Doc's Talk: Lords of the Land

Friday, August 07, 2009

Lords of the Land

The War over Israel's Settlements in the Occupied Territories, 1967-2007
by Idith Zertal and Akiva Eldar
New York: Nation Books, 2007. 531 pp. $30.
Reviewed by Moshe Dann

Middle East Quarterly
Spring 2009, pp. 84-85
http://www.meforum.org/2140/lords-of-the-land

Disagreements about the legitimacy of Israeli settlements, their effect on Israeli politics, and whether they are "obstacles to peace" are hotly-debated questions. A fair-minded and accurate discussion of the issues would be welcome. But Zertal, a historian at University of Basel, and Eldar, a columnist at Ha'aretz, authors of Lords of the Land, offer only a one-sided perspective to such questions as: How did Israel's settlement movement attract such overwhelming support across ideological and party lines, and what has been its impact on Israeli society? The authors did little original research, instead relying on select left-wing newspaper articles, secondary sources, and tendentious reports. A book written on the premises of such material predictably blames Israel for almost everything. The authors argue that settlements are the primary cause of the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians, have undermined the rule of law, have subverted the democratic decision-making process in Israel, and "have brought Israeli democracy to the brink of an abyss."

Their book presents three major arguments: First, settlers tricked every Israeli government into acceding to their demands; second, settlers "stole Palestinian land" in the West Bank and Gaza; and third, Israel's "occupation" of these territories is illegal. The first charge is a conspiracy theory; the second and third rely on distortion and misinformation. Ironically, their arguments are often self refuting.

"The settlements," the authors contend, "flourished not only with the authorities' seal of approval but also with official encouragement and at the government's initiative." Yet, they themselves document the democratic and transparent process: budgets that were approved, allocated, and accounted properly; money spent to help citizens; banks that lent mortgages; residents who paid taxes, and municipal services provided. Everything was done legally, which explains why no criminal charges have ever been brought against anyone who assisted settlement-building.

All Israeli governments have supported settlements—which were permitted by the Oslo accords—because these reflected an Israeli consensus and, at least initially, enjoyed the backing of U.N. resolutions: U.N. Security Council resolution 242 (1967) demanded only that Israel "withdraw from territories" it conquered—deliberately omitting "the" to indicate Israel's right to settle in those territories.

By cherry-picking sources, Zertal and Eldar ill portray the nuance of the Israeli debate. Although the authors insist that "a majority of the country" is against settlements, recent polls show that 54 percent of Israeli Jews back settlements. Few would abandon settlements and return to the Green Line (the 1949 border), the "two-state solution."[1]

The authors' condemnation of settlements as violations of international law is based on the Fourth Geneva convention, which states that "Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory to the territory of the Occupying Power or to that of any other country … are prohibited … The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies."[2] Article 2 of the Fourth Geneva Convention states that it applies "to cases of partial or total occupation of the territory of a High Contracting Party." But the West Bank and Gaza were not the territory of a High Contracting Party, so the convention is not applicable. Jordan's occupation of the West Bank was invalid under international law, as only Great Britain and Pakistan recognized it. And while Egypt occupied the Gaza Strip, it never laid claim to the region.

More problematic is the authors' charge that Jews "stole Palestinian lands," in reference to territory captured by Israel in 1967. This includes vast areas of "state land," unclaimed and designated as such under Ottoman/Turkish, British, and Jordanian rule. Palestine was never a sovereign, independent entity; the concept of a Palestinian people did not exist until quite recently. To suggest the entire West Bank is Palestinian accepts at face value a maximalist Palestinian claim that is not grounded in international law.

Using incomplete sources and unverified Arab claims, Zertal and Eldar wrongly state that most Israeli settlements were built on "private Palestinian land." A typical example of such inaccuracy was Peace Now's claim that 85 percent of Maale Adumim, a settlement a few kilometers east of Jerusalem, was built on private Palestinian land. Reported as fact by all major media at the time, the official figure turned out to be less than 1 percent.[3] Most Arab claims cannot be substantiated or verified.

