An Israeli settlement is a Jewish civilian community built on land that was captured by Israel from Jordan, Egypt, and Syria during the 1967 Six-Day War and is considered occupied territory by the international community.[1] Such settlements currently exist in the West Bank. Israeli neighborhoods in East Jerusalem and communities in the Golan Heights, areas which have been annexed by Israel, are considered settlements by the international community, which does not recognize Israel's annexations of these territories.[2] Settlements also existed in the Sinai and Gaza Strip until Israel evacuated the Sinai settlements following the 1979 Israel-Egypt peace agreement and unilaterally disengaged from the Gaza Strip in 2005.
The International Court of Justice[3] and the international community say these settlements are illegal,[4][5] and no foreign government supports Israel's settlements.[6] Israel disputes the position of the international community.[7] The United Nations has repeatedly upheld the view that Israel's construction of settlements constitutes violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention.[8] Israel dismantled 18 settlements in the Sinai Peninsula in 1982, and all 21 in the Gaza Strip and 4 in the West bank in 2005.[9]
As of December 2010, 327,750 Israelis live in the 121 officially-recognised settlements in the West Bank, 192,000 Israelis live in settlements in East Jerusalem and over 20,000 live in settlements in the Golan Heights [10][11] Settlements range in character from farming communities and frontier villages to urban suburbs and neighborhoods. The three largest settlements, Modi'in Illit, Maale Adumim and Betar Illit, have achieved city status, with over 30,000 residents each.
Israeli policies toward these settlements have ranged from active promotion to removal by force.[12] Since the signing of the Oslo Accords in 1993, no new settlements have been established in the occupied territories.[13] However, the ongoing expansion of existing settlements by Israel and the construction of settlement outposts is frequently criticized as an obstacle to the peace process by the United Nations[14] and third parties including the United Kingdom,[15] the European Union,[16] and the United States.[14]
Some settlements are self-contained cities with a stable population in the tens of thousands, infrastructure, and all other features of permanence. Examples are Beitar Illit (a city of close to 45,000 residents), Ma'ale Adumim, Modi'in Illit, and Ariel (almost 20,000 residents). Some are towns with a local council status with populations of 2,000–20,0000, such as Alfei Menashe, Eli, Elkana, Efrat and Kiryat Arba. There are also clusters of villages governed by a local elected committee and regional councils that are responsible for municipal services. Examples are Kfar Adumim, Neve Daniel, Kfar Tapuach and Ateret. Kibbutzim and moshavim in the territories include Argaman, Gilgal, Niran and Yitav. Jewish neighborhoods have been built on the outskirts of Arab neighborhoods, for example in Hebron. In Jerusalem, there are urban neighborhoods where Jews and Arabs live together: the Muslim Quarter, Silwan, Abu Tor, Sheikh Jarrah and Shimon HaTzadik.
Under the Oslo Accords, the West Bank was divided into three separate parts designated as Area A, Area B and Area C. Leaving aside the position of East Jerusalem, all of the settlements are in Area C which comprises about 60% of the West Bank.
Some settlements were established on sites where Jewish communities had existed during the British Mandate of Palestine.
Other communities: Shimon HaTzadik, Neve Yaakov and Atarot which in post-1967 was rebuilt as an industrial zone.
As of July 2009, 304,569 Israelis were living in 121 officially-recognised settlements in the West Bank and 192,000 Israelis were living in East Jerusalem. As of 2009, there were 102 unauthorized outposts in the West Bank.[10][11] Based on various sources,[22][23][24] population dispersal can be estimated as follows:
| Jewish population | 1948 | 1966 | 1972 | 1983 | 1993 | 2004 | 2007 | 2009 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| West Bank (excluding Jerusalem) | 480 (see Gush Etzion) | 0 | 1,182 | 22,800 | 111,600 | 234,487 | 276,462[25] | 304,569[10] |
| Gaza Strip | 30 (see Kfar Darom) | 0 | 700 1 | 900 | 4,800 | 7,826 | 0 | 0 |
| Golan Heights | 0 | 0 | 77 | 6,800 | 12,600 | 17,265 | 18,692 | 20,000 |
| East Jerusalem | 2,300 (see Jewish Quarter, Atarot, Neve Yaakov) | 0 | 8,649 | 76,095 | 152,800 | 181,587 | 189,708 | 192,000 |
| Total | 2,810 | 0 | 10,608 1 | 106,595 | 281,800 | 441,165 | 484,862 | 516,569 |
In addition to internal migration, in large though declining numbers, the settlements absorb annually about 1000 new immigrants from outside Israel. In the 1990s, the annual settler population growth was more than three times the annual population growth in Israel.[26] Population growth has continued in the 2000s.[27] According to the BBC, the settlements in the West Bank have been growing at a rate of 5–6% since 2001.[11]
As of 2009, the total number of Israeli settlers was 516,569. This figure includes settlers in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights.[10]
Settlements in the West Bank make up the Judea and Samaria District. Authority for planning and construction in the district is held by the Israel Defense Forces Civil Administration. Since Israeli civil law does not apply to the West Bank, settlers in the area are theoretically subject to martial law. In practice, however, settlers are generally judged in civil courts within Israel proper. The district consists of four cities, thirteen local councils and six regional councils.
The Yesha Council is an umbrella organization of municipal councils in the Judea and Samaria district. (Yesha is a Hebrew acronym for Judea, Samaria and Gaza). The jurisdiction of the Israeli settlements and their regional councils includes 42% percent of the West Bank, although the actual buildings of the settlements cover just 1% of the West Bank, according to B'Tselem, which states that the land was seized from Palestinian owners in violation of an Israeli Supreme Court decision.[28]
East Jerusalem is defined in the Jerusalem Law as part of Israel and its capital, Jerusalem. As such it is administered as part of the city and its district, the Jerusalem District. Pre-1967 residents of East Jerusalem and their descendants have residency status in the city but many have refused Israeli citizenship. Thus, the Israeli government maintains an administrative distinction between Israeli citizens and non-citizens in East Jerusalem, but the Jerusalem municipality does not.
The Golan Heights is administered under Israeli civil law as the Golan sub-district, a part of the North District. Israel makes no legal or administrative distinction between pre-1967 communities in the Golan Heights (mainly Druze) and the post-1967 settlements.
After the capture of the Sinai Peninsula from Egypt in the 1967 Six Day War, settlements were established along the Gulf of Aqaba and in the northeast, just below the Gaza Strip. It had plans to expand the settlement of Yamit into a city with a population of 200,000,[29] though the actual population of Yamit did not exceed 3,000.[30] The Sinai Peninsula was returned to Egypt in stages beginning in 1979 as part of the Egypt–Israel Peace Treaty. As required by the treaty, Israel evacuated the civilian population, which took place in 1982. Some evacuation was done forcefully in some instances, such as the evacuation of Yamit. Israel demolished the settlements and gave the reason that for it feared that settlers might try to return to their homes after the evacuation.
Before the Israel's unilateral disengagement plan there were 21 settlements in the Gaza Strip under the administration of the Hof Aza Regional Council.
Palestinians argue that the policy of settlements constitutes an effort to pre-empt or sabotage a peace treaty that includes Palestinian sovereignty, and claim that the presence of settlements harm the ability to have a viable and contiguous state.[31][32]
The Israel Foreign Ministry asserts that some settlements are legitimate, as they took shape when there was no operative diplomatic arrangement, and thus they did not violate any agreement.[33][34][35] Based on this, they assert that:
The consensus view of the international community is that the existence of Israeli settlements in the West Bank including East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights is in violation of international law.[39] The Fourth Geneva Convention includes statements such as "the Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies".[40]
At present, the predominant view of the international community, as reflected in numerous UN resolutions, regards the building and existence of Israeli settlements in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights as a violation of international law.[41][42][43] UN Security Council Resolution 446 refers to the Fourth Geneva Convention as the applicable international legal instrument, and calls upon Israel to desist from transferring its own population into the territories or changing their demographic makeup. The reconvened Conference of the High Contracting Parties to the Geneva Conventions has declared the settlements illegal[44] as has the primary judicial organ of the UN, the International Court of Justice.[45]
The position of successive Israeli governments is that all authorized settlements are entirely legal and consistent with international law.[46] In practice, Israel does not accept that the Fourth Geneva Convention applies de jure, but has stated that on humanitarian issues it will govern itself de facto by its provisions, without specifying which these are.[47][48] The scholars and jurists Eugene Rostow[49] and Stephen Schwebel[50] have disputed the illegality of authorized settlements.
