Israeli Settlements an Obstacle to Peace? (GateStone Institute) by Michael Curtis 07/23/12)
Source: http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3184/israeli-settlements-obstacle-to-peace
GateStone Institute
GateStone Institute Articles-Index-Top
Publishers-Index-Top
For four centuries the West Bank and east Jerusalem, were provinces
of the Turkish Ottoman Empire; after that, from 1922 until 1948, they
were ruled by Britain under the Mandate given it by the League of
Nations. These areas have never been under any Arab sovereignty. The
Palestinians have never had a political state of their own; and when
offered the opportunity to create one by the United Nations General
Assembly in 1947, refused to create one.
One does not have to be
an apologist for Israeli settlements in
disputed areas to recognize that the constant criticism that has
developed around them is unproductive in reaching a peace settlement
between Israel and its Arab neighbors. The settlements may be a
problem but they are not a serious one. Altogether, they occupy less
than three percent of the area of the West Bank, and have a
population of about 300,000 there, another 20,000 in the Golan
Heights, and 190,000 in east Jerusalem, Israelīs capital. Whether
some or many of these settlements will be evacuated by Israel should
depend on the nature of the negotiated peace agreement.
In spite
of the settlement freeze suggested by Israeli Prime Minister
Ehud Olmert in 2008, and the ten-month moratorium on new construction
announced by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in 2010, the
Palestinians still refused, for over nine months, to enter into peace
talks.
The immediate problem is the question of who can
legitimately claim
sovereignty over the disputed areas of east Jerusalem and the "West
Bank," a term coined by Jordan when it controlled the area from 1949
until 1967. For over four centuries, these areas were provinces of
the Turkish Ottoman Empire; after that, from 1922 until 1948, they
were ruled by Britain under the Mandate given it by the League of
Nations. The areas have never been under any Arab
sovereignty.
Jordan declared it had "annexed" the West Bank
after the 1948-49 War.
Only two countries, Pakistan and Britain, ever recognized that claim;
and Britain only de facto, not by full legal recognition. The
Palestinians have never had a political state of their own and, when
offered the opportunity by the United Nations General Assembly in
November 1947, refused to create one. The Golan Heights, about 400
square miles, was ceded to Syria by a Franco-British
agreement.
The boundaries of "Palestine," and the decision about
the exercise of
sovereign power over it, remain to be determined in an overall peace
settlement, as agreed to by all parties concerned in the UN Security
Council Resolution 242 of November 1967.
As the West Bank and
the Gaza Strip were unallocated parts of the
British Mandate, the land held by Israel since the 1967 was
determined not to be the accepted legal territory of any particular
people or country. Moreover, Jewish settlement in the West Bank was
never seen as an intrusion into alien territory as a result of war,
nor as a violation of international agreements -- either of which
would have made settlements illegal.
International law gives no
clear answer on the issue of Israeli
settlements. The Fourth Geneva Convention does forbid government
deportation or "individual or mass forcible transfers" of population
into territory it occupies. This Convention was formulated because of
the activities during World War II of the Nazi regime, and by
inference the Soviet Union, in transferring population into occupied
territory for political or racial reasons, or for colonization. As a
result of those activities, millions were subjected to forced
migration, expulsion, slave labor, and extermination. On this issue
two factors are pertinent. One is that Israeli governments have not
aimed at any displacement of the population in any of the disputed
areas. The other is that neither the Geneva Convention nor any other
law prevents the establishment of voluntary settlements on an
individual basis, nor on their location, if the underlying purpose is
security, public order, or safety, and as long as the settlements do
not involve taking private property. It is absurd to suggest that the
state of Israel "deported" or "transferred" its own citizens to the
territories.
This conclusion was buttressed by a report, in July
2012, of the
independent Israeli three-member committee, headed by former Supreme
Court Justice Edmund Levy, which held that the classic laws
of "occupation" do not apply to "the unique and sui generis historic
and legal circumstances of Israelīs presence in Judea and Samaria
spanning over decades." The committee held that consequently Israelis
have the legal right to settle in Judea and Samaria, and that the
establishment of settlements is not illegal.
Israel has made
concessions in the hopes of peace, although scant
recognition has been given to them. Israel withdrew all forces and
settlers in Sinai after the peace treaty with Egypt in 1979. All 21
Israeli settlements, with 9,000 residents, in the Gaza Strip, as well
as all Israeli forces there, were withdrawn by a unilateral Israeli
decision in 2005, to give the Gaza Strip a chance to become a
thriving independent area. This withdrawal did not, however, result
in any positive response, and has not stopped Hamas, the ruling group
in Gaza, from constant missile bombardment and missile activity
against Israeli civilians in nearby cities.
The settlements in
the West Bank, east Jerusalem, and the Golan
Heights remain as a source of contention, whether regarded as illegal
or merely ill-advised. Certainly there should be legitimate
discussion about them and about the actions of the Israeli government
in legitimizing unauthorized outposts in the West Bank. The
government distinguishes between the settlements that have been
officially sanctioned, and outposts, some on hilltops for security
reasons, for example, that settlers built without permission. Between
1991 and 2005 about 100 hilltop outposts were built by activists who
believed they were creating "facts on the ground," but did so without
government permits or planning approval.
Israeli authorities are
concerned about abuses regarding settlements.
The Israeli Supreme Court in June 2012 ordered the dismantling of an
outpost named Migron , that contained 50 families, a settlement that
had been built on private Arab land. Legal decisions have made clear
that settlements were never intended to displace Arab residents of
the disputed territories. The settlements have been established for a
combination of economic, historic, and military reasons, not ever for
purposes of colonialism, or even colonization. A negotiated peace
settlement between Israel and the Palestinians can easily decide
their fate.
Return to Top
MATERIAL REPRODUCED FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY