Monitoring Policy Making at the United Nations |
| ||||||||||||
Israel, Palestine and the Occupied Territories:
Land and Settlement Issues
Picture Credit: Uriel Sinai/Getty Images At the heart of the Israel/Palestine conflict lies the question of land and who rules it. The collision of Jewish nationalist colonisation and Palestian nationalism, both laying claim to the same territory, forms the basis of this long conflict, deepened by the tragedies of the Holocaust and of the dispossession and occupation of Palestine. The United Nations partition of the land in 1947, an effort to resolve the two claims simultaneously, did not result in a lasting settlement.
Since the war of 1967, Palestinians have come to accept the reality of Israel within the 1948 boundaries. The land dispute has increasingly focused on Israel's occupation of the remaining territories -- the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem. UN Resolutions 242 and 338 stipulate that Israel must withdraw completely from these territories. Israel has not withdrawn, however, and it has built many Jewish settlements in the territories, actions deemed illegal by virtually all other states. The Oslo Accords (1993) and the Road Map (2003) have failed to reach a land agreement between the parties or to bring Israeli withdrawal.
Since 2002, the Israeli government has been building a "security fence" that winds deep into Palestinian territory, claiming the barrier would keep Palestinian suicide bombers from striking Israeli citizens. But this separation wall is a major de facto annexation of Palestinian territories, as is Israel's continued settlement-building. The International Court of Justice has ruled that Israel's West Bank barrier violates international law, but the unequal struggle over the land of Palestine continues.
Click here for more maps and explanation.
Also See GPF's Pages on:
Israel, Palestine and the Occupied Territories
Maps
This B'Tselem map (March 2004) shows how the separation wall will trap a quarter of a million Palestinians in enclaves to the east and west of the main barrier, isolate approximately 200,000 Palestinians who live in East Jerusalem from the rest of the West Bank and separate over 100 Palestinian communities from their agricultural land. The barrier will severely infringe the rights of Palestinians and restrict their access to work, schools and medical treatments.
Click here for the full map (July 1, 2004).
The Monde Diplomatique outlines the terms of agreement of the Geneva Accords (December 2003). This map shows the borders, arrangements about Israeli withdrawal, settlements repatriation, and zones of respective sovereignty the initiative aims at. Click for larger image of map or go to the Monde Diplomatique page.
This map from the Foundation for Middle East Peace shows Israel's plans for its future borders with Palestinian territories in the West Bank as of July, 2003. The map shows large areas of annexations, settlements preserved and the long and circuitous route of the "security fence," creating implausible boundaries. Click for larger image of map.
Map of the Palestinian territories occupied by Israel since the war of 1967, which include the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem. Resolutions 242 and 338 stipulate that Israel must withdraw completely from both these territories. The Oslo Accords were supposed to serve as an initial step toward Israeli withdrawal, but instead, the agreement further fragmented the Palestinian population by confining Palestinians to non-contiguous enclaves and preventing travel to other parts of the West Bank, Gaza and Jerusalem. Click for larger image of map.
Detailed map of the West Bank, with divisions according to the 1993 Oslo Accords. In "Area A", the Palestinian Authority (PA) has full civilian and security control, but Israeli security forces continue to control the borders, making economic activity and travel virtually impossible. In Area B, the PA controls the day-to-day civil administration, while the PA and Israeli Defense Force (IDF) share security responsibilities. In Area C, the Israeli government has full control over the Palestinian population, controlling both the civil administration and police. The heavily guarded Israeli settlements function as colonies within Palestinian territory; Palestinians are expressly forbidden from entering them. Click for larger image of map.
The Oslo accords gave the Palestinian Authority nearly 60% control of the civil administration in the Gaza Strip. However, Palestinians are barred from entering the settlements and from using the roads reserved for Israelis. They are also completely cut off from Jerusalem--the center of Palestinian life. Click for larger image of map.
Under General Assembly Resolution 181, Jerusalem was supposed to be administered under a special UN international regime. Arab states rejected this internationalization, leaving West Jerusalem Israeli and East Jerusalem Palestinian. During the 1967 war, Israel occupied East Jerusalem and formally annexed it in 1980. Both Israel and the Palestinians claim Jerusalem as their capital. Click for larger image of map.
Articles & Analysis
2008
Fuel Crisis Halts Gaza Food Aid (April 24, 2008)
Israel’s blockade of fuel supplies to Gaza prevents UN agencies from delivering humanitarian assistance to Gaza, according to the BBC. The report states that Israel has prevented the delivery of petrol to Gaza since March 18, and diesel since April 2. UN Assistant Secretary General Angela Kane says that if Israel does not reinstate supplies of the fuel, the UN will reduce sewage disposal services, close hospitals and stop food assistance to 650,000 refugees in the territory.Palestinians Fear Two-Tier Road System (March 28, 2008)
The Israeli military is banning Palestinians from traveling on Route 443 in the West Bank for “security reasons.” Israel originally justified the legality of building highway 443 by claiming it would address the needs of the Palestinian people in the occupied territory. Forty thousand Israeli commuters now use the road daily. The New York Times notes that Israel continues to build illegal settlement in the West Bank, and that the barring of Palestinian access to transport constitutes a policy of “apartheid.”The Gaza Strip: A Humanitarian Implosion (March 6, 2008)
This joint NGO report urges Israel to lift its blockade on Gaza. Describing the occupied territory as a “humanitarian implosion,” the article demonstrates that Gaza lacks basic health services and that 80 percent of its inhabitants rely on international aid for their livelihood. The report concludes that Israel’s blockade constitutes collective punishment of ordinary men, women and children, which is illegal under international law.A Third of Settlements on Land Taken for “Security Purposes” (February 17, 2008)
More than one third of the West Bank Israeli settlements were built on private Palestinian land that was temporarily seized by military order for “security purposes,” according to this Haaretz source. The Defence Ministry had previously refused to release information on the issue, telling an Israeli court that publication “would damage the states security and foreign relations.” The report notes that the legality of the settlements is now in doubt within both Israeli and international law. The report also shows the falsehood of the Israeli assertion that “military necessity” justifies keeping the settlements in existence rather than returning the land to its Palestinian owners.Israel to Add Homes in East Jerusalem (February 13, 2008)
Israel has announced plans to build more than 1,100 apartments in disputed East Jerusalem, “triggering a new crisis in already troubled peace talks” this Associated Press report notes. The fate of the area is one of the sticking points of the Annapolis peace negotiations. Palestine hopes to establish an independent state that includes the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, with East Jerusalem as their capital. A Palestinian negotiator claimed that any further construction severely threatens the chances of reaching a final peace accord. Israel captured the area in the 1967 war, and has since built homes for over 180,000 Israelis on the site.Tyranny in Tar (January 31, 2008)
This article by, David Kretzmer, Professor of International Law at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, suggests that Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian territories is a “judicial hypocrisy.” The Israeli Supreme Court rules that Israeli military activity is lawful inside Palestinian territories only if it benefits the local Palestinian population. However, Kretzner notes that the military uses this legal framework to expand settlement activity in Palestine - by seizing real estate and land, placing severe restrictions on the local population, and constructing a highway in Gaza solely for the use of Israeli citizens. (Haaretz)
2007
Jewish Settler Outposts ‘Expanding’ (November 7, 2007)
Jewish settlements continue to expand in the West Bank now with the new method of mobile homes. The Israeli organization Peace Now released a report saying that the Israeli government allows these constructions, which violate international law and take Palestinian land. Yariv Oppenheimer, director of Peace Now stated that a two-state solution won’t be viable if Israel continues to violate Palestinian rights. Palestinians also believe that a “contiguous and viable” Palestinian State is increasingly unrealistic. (al-Jaazera)Israel Reduces Gaza Fuel Supplies (October 28, 2007)
Israel started to reduce oil and electricity supplies within the Gaza strip in response to attacks by Hamas in Israeli territory. Israeli human rights organizations and Palestinian civilians see these economic sanctions as illegal and in violation of international law. The Israeli government claims it will make efforts to help Palestinians civilians. However, the United Nations regards the fuel cuts as collective punishment against more than a million people. Israel’s deputy defense minister, Matan Vilnai suggested that Israel’s real motive is to separate Israel from the Gaza territory. (al-Jaazera)Ariel Sharon and the Geometry of Occupation: Temporary Permanence. (September 5, 2007)
Israel Prime Minister Ariel Sharon originally insisted that the Israeli barrier served merely as a “temporary border,” for “safety” purposes. In reality, the wall seems to be a long-term “frontier border” plan with grave results. This separation confines the Palestinian majority to designated areas and inhibits a possible Palestinian political order. A democratic outcome will be even harder to achieve. (openDemocracy)Israel Court: Redraw Route Barrier (September 5, 2007)
The Israeli separation wall has been cutting the Palestinian village of Bilin in two, disrupting the livelihood of the villagers and limiting access to land. After years of peaceful protests, villagers and Israeli peace groups have won a major victory. Israel’s Supreme Court contests the route of the wall and unanimously orders the return of 250 acres of farmland to the Bilin side. While the Israeli government claims that the wall serves to protect the territory from Palestinian suicide-bombers, it in fact adds more territory to the Israeli side. (Associated Press)The Judicial Arm of the Occupation: The Israeli Military Courts in the Occupied Territories (June 2007)
The Israeli government uses military tribunals to judge civilian cases in the Palestinian occupied territories, according to the International Review of the Red Cross. In the tribunals, a single judge can impose 10-year prison sentences on Palestinian suspects accused of undermining Israeli security. The author argues that the use of military tribunals in the occupied territories is unlawful under international humanitarian law and international human rights law, and that Israel uses the courts to extend “judicial domination” over the Palestinian people.
2006
Israeli Map Says West Bank Posts Sit on Arab Land (November 21, 2006)
This New York Times piece discusses the unresolved issues of land and settlement in the West Bank. According to a research based on Israeli government data, about 40 percent of Israeli settlements in the West Bank cover Palestinian-owned private land. The article points out that the lack of enforcement of court decisions favoring Palestinian ownership has encouraged Israeli settlement on private land.Full Text of the National Conciliation Document of the Prisoners (June 28, 2006)
To end division between their various factions and to establish a common front, Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails produced this “National Conciliation Document.” It proposes establishing a Palestinian State with East Jerusalem as its capital on all territories occupied in 1967. While the document offers implicit recognition of Israel by its endorsement of a two-state solution along the 1967 borders, a major policy change for Hamas, Tel Aviv rejected it for not explicitly recognizing Israel or denouncing terrorism. (Translation by Jerusalem Media and Communication Centre)Israel’s Half Plan (May 18, 2006)
The first Israeli government elected on a platform of dismantling settlements is looking to Washington rather than Ramallah to endorse its unilateral withdrawal plans. While removing Israelis from the patchwork of ethnic communities that currently make up the West Bank would pull “one foot from the quagmire,” this Washington Post article argues that setting the border at the security barrier, and therefore retaining a slice of the West Bank, would “push the other leg deeper into the quicksand.” The imposition of a boundary by Israel without Palestinian agreement will not end the dispute over land.Israel Starts Work On New Settlement (March 16, 2006)
The Israeli government has begun to develop facilities for what could turn into the largest settlement project in the West Bank since 1967. In addition to 3550 settler units, the planned development would include a road network, six hotels and a park. According to a settlement expert, the project would cut off Jerusalem from its Arab surroundings and kill any chance for a viable Palestinian state in the West Bank. Israel calls the demographic expansion “natural growth” but Palestinian officials accuse Israel of embarking on a new phase of “large-scale theft of land.” The Palestinian Authority warned that if the Quartet allowed Israel to carry out the new settlement expansion plan, the two-state solution would be doomed. (Aljazeera)
2005
Palestine: The Forgotten Reality (December 2005)
Israel’s withdrawal from the Gaza Strip does not change the fact that Israel remains an occupying power and Palestinians continue to live under occupation. The US and EU create the “illusion” that the peace process depends on the Palestinians, while ignoring Israel’s violation of international law. Le Monde diplomatique believes the international community should cut military ties with Israel - the fourth largest military exporter in the world - until it adheres to the Road Map peace plan.Secret British Document Accuses Israel (November 25, 2005)
A confidential document from the British Foreign Office indicates that the construction of the West Bank barrier and the establishment of Jewish settlements around Jerusalem are policies designed by Israel to prevent the city from becoming a Palestinian capital. The document, which states that "Israeli activities in Jerusalem are in violation of both its Roadmap (peace plan) obligations and international law," calls for tougher EU action to counter the Israeli campaign. To view the official document, click here. (Guardian)Israel's "Disengagement": The Day After (September 8, 2005)
In this report, the Palestinian NGO Network (PNGO) argues that the Israeli disengagement does not constitute an end to Israel's military occupation of Palestinian land. They believe that “Jerusalem is being turned into an isolated island and is being de facto annexed to Israel in violation of international law.” PNGO is thereby calling on the UN Security Council to compel Israel to abide by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) Advisory Opinion ruling that Israel's Separation and Annexation Wall is contrary to international law.Next up for Israeli Bulldozers: Outposts? (August 26, 2005)
Following the Gaza disengagement, the Israeli government must evacuate the 2,000 Israelis who live in 101 illegal outposts in the West Bank, according to the Christian Science Monitor. Indeed, the US sees the outposts as a threat to the territorial integrity of a future Palestinian state, and made dismantling them a key stipulation in the "road map" peace plan.Israel Confirms Plan to Seize West Bank Land for Barrier (August 25, 2005)
With the media focused on the Gaza disengagement, the Israeli government has given orders for its forces to extend the West Bank barrier and include a large Jewish settlement, Maale Adumim. Palestinian authorities reiterate their past warnings that the barrier violates international law, hinders free movement of Palestinians in the area, and infringes upon land for their future state. (New York Times)Disengagement and the Politics of Post-National Realism (August 17, 2005)
The Gaza disengagement is a “smokescreen” for freezing the peace process, and the two-state solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict will intensify instead of pacify racial injustice, contends ZNet. Additionally, the author says Palestinian right of return must include authority over laws and allow for Palestinian cultural identity to flourish. This “fundamental change in the political orientation” of the Palestinian solidarity movement, aligning it more with the successful South African anti-apartheid movement, may be “the only viable alternative to either the cultural death of the Palestinian people or a repeat of the catastrophe that befell them in the war of 1948.”Disengagement, Where Would It Lead To? (August 16, 2005)
This International Middle East Media Center article suspects that the Gaza disengagement overshadows Israel’s “attempt to legalize the occupation of the West Bank.” Israel has managed to “market” its actions as an end to the occupation, and thus won even more support from the US. But this author criticizes US concessions and warns that “there is no hope for a future Palestinian state” if the disengagement does not spur further withdrawals in the West Bank.Meanwhile, Israel Grabs the Rest of Jerusalem (August 11, 2005)
According to Hind Khoury, the Palestinian Authority's Minister of State for Jerusalem Affairs, Israel’s strategy behind the disengagement consists in consolidating its occupation of Jerusalem's eastern Palestinian sector. Indeed, Israel insists on retaining control over the whole of Jerusalem and rejects Palestinian compromises to share the city on equal terms. But without Jerusalem as a shared capital, a negotiated two-state solution has slim chances to pave the way towards peace between Palestinians and Israelis. (International Herald Tribune)Gaza Will Be "Vacated but still Occupied" (July 28, 2005)
Despite optimism from Palestinian and Israeli officials, many Palestinians fear that the impending August 17, 2005 Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip will do little to enhance their freedom. Rather, Israel’s army will maintain control of the borders, airports, seaports and natural resources around Gaza, virtually rendering the area as "one big prison" for Palestinians. (Inter Press Service)Palestinians Take Israeli Barrier to UN Security Council (July 21, 2005)
Speaking at a UN Security Council briefing on the Middle East, Palestinian Ambassador Somaia Barghouti said Israel was focusing attention on its Gaza withdrawal while underhandedly pushing its “expansionist colonialist plan” via the wall in occupied Jerusalem. UN Envoy for the Middle East Alvaro de Soto urged both sides to develop a framework agreement for the Gaza pullout that would ensure security for Israelis and hope for Palestinians. (Voice of America)Palestinians Ask UN to Act over W. Bank Barrier (July 11, 2005)
One day after Israel renewed construction of the wall in the West Bank, Palestinian Foreign Minister Nasser al-Kidwa asked the UN to help impose “punitive measures against entities, companies and individuals” participating in construction. Sanctions are unlikely due to US veto power on the Council, but Reuters suggests that General Assembly recommendations could lead to boycotts “similar to those used effectively against South Africa over apartheid.”One Year After ICJ Ruling, Israel OKs Wall in Jerusalem (July 10, 2005)
Israel continues to disregard the ruling of the International Court of Justice by restarting construction and calling for “immediate completion” of a wall around West Bank and East Jerusalem settlements. This Electronic Intifada article warns that such a wall violates international law and will further disrupt the lives of thousands of Palestinians living in and around the disputed areas.Letter from Swiss Ambassador to the General Assembly on the Israel-Palestine Conflict (July 5, 2005)
After the year-long task of serving as a “depositary of the Geneva Conventions” to monitor Israeli compliance with international law, Swiss Ambassador to the UN Peter Maurer declares that “Israel’s occupation of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, is not taking place in a legal void. International humanitarian law […] must be respected.” This report supports the International Court of Justice ruling on the wall and suggests dual dialogue groups to mediate between the Israeli government and the Palestinian Authority instead of a previously suggested conference of parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention.Israeli Court Stops Gaza Pullout Challenge (June 9, 2005)
Israel’s Supreme Court has declared Prime Minister Sharon’s planned Gaza withdrawal constitutional, but the removal of legal obstacles has had little impact on domestic opposition. Israeli settlers in Gaza remain determined to force parliament to drop the evacuation, and threaten to upset an agreement with the Palestinian authorities “to prevent violence or chaos during the operation”. Meanwhile, Palestinian officials claim that that Sharon’s “co-ordination efforts” are poor, and a new round of violence has increased fears “that the cease-fire would collapse” during the evacuation. (Associated Press)Israeli Seizure of Land and Housing Has Made a Two-State Solution Impossible (May 11, 2005)
A report by two NGOs working on Palestinian housing and land rights asserts that Israeli governments “manipulate…the Israeli legal system” and use military aggression “to dispossess Palestinians of…land and property.” This strategy has enabled the Israeli government to own, use or control “nearly 90% of the land within both Israel and the Occupied Territories.” According to the report, “a viable Palestinian state would hardly be feasible given the shortage of available land and infrastructure and the lack of territorial contiguity.” (Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions and BADIL Resource Center for Palestinian Residency and Refugee Rights)The Game Is Up (March 10, 2005)
A report on the outposts in the Israeli occupied territories reveals that settlements expanded as a result of a government-constructed difference in definition of the terms "outpost" and "settlement." By referring to illegal settlements as "outposts", the Israeli government created an illusion of "a temporary [settlement] of a security nature." According to this Haaretz editorial, the underlying intention was, however, to enlarge the existing settlements and prevent the emergence of a Palestinian state.Ariel Sharon and the Jordan Option (March 2005)
This piece from Middle East Report Online analyzes the logic behind Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's unilateral disengagement plan and argues that the plan frees Israel of the Roadmap. The plan allows Israel to negotiate the peace process on its own terms and secure "territorial assets it deems vital." Sharon does not believe in a two-state solution to the conflict in the Middle East, and hopes that the new Palestinian state in Gaza and large parts of the West Bank will eventually unite with Jordan. Once completed, Sharon's security barrier will cut off Palestinians from Israel, and leave them with no choice but to adopt Amman as the "new Jerusalem."Move to Annex Settlements Overshadows Israeli Cabinet's Approval of Gaza Pullout (February 21, 2005)
The Israeli cabinet has authorized Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's evacuation plan, reinforcing the illegality of Jewish settlements in Gaza and the West Bank. The decision yields power to the Israeli army to forcibly remove settlers who refuse to leave the West Bank and some settlements in Gaza voluntarily and foresees prison sentences of up to two years for those who resist. Palestinians fear the Gaza withdrawal measures amount to no more than a "cover to annex the major Jewish settlements to Israel" and to justify the West Bank security fence route. (Guardian)Israeli Aide Bars Policy of Seizing Arab Land (February 2, 2005)
Israel's attorney general Menachem Mazuz has ruled against implementation of the 50-year old Absentee Property Law, which the Israeli government approved in the summer of 2004. The law would have allowed Israel to seize Palestinian property in East Jerusalem but faces "many legal difficulties, including Israel's obligations according to the rules of customary international law." The decision protects so called "present absentees" who have no property rights because of the 'broad, technical formulation of the law." (New York Times)Palestinians Fear East Jerusalem Land Grab (January 25, 2005)
Following the publication of a new government policy report in the daily Ha'aretz, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon acknowledged the secret ratification of a new land confiscation measure approved in July 2004. Israel has labeled the new law "a security issue, not a property issue," denying that the land grab of Palestinian-owned property in East Jerusalem is "state theft, pure and simple." The measure will deny West Bank-based Palestinian landowners access to their property inside the Jerusalem borders. (New York Times)The Only Way Is Out (January 17, 2005)
This article argues that Palestinians will not benefit from Israel's unilateral withdrawal from Gaza. Israeli settlements in the West Bank will continue to grow, and violence will increase when Israeli settlers refuse to leave Gaza. Ultimately, Israelis in Gaza must either evacuate or agree to live under Palestinian Authority jurisdiction. Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's "disengagement plan" will unlikely result in a long-term solution. (bitterlemons.org)The Truth About Camp David (January 11, 2005)
This article questions why the 2000 Arab-Israeli peace talks at Camp David collapsed, and refutes a mainstream argument that portrays Arafat as the "villain." Arafat could not accept a "generous deal" in Gaza and the West Bank if it implied denying 1.2 billion Muslims access to the holy site of Temple Mount in Jerusalem. But according to a former CIA officer and adviser to George Tenet, the "status quo theory" that Arafat "couldn't get what he wanted and so he chose the path of violence" is "a lie." (Aljazeera)Annan Takes First Steps on Barrier Claims (January 11, 2005)
Following up on a July 2004 General Assembly resolution, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan has outlined a framework establishing a register for Palestinians who wish to submit damage claims and receive adequate compensation. The register will include damage claims resulting from the building of Israel's barrier. The same resolution urged Israel to demolish the wall dividing the Jewish State from Palestinian Territories, but its non-binding nature has rendered the resolution ineffective. (Associated Press)
2004
‘Disengagement’ Will Not End Gaza Occupation (October 29, 2004)
Human Rights Watch asserts that Israel's plan to remove settlers and troops from Gaza will not end Israeli occupation. Israel will continue to control Gaza's coastline, borders and airspace as well as telecommunications, water, electricity and sewage networks. In addition, Israel's "overwhelming power over the territory's economy and its access to trade" could lead to a worsened economy in Gaza following withdrawal. International law, including the Geneva Convention, contradicts the plan's assertion that "disengagement" absolves Israel of any responsibility for Palestinians living in Gaza."Fateful Moment" (October 27, 2004)
Israel's Parliament voted in favor of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's "disengagement plan" which will remove approximately 8,000 settlers, mostly from the Gaza Strip. The cabinet, however, still has to approve four stages of withdrawal and observers say Likud opponents will likely block the withdrawal. Palestinians suspect that Israel is using the plan to tighten its grip on the West Bank and Jerusalem where approximately 420,000 settlers live, even as Hamas hails the disengagement as a "victory for Palestinian resistance." (Guardian)EU Opposed to More Talks on Fence at UN (September 15, 2004)
EU diplomats oppose a PLO initiative for renewed deliberations on Israel's security "fence" in the General Assembly. Diplomats call the discussions "exhausted" and advise moving on to political talks between the Palestinian Authority and Israel. Arab diplomats also oppose talks for fear of jeopardizing Palestinian gains made in the ICJ ruling against the fence and the subsequent General Assembly call for the fence's demolition. (Haaretz)Key Settlement Blocs to Stay Inside Fence (September 9, 2004)