Under Israeli law, West Bank settlements must meet specific criteria to be legal. In 2009, there were approximately 100[11] small communities that did not meet these criteria and are referred to as illegal outposts.[51][52][53]
The International Court of Justice has ruled that Israel is in breach of international law by establishing settlements in Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem. The Court maintains that Israel cannot rely on its right of self-defense or necessity to impose a regime that violates international law. The Court also ruled that Israel violates basic human rights by impeding liberty of movement and the inhabitants' right to work, health, education and an adequate standard of living.[54]
International intergovernmental organizations such as the Conference of the High Contracting Parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention,[55] major organs of the United Nations,[56] the European Union, and Canada,[57] regard the settlements as a violation of international law. The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination wrote that "The status of the settlements was clearly inconsistent with Article 3 of the Convention, which, as noted in the Committee's General Recommendation XIX, prohibited all forms of racial segregation in all countries. There is a consensus among publicists that the prohibition of racial discrimination, irrespective of territories, is an imperative norm of international law."[58] Amnesty International, and Human Rights Watch have also characterized the settlements as a violation of international law. In 1978, the Legal Adviser of the Department of State reached the same conclusion.[51][59]
In 1967, Theodor Meron, legal counsel to the Israeli Foreign Ministry stated in a legal opinion to the Prime Minister, "My conclusion is that civilian settlement in the administered territories contravenes the explicit provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention."[60] The legal opinion, forwarded to Prime Minister Levi Eshkol, was not made public at the time, and the Labor cabinet progressively sanctioned settlements anyway; this action paved the way for future settlement growth. In 2007, Meron stated that "I believe that I would have given the same opinion today."[61]
Among the legal scholars who dispute this view is Stephen M. Schwebel.[50] Schwebel, a judge of International Court of Justice and Professor of International Law at Johns Hopkins University who makes three distinctions specific to the Israeli situation to claim that the territories were seized in self-defense and that Israel has more title to them than the previous holders. Professor Julius Stone also writes that ”Israel's presence in all these areas pending negotiation of new borders is entirely lawful, since Israel entered them lawfully in self-defense.”[62]
Julius Stone said that the notion that establishing settlements violates Article 49(6) was "irony bordering on the absurd": "We would have to say that the effect of Article 49(6) is to impose an obligation on the State of Israel to ensure (by force if necessary) that these areas, despite their millennial association with Jewish life, shall be forever judenrein. Irony would thus be pushed to the absurdity of claiming that Article 49(6), designed to prevent repetition of Nazi-type genocidal policies of rendering Nazi metropolitan territories judenrein, has now come to mean that . . . the West Bank . . . must be made judenrein and must be so maintained, if necessary by the use of force by the government of Israel against its own inhabitants. Common sense as well as correct historical and functional context exclude so tyrannical a reading of Article 49(6)."[63]
Stone has been criticized for his views on the Israeli–Palestinian conflict by Professor Ben Saul. In particular, Professor Paul says that on its face Article 49(6) can be read to include voluntary or assisted transfers.[64] Professor Saul then goes on to quote the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice which had earlier in 2004 expressed the same view in the Israeli Wall Advisory Opinion (2003).
Israel maintains that a temporary use of land and buildings for various purposes is permissible under a plea of military necessity and that the settlements fulfilled security needs.[65] Israel argues that its settlement policy is consistent with international law, including the Fourth Geneva Convention, while recognizing that some settlements have been constructed illegally on private land.[66] The Israeli Supreme Court has ruled that the power of the Civil Administration and the Military Commander in the occupied territories is limited by the entrenched customary rules of public international law as codified in the Hague Regulations and Geneva Convention IV.[67][68][69] In 1998 the Israeli Minister of Foreign Affairs produced "The International Criminal Court Background Paper".[70] It concludes
International law has long recognised that there are crimes of such severity they should be considered "international crimes." Such crimes have been established in treaties such as the Genocide Convention and the Geneva Conventions.... The following are Israel's primary issues of concern [ie with the rules of the ICC]: The inclusion of settlement activity as a "war crime" is a cynical attempt to abuse the Court for political ends. The implication that the transfer of civilian population to occupied territories can be classified as a crime equal in gravity to attacks on civilian population centres or mass murder is preposterous and has no basis in international law.
A UN conference held in Rome in 1998, where Israel was one of seven countries to vote against the Rome Statute to establish the International Criminal Court. Israel was opposed to a provision that included as a war crime the transfer of civilian populations into territory the government occupies. [71] Israel has signed the statute, but not ratified the treaty. [72]
In November 2006 Peace Now acquired a report, which it claims was leaked from the Israeli Government's Civil Administration, indicating that up to 40 percent of the land Israel plans to retain in the West Bank is privately owned by Palestinians.[73] Peace Now called this a violation of Israeli law.[74] The Washington Post reported that "The 38-page report offers what appears to be a comprehensive argument against the Israeli government's contention that it avoids building on private land, drawing on the state's own data to make the case."[75] Peace Now published statistics and aerial maps for each settlement.[76][77] In the wake of a legal battle, Peace Now lowered the figure to 32%, which the Civil Administration also denied.[78]In February 2008, the Civil Administration stated that the land on which more than a third of West Bank settlements was built had been expropriated by the IDF for "security purposes." [79] The unauthorized seizure of private Palestinian land was defined by the Civil Administration itself as 'theft.'[80]
The Spiegel report, commissioned by the Israeli Defense Ministry, found that some settlements deemed legal by Israel were illegal outposts, and that large portions of Ofra, Elon Moreh and Beit El were built on private Palestinian land.[81]According to Israel, the bulk of the land was vacant, was leased from the state, or bought fairly from Palestinian landowners.
Invoking the Absentee Property Law to transfer, sell or lease property in East Jerusalem owned by Palestinians who live elsewhere without compensation has been criticized both inside and outside of Israel.[82]Opponents of the settlements claim that "vacant" land belonged to Arabs who fled or collectively to an entire village, a practice that developed under Ottoman rule. B'Tselem charged that Israel is using the absence of modern legal documents for the communal land as a legal basis for expropriating it.
Amnesty International argues that Israel's settlement policy is discriminatory and a violation of Palestinian human rights.[83] B'Tselem claims that Israeli travel restrictions impact on Palestinian freedom of movement and Palestinian human rights have been violated in Hebron due to the presence of the settlers within the city.[84][85][86] According to B'Tselem, over fifty percent of West Bank land expropriated from Palestinians has been used to establish settlements and create reserves of land for their future expansion. The seized lands mainly benefit the settlements and Palestinians cannot use them.[87] The organization also claims that roads built by Israel in the West Bank that are closed to Palestinian vehicles are 'discriminatory.'[88]
Human Rights Watch has filed reports on "settler violence," referring to stoning and shooting incidents involving Israeli settlers.[89] Israel's withdrawal from Gaza and Hebron have led to violent settler protests and disputes over land and resources. Meron Benvenisti described the settlement enterprise as a "commercial real estate project that conscripts Zionist rhetoric for profit."[90]
The construction of the Israeli West Bank barrier has been criticized as an infringement on Palestinian human and land rights. The United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs estimated that 10% of the West Bank would fall on the Israeli side of the barrier.[91][92]
Palestinian officials estimate that settlers sell goods worth some $500 million to the Palestinian market.[93] In 2009, the UK Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs called for labelling imports from the settlements.[94]
Due to high unemployment rates in the West Bank, tens of thousands of Palestinians work in Israeli settlements. According to the Manufacturers Association of Israel, some 22,000 Palestinians were employed in construction, agriculture, manufacturing and service industries.[95] In 2010, Palestinian leaders banned the practice of working in Israeli settlements, angering Palestinians who depend on this employment.[96] The prospect of losing Palestinian labour has forced farms in the Jordan valley to consider bringing in more workers from East Asia. [93]
Palestinians have been highly involved in the construction of settlements in the West Bank. The Palestinian Authority estimates that over 12,000 Palestinians are employed by Jewish and Arab contractors in settlement construction and expansion projects. A lack of jobs and relatively high salary has been cited as a motivation for Palestinian involvement. Arab workers are said to be paid approximately 3 times as much by Israeli contractors than Palestinian employers.
In 2008, Kav LaOved charged that Palestinians who work in Israeli settlements are not granted basic protections of Israeli labor law. Instead, they are employed under Jordanian labor law, which does not require minimum wage, payment for overtime and other social rights. In 2007, the Supreme Court of Israel ruled that Israeli labor law does apply to Palestinians working in West Bank settlements and applying different rules in the same work place constituted discrimination. The ruling allowed Palestinian workers to file lawsuits in Israeli courts. In 2008, the average sum claimed by such lawsuits stood at 100,000 shekels.[97]
According to Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research, 63% of Palestinians oppose PA plans to prosecute Palestinians who work in the settlements. However, 72% of Palestinians support a boycott of the products they sell.[98]
A UN report recorded 222 acts of Israeli settler violence against Palestinians and IDF troops in the first half of 2008 compared with 291 in 2007.[99] This trend reportedly increased in 2009.[100] Maj-Gen Shamni said that the number had risen from a few dozen individuals to hundreds, and called it "a very grave phenomenon."[99] In 2008–2009, the defense establishment adopted a harder line against the extremists. [100] This group responded with a tactic dubbed "price tagging," vandalizing Palestinian property whenever police or soldiers were sent in to dismantle outposts.[101]
This violence has been harshly condemned by leading religious figures in the West Bank, among them Rabbi Menachem Froman of Tekoa, who said: "Targeting Palestinians and their property is a shocking thing, (...) It's an act of hurting humanity. (...) This builds a wall of fire between Jews and Arabs."[102] The Yesha Council and Hanan Porat also condemned such actions.[103] Some rabbis, on the other hand, have been accused of inciting violence against non-Jews. [104]
In response to settler violence, the Israeli government has said that it would increase law enforcement and cut off aid to illegal outposts.[105] When buildings were evacuated by the Israeli government, settlers lashed out at Palestinians because they were "easy victims."[106] The United Nations accused Israeli security forces of failing to intervene and arrest settlers suspected of violence.[107]
Israeli civilians living in the Palestinian Territories are not subject to military or local law, but are prosecuted according to Israeli penal law.[108] In 2008, Haaretz wrote that "Israeli society has become accustomed to seeing lawbreaking settlers receive special treatment and no other group could similarly attack Israeli law enforcement agencies without being severely punished."[109]
Gush Emunim Underground was a militant organization associated with Gush Emunim that operated in 1979–1984. The organization planned attacks on Palestinian officials and an attack on the Dome of the Rock.[110][111] In 1994, Baruch Goldstein of Hebron, a member of Kach carried out the Cave of the Patriarchs massacre, killing 29 Muslim worshipers and injuring 125. The attack was widely condemned by the Israeli government and Jewish community.
The Palestinian leadership has accused Israel of "encouraging and enabling" settler violence in a bid to provoke Palestinian riots and violence in retaliation.[112]
In September 2011, settlers vandalized a mosque and an army base. They slashed tires and cut cables of 12 army vehicles and sprayed graffiti. [113]
In November 2011, the United Nations Office for Coordination of Human Affairs (OCHA) in the Palestinian territories published a report on settler violence against Palestinians in the West Bank that showed significant rises compared with 2010, and 2009. The report covered not only physical harm to Palestinians, but also property damage such as the impact of uprooted olive trees, damaged tractors and murdered sheep. The report states that 90% of complaints filed with the Israeli police by Palestinians of settler violence have been closed without any indictments. [114]
While the Economy of the Palestinian territories has shown signs of growth, the International Committee of the Red Cross released a report stating restrictions imposed on Palestinians in the West Bank have had a negative impact on Palestinian olive farming. According to the ICRC, 10,000 olive trees were cut down or burned by settlers between 2007 and 2010.[115][116] Foreign ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor said the report ignored official PA data showing that the economic situation for Palestinians had improved substantially. He referred to a comment made by Mahmoud Abbas to The Washington Post in May 2009, where he said "in the West Bank, we have a good reality, the people are living a normal life".[115]
Haaretz described the olive harvest as a time of heightened violence due to provocation by a handful of extremist settlers.[117] Court rulings required the army to protect the harvesters. In 2010, however, there were numerous incidents of trees being cut down, poisoned or torched. In the first two weeks of the harvest, some 500 Palestinian trees and 100 Jewish trees had been vandalized.[118]
Pro-Palestinian activists who hold regular protests near the settlements have been accused of stone-throwing, physical assault and provocation.[119][120][121] In 2008, Avshalom Peled, head of the Israel Police's Hebron district, called "left-wing" activity in the city dangerous and provocative, and accused activists of antagonizing the settlers in the hope of getting a reaction.[122]
Since mid-1990s attacks against settlers became a frequent phenomenon. Settlers are mostly targeted by Palestinian armed groups such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad, whose representatives argue that the settlers have forfeited their civilian status because they reside in illegal settlements.[123] B'tselem rejected this reasoning, and stated:
"The illegality of the settlements has no effect at all on the status of their civilian residents. The settlers constitute a distinctly civilian population, which is entitled to all the protections granted civilians by international law. The Israeli security forces' use of land in the settlements or the membership of some settlers in the Israeli security forces does not affect the status of the other residents living among them, and certainly does not make them proper targets of attack. B'Tselem strongly opposes the attempts to justify attacks against Israeli civilians by using distorted interpretations of international law. Furthermore, B'Tselem demands that the Palestinian Authority do everything within its power to prevent future attacks and to prosecute the individuals involved in past attacks."[124]
The human rights organization Human Rights Watch also issued a similar statement.[123]
Fatal attacks on settlers have included firing of rockets and mortars and drive-by shootings, also targeting infants and children. Violent incidents include the murder of Shalhevet Pass, a ten-month-old baby shot by a Palestinian sniper in Hebron,[125] and the murder of two teenagers on May 8, 2001, whose bodies were hidden in a cave near Tekoa. [126]In the Bat Ayin ax attack, children in Bat Ayin were attacked by a Palestinian wielding an axe and a knife. A 13-year-old boy was killed and another was seriously wounded.[127] Rabbi Meir Hai, a father of seven, was killed in a drive-by shooting.[128][129]
Municipal Environmental Associations of Judea and Samaria, an environmental awareness group, was established by the settlers to address sewage treatment problems and cooperate with the Palestinian Authority on environmental issues.[130] According to a Haaretz study, settlers account for 10% of the population in the West Bank but produce 25% of the sewage output. Beit Duqqu and Qalqilyah have accused settlers of polluting their farmland and villagers claim children have become ill after swimming in a local stream. Legal action was taken against 14 settlements by the Israeli Ministry of the Environment. The Palestinian Authority has also been criticized by environmentalists for not doing more to prevent water pollution.[130][131] Settlers and Palestinians share the mountain aquifer as a water source, and both generate sewage and industrial effluents that endanger the aquifer. Friends of the Earth Middle East claimed that sewage treatment was inadequate in both sectors. Sewage from Palestinian sources was estimated at 46 million cubic meters a year, and sources from settler sources at 15 million cubic meters a year. A 2004 study found that sewage was not sufficiently treated in many settlements, while sewage from Palestinian villages and cities flowed into unlined cesspits, streams and the open environment with no treatment at all.[130][132]
In a 2007 study, the Israel Nature and Parks Authority and Israeli Ministry of Environmental Protection, found that Palestinian towns and cities produced 56 million cubic meters of sewage per year, 94 percent discharged without adequate treatment, while Israeli sources produced 17.5 million cubic meters per year, 31.5 percent without adequate treatment.[133]
According to Palestinian environmentalists, the settlers operate industrial and manufacturing plants that can create pollution as many do not conform to Israeli standards.[130][131] In 2005, an old quarry between Kedumim and Nablus was slated for conversion into an industrial waste dump. Pollution experts warned that the dump would threaten Palestinian water sources.[134]
The settlements have been a source of tension between Israel and the U.S. Jimmy Carter regarded the settlements as illegal and tactically unwise. Ronald Reagan stated that they were legal but an obstacle to negotiations.[135] In 1991, the U.S. delayed a subsidized loan to pressure Israel on the subject of settlement-building in the Jerusalem-Bethlehem corridor. In 2005, U.S. declared support for "the retention by Israel of major Israeli population centers as an outcome of negotiations,"[136] reflecting the statement by George W. Bush that a permanent peace treaty would have to reflect "demographic realities" in the West Bank.[137] In June 2009, Barack Obama said that the United States "does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements."[138]
Palestinians claim that Israel has undermined the Oslo accords and peace process by continuing to expand the settlements. Settlements in the Sinai Peninsula were evacuated and razed in the wake of the peace agreement with Egypt.
Final status proposals have called for retaining long-established communities along the Green Line and transferring the same amount of land in Israel to the Palestinian state. The Clinton administration proposed that Israel keep some settlements in the West Bank, especially those in large blocs near the pre-1967 borders of Israel, with the Palestinians receiving concessions of land in other parts of the country.[139]Both Clinton and Tony Blair pointed out the need for territorial and diplomatic compromise based on the validity of some of the claims of both sides.[140][141]
Fayed Mustafa, Palestinian ambassador to Russia, called for the return of Palestinian territories to Egypt and Jordan if talks failed.[142]
As Minister of Defense, Ehud Barak approved a plan requiring security commitments in exchange for withdrawal from the West Bank.[143] Barak also expressed readiness to cede parts of East Jerusalem and put the holy sites in the city under a "special regime."[144]
On June 14, 2009, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, as an answer to U.S. President Barack Obama's speech in Cairo, delivered a speech setting out his principles for a Palestinian-Israeli peace, among others, he alleged "... we have no intention of building new settlements or of expropriating additional land for existing settlements."[145] In March 2010, the Netanyahu government announced plans for building 1,600 housing units in Ramat Shlomo across the Green Line in East Jerusalem during U.S. Vice President Joe Biden's visit to Israel causing a diplomatic row.[146]
On 6 September 2010, Jordanian King Abdullah II and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad said that Israel would need to withdraw from all of the lands occupied in 1967 in order to achieve peace with the Palestinians.[147]
Bradley Burston has said that a negotiated or unilateral withdraw from most of the settlements in the West Bank is gaining traction in Israel.[148]
In November 2010, the United States offered to "fight against efforts to delegitimize Israel" and provide extra arms to Israel in exchange for a continuation of the settlement freeze and a final peace agreement, but failed to come to an agreement with the Israelis on the exact terms.[149][150]
In December 2010, the United States criticised efforts by the Palestinian Authority to impose borders for the two states through the United Nations rather than through direct negotiations between the two sides.[151] In February 2011, it vetoed a draft resolution to condemn all Jewish settlements established in the occupied Palestinian territory since 1967 as illegal.[152] The resolution, which was supported by all other Security Council members and co-sponsored by over 120 nations,[153] would have demanded that "Israel, as the occupying power, immediately and completely ceases all settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem and that it fully respect its legal obligations in this regard."[154] The U.S. representative said that while it agreed that the settlements were illegal, the resolution would harm chances for negotiations.[154] Israel's deputy Foreign Minister, Daniel Ayalon, said that the "UN serves as a rubber stamp for the Arab countries and, as such, the General Assembly has an automatic majority," and that the vote "proved that the United States is the only country capable of advancing the peace process and the only righteous one speaking the truth: that direct talks between Israel and the Palestinians are required." [155] Palestinian negotiators, however, have refused to resume direct talks until Israel ceases all settlement activity.[154]
The Clinton Parameters included a plan on which the Palestinian State was to include 94–96% of the West Bank, and around 80% of the settlers were to remain under Israeli sovereignty, and in exchange for that, Israel will concede some territory (so called 'Territory Exchange' or 'Land Swap') within the Green Line (1967 borders). The swap would consist of 1–3% of Israeli territory, such that the final borders of the West Bank part of the Palestinian state would include 97% of the land of the original borders.[156]
In 2010, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas said that the Palestinians and Israel have agreed on the principle of a land swap. The issue of the ratio of land Israel would give to the Palestinians in exchange for keeping settlement blocs is an issue of dispute, with the Palestinians demanding that the ratio be 1:1, and Israel offering less.[157]
Under any peace deal with the Palestinians, Israel intends to keep the major settlement blocs close to its borders, which contain over 80% of the settlers. Prime Ministers Yitzhak Rabin, Ariel Sharon, and Benjamin Netanyahu have all stated Israel's intent to keep such blocs under any peace agreement. U.S. President George W. Bush acknowledged that such areas should be annexed to Israel in a 2004 letter to Prime Minister Sharon.[158]
The European Union position is that any annexation of settlements should be done as part of mutually agreed land swaps, which would see the Palestinians controlling territory equivalent to the territory captured in 1967.[159] The EU says that it will not recognize any changes to the 1967 borders without an agreement between the parties.
Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman has proposed a plan which would see settlement blocs annexed to Israel in exchange for heavily Arab areas inside Israel as part of a population exchange.
According to Mitchell G. Bard: "Ultimately, Israel may decide to unilaterally disengage from the West Bank and determine which settlements it will incorporate within the borders it delineates. Israel would prefer, however, to negotiate a peace treaty with the Palestinians that would specify which Jewish communities will remain intact within the mutually agreed border of Israel, and which will need to be evacuated. Israel will undoubtedly insist that some or all of the "consensus" blocs become part of Israel".[158]
A number of proposals for the granting of Palestinian citizenship or residential permits to Jewish settlers in return for the removal of Israeli military installations from the West Bank have been fielded by such individuals[160] as Arafat,[161] Ibrahim Sarsur[162] and Ahmed Qurei.[163]
Israeli Minister Moshe Ya'alon said in April 2010 that "just as Arabs live in Israel, so, too, should Jews be able to live in Palestine." ... "If we are talking about coexistence and peace, why the [Palestinian] insistence that the territory they receive be ethnically cleansed of Jews?".[164]
The idea has been expressed by both advocates of the two-state solution[165] and supporters of the settlers and conservative or fundamentalist currents in Israeli Judaism[166] that, while objecting to any withdrawal, claim stronger links to the land than to the state of Israel.
However, any retention of Jewish settlers as Palestinian citizens and residents by an independent Palestinian state is uncertain in the long-term, given the current land laws of the current Palestinian territory which prohibit the selling of land to Jews or Israeli citizens under pain of death by hanging[167] (current president Mahmoud Abbas, who is empowered by office to approve death sentences, has consistently refused to do such since coming to office[168] but irregular militias such as those of Hamas often carry out their own executions without PA approval). The Palestinian right of return, if applied, would also further reduce a hypothetical Jewish-Palestinian minority's presence in the state (Jews, including settlers, constitute approximately 17 percent of the West Bank population[169]). And given the legal precedent of unilateral withdrawal from Gaza which resulted in the forcible removal of the Jewish population by the IDF on the basis of personal safety for Israeli citizens, it is less likely that the Israeli government would allow for Jewish settlers to remain in the West Bank and Jerusalem.
Sushil P. Seth writes that Israelis seem to feel that increasing settlements will force many Palestinians to flee to other countries and that the remainder will be forced to live under Israeli terms.[170]
Human Rights Watch has determined that Israeli settlement policies has had the effect of "forcing residents to leave their communities".[171]
In 2008, Condoleezza Rice suggested sending Palestinian refugees to South America, which might reduce pressure on Israel to withdraw from the settlements.[172]
American refusal to declare the settlements illegal was said to be the determining factor in the 2011 attempt to declare Palestinian statehood at the United Nations.[173]
Israel announced additional settlements in response to the Palestinian statehood bid and Germany responded by moving to stop deliveries of nuclear weapons capable submarines to Israel.[174]
Ariel University Center of Samaria, formerly the College of Judea and Samaria, is the major Israeli institution of higher education in the West Bank. It is Israel's largest public college. The college was accredited in 1994 and awards bachelor degrees in arts, sciences, technology, architecture and physical therapy.[175] Teacher training colleges include Herzog College in Alon Shvut and Orot Israel College in Elkana. Ohalo College is located in Katzrin, in the Golan Heights.[175] Curricula at these institutions are overseen by the Council for Higher Education in Judea and Samaria (CHE-JS).[176]
Neve Dekalim was Gush Katif's urban center and home to the greatest population, before the dismantling of the settlements as part of Israel's unilateral disengagement plan.
Given the dispute over the territories where the settlements were built, the issue of dismantling them has been considered. Arab parties to the conflict have demanded the dismantlement of the settlements as a condition for peace with Israel. As part of the Egypt–Israel Peace Treaty, Israel was required to evacuate its settlers from the 18 Sinai settlements. The evacuation, which took place in 1982, was done forcefully in some instances, such as the evacuation of Yamit. The settlements were demolished, as it was feared that settlers might try to return to their homes after the evacuation.
During the peace process with the Palestinians, the issue of dismantling the West Bank and Gaza Strip settlements has been raised.
As part of Israel's unilateral disengagement plan, Israel evacuated the Gaza Strip and part of the West Bank, including all 21 settlements in Gaza and four in the West Bank, while retaining control over Gaza's borders, coastline, and airspace. Most of these settlements have existed since the early 1980s, some are over 30 years old, and with a total population of more than 10,000, many of whom have yet to find permanent housing. There was significant opposition to the plan among parts of the Israeli public, and especially those living in the territories. George W. Bush said that a permanent peace deal would have to reflect "demographic realities" in the West Bank regarding Israel's settlements.[177]
Within the former settlements, almost all buildings were demolished by Israel, with the exception of certain government and religious structures, which were completely emptied. Under an international arrangement, productive greenhouses were left to assist the Palestinian economy but these were destroyed within hours by Palestinian looters.[178] Following the withdrawal, many of the former synagogues were torched and destroyed by Palestinians.[179] The Palestinian leadership "maintained" that the synagogues were "symbols of Israeli occupation." Kofi Annan, the Secretary-General of the United Nations at the time, said the Palestinian Authority had a "moral responsibility to protect the synagogues as places with religious significance."[180]
Some Israelis believe the settlements need not necessarily be dismantled and evacuated, even if Israel withdraws from the territory where they stand, as they can remain under Palestinian rule. These ideas have been expressed both by people from the left,[181] who see this as a possible situation in a two-state solution, and by extreme right-wingers and settlers[182] that, while objecting to any withdrawal, claim stronger links to the land than to the state of Israel.
A July 2009 survey of Israeli public opinion found that people are about evenly divided on the issue, with 46 percent of those polled in support of further construction and 44 percent opposed.[183] Since 1982, the Sinai Peninsula has not been regarded as occupied territory.
In 2009, Benjamin Netanyahu said: "I have no intention of building new settlements in the West Bank... But like all the governments there have been until now, I will have to meet the needs of natural growth in the population. I will not be able to choke the settlements."[184] On 15 October 2009, he said the settlement row with the United States had been resolved.[185]
On June 19, 2011, Haaretz reported that the Israeli cabinet voted to revoke Defense Minister Ehud Barak's authority to veto new settlement construction in the West Bank, by transferring this authority from the Agriculture Ministry, headed by Barak ally Orit Noked, to the Prime Minister's office.[186]
|
||||||||||||||||||||
![[4]](http://www.cbs.gov.il/archive/shnaton47/st02-07.gif){kind=link}