Reassessing Israeli Settlements
On June 4, 2009, President Barack Obama delivered his much-anticipated speech to the Muslim world from Cairo, Egypt. Mr. Obama asserted that he will pursue the creation of a Palestinian state and that Israeli settlement growth must be stopped because it is illegitimate. The previous week, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stated, “He [Obama] wants to see a stop to settlements — not some settlements, not outposts, not ‘natural growth’ exceptions.”
The Palestinians cite settlements as the most significant obstacle to peace. Much of the Arab world supports that narrative. Now, it appears, the current U.S. administration does, too. However, the administration may be ignoring key aspects of the debate, and in the process, placing undue stress on a Middle East ally committed to peace with its neighbors.
Settlements in context
Settlement activity began after Israel’s victory in the 1967 Six Day War, a preemptive and defensive battle whereby the Israeli military surprised even its own top brass when it gained control over the West Bank, Gaza Strip, Sinai Peninsula, east Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights. During the initial settlement period, between 1967 and 1977, the territories were viewed as bargaining chips that Israel could, in the future, trade for recognition and peace. Jerusalem authorized limited settlement activity based on national security, according to the Alon Plan. This plan, created by Israeli Defense Minister Yigal Alon in 1967, spawned a string of settlements in strategic areas along the Jordan Valley to create a line of protection around the country’s vulnerable midsection. Indeed, many settlements began as military stations located in strategic but uninhabited areas.
In 1977, Israel’s Likud Party rose to power. Under Ariel Sharon, the so-called “grandfather of the settlements,” the settlement project skyrocketed. Prior to 1977, 4,500 Israelis lived in 36 settlements — 31 in the West Bank and five in the Gaza Strip. By 1981, West Bank settlers nearly quadrupled to over 16,000. With the party’s second victory in 1981, the settlement project became a state-sponsored venture involving subsidies to encourage growth. By 1990, the West Bank settler population reached over 78,000.
Today, there are 187,000 settlers in the West Bank. And while that number indicates significant expansion since 1967, Israeli settlements comprise only a small area of the West Bank. According to the Palestine Monitor, less than three percent of the West Bank is dotted by settlements and Israeli military or industrial facilities. Moreover, settlers amount to less than 10 percent of the West Bank’s population of 2,461,267.
Settlements built, settlements destroyed
However, even if Israelis constituted a more sizable percentage of the West Bank population, settlements are not an obstacle to peace. They are impermanent. Indeed, Israeli leaders on both the Left and the Right have repeatedly illustrated their willingness to vacate settlements in exchange for peace.
After the peace treaty between Israel and Egypt in 1979, Israel uprooted its settlements in April 1982 from the Sinai Peninsula, an area measuring some 22,500 square miles, in exchange for peace. The majority of settlers left without protest. Those who didn’t were evacuated forcefully by the Israel Defense Force (IDF) in accordance with then-Minister of Defense Ariel Sharon’s orders. Israel also relinquished the Alma Oil Field, which it discovered and developed, and would have made Israel an oil exporter; dozens of early warning stations; and military installations, such as airfields and a naval base.
The Sinai evacuation was not an isolated incident. In 2005, Israel again vacated settlements in what Prime Minister Ariel Sharon called a “unilateral security step of disengagement.” Sharon dismantled all 21 settlements in the Gaza Strip and four in the West Bank. The evacuation process, which lasted five days, uprooted approximately 8,500 civilians. Like in Sinai, evacuating the settlers was no easy task. In some towns, settlers protested from their rooftops, throwing paint, foam, and other liquids at the soldiers.
Israel also demonstrated its willingness to relinquish land for peace in negotiations with Palestinians. In December 2000, under the auspices of former President Bill Clinton, Israel agreed to offer the Palestinians a sovereign Palestinian state on roughly 96 percent of the West Bank and 100 percent of Gaza, as well as sovereignty over the Temple Mount in Jerusalem and control over Arab sections of Jerusalem. The plan afforded Israel just four to six percent of the West Bank — areas housing 80 percent of the settlers, as well as key early warning military stations. The Palestinians, under Yasser Arafat, rejected the plan. Israel offered to relinquish even more settlements during final status talks at Taba in January 2001, to no avail.
Ms. Greenberg was doing quite well until this: “Jewish settlements in the West Bank, such as Hebron, have existed for centuries, dating back to before the birth of Prophet Muhammad.” She doesn’t go back far enough, as Jewish residence in Hevron goes back to King David who was king there for 7 years before he made Jerusalem the capital. If that’s not good enough for you, Abraham bought the Cave of Machpelah as a burial place for himself, his wife Sarah, their son Isaac, his wife Rebecca, their son Jacob and his wife Leah (Jacob’s wife Rachel is buried near Bethlehem where she died).
As well, there is absolutely no historical precedence for a “palestinian state” as there has never been such a political entity nor a nationality in all of history. Thus, the idea of evacuating Jews from their homes and/or creating such an entity anywhere in this region is moot and should be stricken from political rhetoric or discussion.
In the order of liberal fascist politics it is a matter of get rid of and present the proper optics while doing so. Obama and his greenshirts/brownshirts are the same liberal/socialistl jew haters of yester year. Does anyone remember what happened? Is history repeating itself? Right or wrong, facts and history of the problem be damned, we have our agenda and we are right. Any and all facts used will be manufactured to suit with the facts of past history simply omitted by his administration and the Goebels media.
They say that most of the great civilizations of the past died from suicide, not murder, born of rot, despair and corruption, will this be any different? Is this the path we are taking?
It’s always struct me as odd, to say the least, that not a single Jew, or non-muslim in general, is allowed to live within the Palestinian territories. NOT ONE. Sure there’s a few dozen Christians living in the Palestinian territories but they’re constantly abused, an understatment, by the muslim Palestinians. They’re murdered, raped and discriminated against on a daily basis. And it’s actually ILLEGAL for a Palestinian muslim to sell their home or property to a Jew. Legal punishment for doing is the DEATH PENALTY. How about that liberals? Where’s the outrage? They practice the death penalty and they discriminate against people based on race and religion. That’s two things which supposedly outrage you, right? Liberals: *yawn*. This is in stark contrast to Westernized Jewish Israel which allows MILLIONS of arab muslims, and members of every ethnicity and faith, to live within Israel with full citizenship rights. They also welcome gays and treat women equally and developed amazing economies and a thorough democratic society. Yet the Western world, or more specially Western leftists, DARE to go apeshit over Israeli “settlements” within the Palestinian territories? And it’s not like these settlements are military outposts of the “Nazi Israeli empire”. They’re simply HOMES. So to summarize: millions of arab muslims living in Israel, some illegally on illegal SETTLEMENTS, = good. But a few thousand Jeiwsh families building homes in the Palestinian territories = bad.
??????
Leftist hypocrites much?
ENOUGH WITH THE STUPID RACIST DOUBLE STANDARDS.
Settlements, shmettlements, the next “obstacle” to peace will be the right of return and then the status of Jerusalem and then something else. Until Israel thoroughly defeats the Arabs and they see the futility of their struggle, they will continue their jihad against the infidels. The only problem is that every time Israel gets close to beating the hell out of these barbarians, they are saved by the anti-Semitic leftist governments of the Western Powers including the US of A.
For the life of me, I can’t even imagine that Jerusalem or the Temple Mount would even be considered for division. Bargaining chip? No suicide for Israel to cut out it’s heart and give any portion to those who want to wipe the memory of Israel and the Jewish People from the face of the earth. I think the Jewish People are instructed to be kind to strangers but they are absolutely NOT told to destroy themselves for them.
As far as the settlements are concerned, there is nothing that makes the enemies of Israel angrier than a tiny speck of green in the middle of desolation. Bleck! on the world who expects behavior from Israel they they would never expect of themselves.
Enough!
Ms. Greenberg has omitted a crucial part of the story. She tells us that the president considers settlement growth “illegitimate,” but she fails to explain that the president is flat-out wrong.
Under international law, the so-called territories are an unallocated part of the Palestine Mandate. In 1967, they were legally occupied by Israel because they were acquired when Israel repelled aggression coming from the territories. If and when a final settlement is effected between Israel and some legal representative of the Palestinians, the exact boundaries of the territories will be spelled out, and we will then be able to say whose territory the settlements occupy. Until then, the territories are, for all practical purposes,
a no-man’s-land — and the Israelis have every right to be there and to build there.
To call these territories “Palestinian” is another Big Lie successfully perpetrated by the Arabs and bought into by ignorant libersls. Whose land the territories will be is a matter to be determined. Until so determined by procedures acceptable under international law, the territories could just as well be called the Israeli territories — or, better yet, Israel.
Remember: 80% voted for the eventual destruction of the Jewish Nation.
It’s highly recommended to read Melanie Phillips essay:
Dershowitz doesn’t get it.
By Melanie Phillips
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0709/phillips070609.php3
The same can be read here:
http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/4558351/he-still-doesnt-get-it.thtml
And here is the answer by Dershowitz, a typical Leftist, Obamabot Jewish academic facing the end of Israel:
“Dershowitz writes:
The major difference between Melanie Phillips and me is that I want Jews to remain Democrats – if they support, as I do, liberal principles such as a women’s right to choose abortion, the rights of gays and lesbians to equal justice, and other progressive policies.
So gays and abortion are worth more than the death of unfathomable number of Jews.
This their mindset in black and white.
History and legitimacy are not the issues that drive Obama and State Department policy toward Israel. Presenting arguments on either basis is a waste of time.
Power politics will decide this issue. Obama is attempting to screw Israel without losing domestic Jewish support in the next election. Israel needs to hunker down and dig in its heels. Sad to say, it won’t be long before this preening Arabist President will be engulfed by policy failures, domestic and foreign.
“Sure there’s a few dozen Christians living in the Palestinian territories but they’re constantly abused, an understatment, by the muslim Palestinians. They’re murdered, raped and discriminated against on a daily basis.”
Thats a flat out lie, actually. At last count, there were 33 000 christians in the West Bank, and 3000 in Gaza. In Gaza, they have suffered persecution, but in the west bank they have the backing of Abbas.
I find it somewhat hysterical that the same leftists who advocate vigorous enforcement of America’s anti-discrimination laws—are the first to excuse the bigotry of the Palestinian anti-Semites. Sigh, white bigots are treated quite differently than those possessing darker skin. It’s very unfortunate that the Palestinians are not normally blue eyed and blond haired. This would make things far easier for the Israelis. Race guilt would not be a factor.
It’s ironic how Obama insists America must stop imposing its views on the rest of the world -and must even be willing to meet its enemies with no preconditions- yet finds it perfectly acceptable to forcefully demand Israel change its settlement policies.
It’s also ironic how liberals, who alledge the past Administration’s Middle East peace plan failed because it favored one side over the other, don’t realize that the current Administration’s policies will fail for exactly the same reason.
In any case, pressuring Israel on the settlement issue won’t bring peace. To the Palestinians, the “occupied territories” aren’t Gaza/West Bank, but ALL of Palestine. The ultimate goal is not “A” Palestinian state, but THE state of Palestine. This is why the Hamas charter specifically states that all negotiations are a waste of time. When the goal is removing all Jews from Palestine, what is there to negotiate?
Israeli settlements aren’t the problem!
Paving the Rocky Road to Armageddon
Hiroshima, Mon Amour was a tame film compared to Armageddon, Mon Amour which hasn’t been filmed as yet and probably never will be.
Armageddon, a truly stupid 1998 film featuring Bruce Willis, unfortunately was filmed and featured an asteroid hurtling our way which Bruce re-directs with a nuke. One trouble is that Armageddon the movie sucked as a film, despite Willis. Another is that it had no relevance to Armageddon.
It seems someone is always fretting that the end is near, that the Messiah will make His Second Coming to confront and destroy evil incarnate, the Anti-Christ
The precise time is uncertain for that Final Battle but the location has been pinpointed: The Battle of Armageddon is set for Megiddo, a little lump of a place, a hill situated near an Israeli kibbutz, a tiny spot on the globe that just happens to have monumental biblical and modern relevance as foretold in the Book of Revelations.
Revelations didn’t schedule a date. The paving of the rocky road to the Apocalypse may be in process, however. Practically speaking, any future generations could refer to it as World War III.
Many believe the Armageddon is imminent, a belief that tends to gain more credence and adherents at epochal moments in history, such as the years 1000 A.D. and 2000 A.D., and during stressful times such as ours.
Just as the First World War was precipitated by a single event in Sarajevo, the fear today is that the actions of one or both of the planet’s chief lunatics will lead to Armageddon.
Those two crazies in our midst, the pot-bellied North Korean fruitcake, Kim Jong-il, and the ascetic-looking Iranian nutcase, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, are the most unlikely characters on the world stage to be able to change history except for one distinction: Both are on the verge of nuclear and nuclear-delivery capabilities.
As always, the ever-watchful and ever-impotent United Nations is on the case, wringing its collective, angst-ridden hands and issuing resolution after resolution warning North Korea and Iran not to continue on their respective nuclear courses.
U.N. resolutions are customarily followed by studied inaction during which the delegates settle back and retreat into their comfortable cocoons.
Resolutions are the U.N.’s method of making itself appear useful and its modus operandi for absolving itself of responsibility in the face of potential world dangers should they erupt into full-scale, catastrophic disasters.
Well, we tried, the United Nations can always say even when those attempts have the practical utility of teats on bulls or wings stapled on pigs.
The blustering, self-indulgent despot, Kim Jong-il, represents no Earth-altering geo-political threat, which is not to minimize his insanity and inanity.
He could unilaterally bring about massive devastation in a relatively concentrated area of the planet and the probable retaliation would effectively return his nation to the Bronze Age. That status wouldn’t change much in the daily lives of most North Korean survivors.
On the other hand, Ahmadinejad has the capacity to wreak unspeakable horrors, including beginning that battle in Megiddo, something the maniacal tyrant devoutly wishes.
For a transcript of a lengthy panel discussion featuring various Islamic scholars . . .
(Read the rest at http://genelalor.com)
The problem with the Arab-Israeli dispute, to my mind, is that everyone has a blind spot with regards to it. Israelis complain loudly about Arab terrorism, but seem to think that Arabs should accept the bombing of refugee camps, with dead civilians including women and children. In contrast you can find the opposite point of view on the Arab side: bombing of refugee camps is illegal, and awful, but the terrorists are killing Jews, who deserve to die because they’re stealing land from the Arabs.
So on the subject of settlements: Arabs used to live in what’s now Israel. Some still do, and most Jews who live(d) in Arab countries have been driven out, winding up in Israel or perhaps the States. Yes, Jews have always lived in what’s now Israel. So have Arabs. Yes, the state of Palestine is a modern construct, and the name Palestinian is a relatively new invention. The same can be said, pretty much exactly, for the words Israel and Israeli. The country existed independently for a very short time several thousand years ago; does anyone want to revive all the nations and countries that existed for a similar length of time, within the last three millenia? Sure, Jews survived as a race; so did Arabs. Sure, Jews have a right to a homeland; so do Arabs.
The chief difficulty comes out of the fact that the Jewish community decided to relocate themselves, and their nation, into the heart of the Arab world, and no one thought to ask the Arabs. They had been conquered (more or less) by the Europeans, during the First World War. How would you feel, if someone else gave away your home and didn’t ask you for permission? Yes, some of the Jews bought homes from their owners; unfortunately, the owners were usually absentee landlords who lived in Istanbul or Ankara. The actual people living in the houses were never consulted. The Jews, fleeing the Holocaust in Europe, thought they had found the sanctuary they needed. The Arab world (at least the more sane members of it) understand that the Jews are victims; what puzzles them is that they’re asked to compensate the Jews for what Europeans did to them.
Each side sees the other as villain, and themselves as victims. No one feels that they are unjustified in their actions; people are willing to bend rules to defend themselves. So Sabra and Shatilla, Munich and various terror attacks too numerous to name individually. Each side is willing to justify what they’ve done, because look what they did to us yesterday. Sort of the Hatfields and the McCoys, but with automatic weapons and a *lot* more history.
Are the settlements an issue that needs to be addressed? Yes, of course. Do Israelis or Arabs have sole rights to the land? Well, by the light of each side, both sides have sole rights, and the other is an interloper. The one thing I do know is this: someone should make a final decision. Either expel all the Arabs from the West bank, or all the Jews, and then try to get past the anger and frustration that the Chinese water torture of the last 40+ years has caused. Frankly, if Israel had expelled all of the Arabs across the Jordan in 1967, they’d have been condemned internationally…but they’d probably have survived, and wouldn’t have half the problems they do now. If they’d left the territory alone, and not settled it at all, there would be problems, but not the ones they have now. In this instance, compromises don’t work…anyone who thinks differently hasn’t paid attention.
I’m looking at the Arabian Peninsula http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/middle_east_and_asia/arab_pennisula.gif
and can’t see Israel. Wait let me get a magnifying glass.
Oh yea, there they are! Oops just a little bit more and they could be pushed right into the sea! The memory of Israel and the Jewish People just a small spit of land from being wiped from the face of the earth. Hmm…seems as if the heart of Arabia is wherever they say it is.
fnord “Thats a flat out lie, actually. At last count, there were 33 000 christians in the West Bank, and 3000 in Gaza. In Gaza, they have suffered persecution, but in the west bank they have the backing of Abbas.” Really? The Christian population of Bethlehem has been shrinking amidst reports of murder, forced conversions to Islam, and forced marriage of Christian women to Muslims. As I recall, Bethlehem is in the West Bank (as you call it), not in Gaza. Christians elsewhere in the West Bank have also complained of persecution by Muslims abetted by the PA.
@ #13 I understand your effort to put historical events in context, but it’s hard to swallow the moral equivalence you draw between Palestinian extremists and Israel. Israelis have killed countless Palestinians. But these tragic deaths are usually the unintentional consequence of battling extremists who hide among civilians. The killing of civilians by Israel is not welcomed. It’s usually regretted, regarded as a mistake, and commonly brings protests. On the other hand, Palestinian extremists specifically target civilians. The killing of Jews is seen as a victory, and usually brings cheers. It’s reprehensible when any civilian is killed. But there’s a difference between manslaughter and murder. I do feel sorry for the misery the Palestinian people have suffered. But it’s hard to empathize with a people who show no remorse at their own acts of cruelty.
It’s true that both Arabs and Jews have a right to a homeland. But while Jews accepted the 1947 Partition Plan -which would’ve created a homeland for each- the Arabs rejected it, as they considered all of Palestine Arab land. (On the other hand, they had no problem supporting the British partition of India to create Muslim Pakistan…) What made the coastal plains of Palestine so particularly “Arab”? They may have been land OWNERS, but they did not have land SOVEREINGTY. There were already 600,000 Jews living there by 1947, many land owners as well. And it was clear long before WWII that the Jews and Arabs would be ungovernable under a single state. Whether the Israelis would have kept to the UN plan and it’s poorly defensible borders is debatable. It’s a moot point, however, given the state of civil war Palestine was in after the partition plan was announced in 1947. Taking advantage of the war, and in the name of “security,” the Jews expelled thousands of Arabs and destroyed their villages. But then again, this is a people who were being threatened by Arabs that they would be obliterated, and “pushed into the sea,” a people who had heard similar threats come true before, by the Nazis, the Russians, and countless others who over the centuries have slaughtered Jews.
Though tragic, the Palestinian refugee crisis was hardly unique. The period between 1946-1952 saw many such injustices, involving millions of refugees. The difference is that other refugees were absorbed, while the Palestinians were left to fester in camps. For example, the losing Germans saw Poland and the Soviets annex one quarter of their country. 12 million ethnic Germans – Polish, Czech, Hungarian citizens- living in centuries-old eastern European communities were expelled by the Allies and shipped to Germany. 3 million died en route. Other upheavals of that period included how 14 million Hindus/Muslims were forced to flee after the partition of Pakistan/India (500,00 died in the process), the 800,000 Jews forced to flee centuries-old communities across the Arab world, and the thousands who fled or were killed by the Chinese after the 1950 invasion of Tibet. All these tragic acts saw land takings, expulsions, and the creation of millions of refugees, most of which were never repatriated, nor compensated for their losses. They were, however, absorbed by their kin in neighboring countries. Contrast this to the 711,000 Palestinians refugees (and their descendants), who have been left to rot in Arab refugee camps, in many cases with no citizenship (despite being born on Arab soil), limited mobility and limited access to employment and healthcare. The Nakba was provoked by the creation of Israel, but it has been perpetuated by the very Arab governments who hypocritically claim to fight for the refugees’ rights.
Israel’s objectives may at times be suspect. But the Palestinians’ objectives have always been clear: the destruction of Israel. There is no Palestinian partner for true peace negotiations. If they believe all of Palestine is theirs, what is there left to negotiate about?
In truth, if the Palestinians laid down their weapons, there would be a chance for peace. If Israel laid down its weapons, there would be no chance for Israel. Because in the end, Israel goes to war, but would rather live in peace. The Palestinians would simply rather Israel just die.
Finally, I do agree that the only definitve stop to the conflict will come when one of the two peoples has been completely annihilated. As of now, Israel has the weapons but not the will. Radicals like Hamas have the will but not the weapons. One day this equation will change. If peace is not achieved before that day when Hamas acquires the weapons for complete annihilation (with the help of Iran?), or Israel develops the will for complete annihilation, there will be so much blood spilled, we may look back at days like today with fondness.
“The Nakba was provoked by the creation of Israel,”
Israel has provoked many civilizations over these thousands of years long before YOU discovered it.
We are witnessing another generation of peoples who’s aim it is to wipe the memory of Israel and it’s people from the face of the earth. Many tried before, some thought they succeeded but lo and behold, there is Israel still there, it’s very existence a challenge to the world. Despite the efforts to change the name of the land, eject the people of the land, hunt them down in the lands they fled to, Israel is still there, always. No man and no man’s god will destroy them.