Following a June High Court injunction, the Israeli legal and defense establishments are hammering out a new route for the security "fence" that attempts to mitigate damage done to local Palestinians. Although some parts of the wall will be rerouted to adhere to pre-1967 lines, at least three large settlement blocs will remain on the Israeli side. (Haaretz)Cracking Under the Strain (August 26 - September 1, 2004)
Israel is beset by internal fears of international censure over the security wall and the occupied territories. The Non-Aligned Movement has urged member states to impose sanctions and many expect the General Assembly to push for sanctions against Israel when it meets in September. The EU will likely pressure Israel to return to the peace process in upcoming negotiations on the Wider European Initiative. Israel, however, continues to violate international law amidst political in-fighting. (Al-Ahram Weekly)Legal Team Recommends Applying Fourth Geneva Convention (August 24, 2004)
An Israeli Justice Ministry team recommends that the government apply the Fourth Geneva Convention to the occupied territories and reroute the security wall to adhere more closely to the Green Line. The Ministry expressed nervousness over the possibility that the International Court of Justice ruling on the wall "could serve as a basis for anti-Israel activity in international forums, and could even lead to sanctions." (Haaretz)Water Wall (August 19, 2004)
Does water run beneath Israeli construction of the wall in the West Bank? Abdel Rahman Tamimi argues that Israel has long exploited water resources at the expense of Palestinians and points out, "the course of the wall neatly takes in the main basin of the Western Aquifer." An Israeli grip on water resources in the region will weaken the Palestinian agricultural industry and strengthen Israel's hold on the land, including settlements in the occupied territories. (Bitterlemons)Sharon Rips Up 'Road-Map' with Plan for 1,001 New Settler Homes (August 18, 2004)
The Sharon government issued tenders for 1,001 new government-subsidized settler homes, sparking international concern over the seriousness of Sharon's commitment to the Road Map for peace. The new tenders violate the Road Map stipulation for a "total building freeze." Skeptics see Sharon's move as a way to appease right-wing critics of his plan to withdraw from the Gaza Strip. (Independent)One UN, Two Fences (July 25, 2004)
Israel used UN decisions to legitimate its fence along the Israel-Lebanon border and its possession of the Shaba farms. The country's rejection of the General Assembly's decision against the separation wall therefore demonstrates Israel's policy of accepting UN resolutions only when politically convenient. (Haaretz)Just Say No to Vetoes (July 19, 2004)
The impact of the International Court of Justice’s ruling on the illegality of Israel’s wall extends far beyond Israel and Palestine. This article argues that the Court’s holdings “chart a path for the international community to counter the United States’ veto power” by appealing to the Court and to binding international law. (New York Times)Palestinians Plan UN Resolution on Barrier (July 11, 2004)
Palestinian leaders are writing a General Assembly resolution pressing Israel to comply with the World Court’s ruling against the barrier in the West Bank. Despite the limited scope of action possible in the General Assembly, these leaders remain uncertain about whether to refer the issue to the Security Council. The United States would be likely to use its veto power to prevent the Security Council from implementing the Court’s decision. (Independent)High Court Tells Israelis to Shift Part of Barrier (June 30, 2004)
The Israeli Supreme Court ordered the country’s army to remove and reroute certain sections of the wall being built in the West Bank, arguing that the hardships caused to Palestinians were not “proportional to security needs” of Israel. Yet the ruling represented only a partial victory for Palestinians because the court “did give approval to the idea of the fence.” (New York Times)Withdrawal from Gaza (March 3, 2004)
This article argues that the real intention of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to unilaterally dismantle settlements in the Gaza Strip is to relocate settlers to another occupied zone in the West Bank. Such an attempt is only likely to "complicate an already complicated situation" and make "peace with the Palestinians recede further into the background." (Asahi Shimbun)Israeli Court Hears Barrier Case (February 9, 2004)
The Supreme Court of Israel has heard a petition from two Israeli human rights groups against the barrier Israel is building in the West Bank. The groups denounced any construction on occupied land as unlawful and urged the Israeli government to re-route the barrier so as not to disrupt the lives of thousands of Palestinians. (BBC)
More Information on the Security Council
Back to Israel/Palestine Index
