therefore not meet the definitions of the Geneva conventions. Israel argues further that even if they did, the settlements are not intended to, nor have ever resulted in, the displacement of Palestinians from the area. In addition, the Geneva Conventions only apply in the absence of an operative peace agreement. And since the Declaration of Principles and other agreements allow for such settlements, there is no basis for declaring them illegal.
Nevertheless, the establishment and expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank and Gaza Strip has been described as illegal by the UN Security Council many times, for example in resolutions 446, 452 , 465 and 471 .
Since resolutions 446 and 465 were not made under Chapter VI or VII of the United Nations Charter, Israel argued that it was purely an advisory request, and chose not to fulfill it. The issue of the legal status of resolutions of the UN Security Council not made under Chapters VI or VII of the Charter is controversial in international law -- some accept Israel's argument, others reject it, and consider the resolution to be legally binding on Israel.
Israel further points out that in the Oslo accords, the Palestinians accepted at least the temporary presence of Israeli settlements; therefore the violent attacks carried out by Palestinians against settlements are not only wrong because of settlers' being civilians, but also are in fact a breach of a mutual agreement put down in the form of Oslo Accords. Some moderate Palestinians agree that violence is unacceptable. However, all but a tiny minority support the right of self defense against the armed Jewish settlers, some of which have attacked Palestinians.
Tensions, mistrust and accusations
The settlements have on several occasions been a source of tension between Israel and the U.S. In 1991 there was a clash between the Bush administration and Israel, where the U.S. delayed a subsidized loan in order to pressure Israel not to proceed with the establishment of settlements for instance in the Jerusalem-Bethlehem corridor. Jimmy Carter has said that the settlements consitute a major obstacle to peace. The current Bush administration, while generally being supportive of Israel, has said that settlements are "unhelpful" to the peace process. Generally, these U.S. efforts have at most temporarily delayed further expansion of Israeli settlements. It should also be noted that U.S. public opinion is divided. The strongest support for the Israeli position can be found among the evangelical Christians. Public opinion outside the U.S. and Israel strongly opposes the settlements.
Although the Oslo accords did not include any explicit obligation on Israel's part to stop building in the settlements, Palestinians argue that Israel has undermined the Oslo accords by continuing to expand the settlements after the signing of the accords. Israel argues that the PLO instead violated the Oslo accords by not dismantling the terrorist organisations and by inciting their population to hate. Palestinians and other Arab states regularly accuse Israel of attacking refugee camps and villages in an attempt to scare off Palestinians and claim the land as theirs. Israel justifies that it only fights against those terrorist organisations, and if there would be no terrorists, there wouldn't be any military operations.
Israel previously also had settlements in the Sinai, but these where withdrawn as a result of the peace agreement with Egypt. Most proposals for achieving a final settlement of the Middle East conflict involve Israel dismantling a large number of settlements in the West Bank and Gaza strip. A poll conducted by Peace Now in July 2002 indicates that up to two-thirds of the settler population would agree to evacuate, provided that it is done as a result of a democratically-made and accepted decision by the Israeli government, while the rest would refuse to leave peacefully.
Most Israeli and US proposals for final settlement have also involved Israel being allowed to retain settlements near Israel and in East Jerusalem (the majority of the settler population is near the Green Line), with Israel annexing the land on which the settlements are located. This would result in a transfer of roughly 5% of the West Bank to Israel, with the Palestinians being compensated by the transfer of a similar share of Israeli territory (i.e. territory behind the Green Line) to the Palestinian state.
Palestinians complain that the land offered in exchange is situated in the Judean desert, while the areas that Israel seeks to retain are considered to be among the West Bank's most fertile areas; to this Israel replies that if the current Green line is fully retained, Israel would have at some points no more than 17 kilometers from the border to the sea, which is widely considered an immense security risk. However, this is an issue that is separate from the discussion of settlements. For more details about the issues at stake, see Proposals for a Palestinian state.
On April 30, 2003 the details of the Roadmap for Peace in the Middle East were released. The "roadmap" is a plan to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through a set of milestones, with the ultimate result being the creation of an independent Palestinian State and a safe and secure Israel. The plan was proposed by a "quartet" of international entities: the United States, the European Union, Russia, and the United Nations.
Topics that need more discussion
- the origin of Israeli settlements in the West Bank, Gaza and Sinai.
- the historical, social and political context in which these settlements were created.
- The political and religious motivations of the settlers. Note that many people simply move to settlements for tax purposes.
- The willingness of Israel to remove all settlements in the Sinai once a peace treaty with Egypt was signed.
- the radical side of the settler movement, and also the more moderate side
- a continuously updated section regarding the Gaza Strip Disengagement Plan, and the settlers' varied reactions to it
External links
- http://www.jcpa.org/jl/vp470.htm an unofficial Israeli position paper
- http://www.nad-plo.org/permanent/settlements.html an official Palestinian position paper
- http://www.cartercenter.org/viewdoc.asp?docID=137&submenu=news analysis by former U.S. president Jimmy Carter.
- http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/Peace/settletoc.html A compiling of facts on the settlements, as presented by a joint Israeli-American Organization
Last updated: 02-07-2005 15:59:58
Last updated: 05-06-2005 01:27:49