Likewise, Zertal and Eldar mischaracterize the parameters of the debate over so-called outposts, relatively new hilltop settlements. Despite Zertal and Eldar's blanket characterization of illegality, nearly all of the hundred or so sites are within the legal boundaries established by the government for communities. Moreover, it appears that authorization and approval were implicit when government ministries and public institutions including the Israel Defense Forces were involved.

Israel's repossession of its ancient homeland is unique in history. It did not acquire territory belonging to another country and, therefore, has not violated international law. Arabs were not dispossessed in 1967; Jews were allowed to build communities, significantly, in areas that had once been Jewish (e.g., Gush Etzion, Jerusalem, Hebron) and in areas many of which have biblical significance (e.g. Shilo, Bet El, Shechem/Nablus). The integrity of the state of Israel and the right of Jewish settlement, included in U.N. resolution 242, has been amply defended. The settlement issue, moreover, was never included in any negotiated agreement between Israel and the Palestinians.

Lords of the Land feeds the neurosis of Palestinian victimhood, a mindset that fuels terrorism and prevents the development of any positive alternatives. Promoting the notion that Jews "illegally occupy" and "steal Palestinian land" supports a libel that legitimizes terrorism and provides an excuse for genocide. Why, then, such hostility to Israeli settlements?

Blaming Israel for Palestinian terrorism and the failed peace process is irrational. Giving Palestinian terrorism political, economic, and social dimensions attempts to make sense out of the absurd, to explain what is so profoundly anti-human. Unable to accept terrorism, Zertal and Eldar transform the ideological and theological onslaught against Jews and a nominally Jewish state into a simpleminded dispute over land: land-for-peace and the two-state-solution.

Moshe Dann is a writer and journalist living in Jerusalem and a former assistant professor of history at the City University of New York.As historian Benny Morris observes:

It has become clear to me that from its start, the struggle against the Zionist enterprise wasn't merely a national conflict between two peoples over a piece of territory, but also a religious crusade against an infidel usurper.[4]

Endnotes

1. UN Resolution 242 (1967) demands that Israel "withdraw from territories" it conquered - deliberately omitting "the", to indicate Israel's right to settle in those territories, and, of course, only in the context of full peace and security.

2. In March 2005, Talia Sasson, a former Justice Ministry official and critic of settlements, submitted a report on outposts commissioned by then PM Ariel Sharon in which she charged collusion between government and public bodies to enable "illegal" building in outposts and settlements. Working closely with Peace Now, based on faulty maps and information, she determined that most of the outposts were built on land "part or all of which did not belong to the state"; this was subsequently proved false and misleading. Much of Zertal and Eldar's "evidence" is based on this and similar reports.

Guest Comment: REMEMBER YOUR ARGUMENT: The integrity of the state of Israel and the right of Jewish settlement, included in U.N. resolution 242, has been amply defended!

One more "master piece" written by Jewish left, based on cherry-picking sources that end up as deceitful propaganda that feeds the neurosis of Palestinian 'victimhood,' brings about a mindset that fuels terrorism, supports a libel that legitimizes terrorism, provides an excuse for genocide and prevents the development of any positive alternatives, if there are any.

When the left needs to make his case they elevate the culprit to the level of the victim and them blame the victim for what the culprit has done to him/her (Blaming Israel for Palestinian terrorism and the failed peace process)…a book written on such premise is predictable to be skewed and blame Israel for almost everything! This is the Arab mentality the Left has…ironically, their arguments are often self refuting. I guess this book will not make the Best Seller list after all!

Israel's repossession of its ancient homeland is unique in history! Ironically it did not acquire territory belonging to another country because God saved it for his children all those years waiting for them to come and settle on their promised land. AND I forgot, no use of the derogative word settlement is allowed; it is Israeli hometowns!

---
With Kind Regards,
Nurit

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk