This past Tuesday, here in
Jerusalem, the Women in Green -- joined now by some other groups --
sponsored their third annual conference: Application of Israeli Sovereignty over
Judea and Samaria.
The turnout was incredible.
Not only did it exceed numbers for the previous two conferences by a good deal,
planners had to move the venue because registration was so robust. And
even in that larger venue the hall was packed. This provides strong
evidence for what I have been saying -- that the Israeli populace is moving
right, and is, indeed, weary with notions of a "two-state
solution."
~~~~~~~~~~
If there was an over-arching
message delivered by speakers (many, not all) it is that sovereignty is
something that has to be approached in stages. It is simply not realistic
to imagine that the Israeli government is going to get up one fine morning and
declare all of Judea and Samaria annexed and fully part of Israel.
What is important, first of all,
is the stimulation of public discourse on the issues. People just do not
understand, do not have solid information.
It falls to those of use
who do understand, and do wish to promote sovereignty, to create the atmosphere
for dialogue. And that dialogue must be advanced rationally, via
the sharing of facts, and not emotions.
~~~~~~~~~~
And then, there are measures that
might be taken to move the process along. Speakers differ on exactly what
those measures should be: application of civil law to all of the Jewish
communities in Judea and Samaria; annexation of area C; etc..
~~~~~~~~~~
Yuli Edelstein (Likud), Minister
of Public Diplomacy and Diaspora Affairs, suggested that without
initiatives such as the current conference, the issue would not arise
on the government's agenda.
Credit:
Israelfrontline
Edelstein warned that application
of sovereignty would not automatically resolve international challenges couched
in legal language. But sovereignty would send the world a message,
none-the-less.
It is easier to face the
international community when we are united by a consensus, he observed.
The problem now, however, is that the government sends an ambivalent message
instead of stating clearly that we have rights over our land.
He sees several scenarios being
pushed: The far left is ideological and sees the need to relinquish land
to the Arabs for ethical reasons. The pragmatic left concedes that we have
rights to the land, but says that in the current international climate we have
no choice but to concede it.
An optimistic scenario to the
right of these positions says that we must approach the situation in stages, and
this is what he supports. To the right of this are groups not content with
stages and pushing for immediate sovereignty as an expression of our
rights.
~~~~~~~~~~
Yari Levin (Likud), Chair of the
Knesset House Committee, warned that we must not confuse historical merit in
terms of our claim to the land, which is solid, with a legislative process,
that is going to take time.
Credit:
Indynews
What we can do, says Levin, is
apply Israeli law to all those Jews living in Judea and Samaria, put in
place laws that permit Jewish development in Judea and Samaria, and
pass other constructive legislation that will apply to all of Judea and
Samaria.
(As to laws that permit Jewish
development in Judea and Samaria, there is a great deal to say --- I have
already touched upon this in several contexts but expect to be revisiting it in
greater detail with regard to the Levy Report. The bias against Jewish
development is currently horrendous.)
Levin is adamant in his opinion
that there should be no singling out of major settlement blocs. Any
legislation put in place must apply to all Jewish
communities in Judea and Samaria.
Following this, there should
be an attempt to apply full Israeli law to all of Judea and Samaria. But now we
must advance plans by building another school and another house.
~~~~~~~~~~
Moshe Feiglin heads the Jewish
Leadership faction in Likud and is currently on Likud's list.
Credit:
gavrielsanders
Feiglin made an extremely
important point, and one we cannot afford to lose sight of: We have to pay
attention to places where we are supposed to already have sovereignty, but are
losing it. This is true in communities such as Lod, where there are
neighborhoods that Arabs have taken over.
And it is particularly true on Har
Habayit -- the Temple Mount. The attorney general has said that Israeli
law applies on the Mount, and the High Court has said Jews have a right to pray
there. But the police have determined that Jewish praying on the Mount
will foment Arab violence and thus have forbidden it.
Earlier on the day of the
conference, Feiglin went up on the Mount, as he regularly does, bowed down and
began to pray, and was promptly arrested by the policeman who had been following
him.
Every time I write about this sort
of incident, I find myself ashamed to the core. This is not how a Jewish
government should be managing matters on the site that is the holiest to the
Jewish people simply in order to appease or avoid confrontation with
Arabs. And, indeed, perhaps we need to raise our voices and promote activism on
this issue before we talk about annexing Judea and Samaria.
It's all of a piece, of
course. A government that does not have the courage to protect sovereignty
on the Mount is not going to promote legislation for sovereignty in Judea and
Samaria.
~~~~~~~~~~
Adv. Alan Baker, an international
lawyer, former Israeli ambassador to Canada, and a member of the Edmund Levy
Committee, which issued the Levy Report, spoke about that report.
Credit:
lawubc
What he had to say was exceedingly
important. His presentation touches upon so much however, that I want to
return to examine it in greater detail on another day.
The mandate of the three-person
Levy Committee was to examine the status of Judea and Samaria and to
recommend ways to deal with the land.
This was with regard to
considering the highly ambiguous situation that pertains there, not with an eye
to legalizing illegal construction. An important point must be made,
however: Former prime minister Sharon had mandated Talia Sasson with
examining the situation in Judea and Samaria, as well. Her report was
never formally adopted by an Israeli government. But she made a list of
outposts that had been constructed without full authorization -- they were
"unauthorized" -- and changed the term to "illegal" (which is not the same
thing). The concept of "illegal outposts" was then adopted by the international
community.
For a long time, there was a
freeze on construction that prevented the issuance of permits. There
was no possibility of continuing construction with full authorization (with all
proper signatures). Construction done in this manner was termed
"illegal."
The over-riding question is
whether Israel has rights in Judea and Samaria on the ground. Is Israeli
presence there "illegal"?
The committee examined the
idea that public lands -- not privately owned -- in Judea and Samaria were
automatically Arab and rejected this approach. Ottoman,
Jordanian, Israeli and international law were considered in depth.
We do not have
"occupation" in the sense implied by international law because we did not move
onto the land of a legal sovereign. Our situation is sui
generis, which means one of a kind -- without precedent or basis in
international law.
The committee rejected
completely application of the Fourth Geneva Convention.
We are the indigenous
people in this region. After examining the legal history, the
committee concluded that the Jewish people has well established rights
that cannot be negated or denied. We are talking here about San
Remo, the Balfour Declaration and more. These declarations are treaty
statements.
Instead of apologizing, we
should state our rights. People simply don't know.
The land is not Palestinian --
there is no document that gives the Arabs the right to the land. What
we are dealing with is "disputed" land, not "occupied Palestinian
territory."
The committee hopes the next
government will relate seriously to the Levy Report.
More to follow, including on the
Levy recommendations.
~~~~~~~~~~
Ze'ev Elkin (Likud), Chair of
the Coalition and Chair of the Knesset Eretz Yisrael
Committee, alluded to two historical periods here in Israel since
1967.
Credit:
Wikipedia
From 1967 until 1992 or 1993, the
trend was preserving the status quo in Judea and Samaria. Communities were
built there, and there was an assumption that matters would unfold on their own
as facts were established on the ground.
From 1992 [with the advent of
Oslo] until the present, there has been a back-stepping. We are in a state
of confusion now and he hopes this second period is coming to an end. He
believes (there is not consensus on this yet) that what Abbas did at the UN has
brought the Oslo period to a finish.
Israel postponed the discourse on
sovereignty and now we need a new approach. We must apply sovereignty to
the maximum possible at any given moment. Slowly we can change the public
discourse.
~~~~~~~~~~
Dr. Moti Kedar, Middle East expert
and lecturer at Bar Ilan University, was asked to speak on the Arab reaction to
sovereignty.
Credit:
sassywire
But, asked Kedar, did Arabs ever
agree to sovereignty over Tel Aviv or Haifa? Have Egypt and Jordan -- both
of which have peace treaties with Israel -- ever recognized Israel as the state
of the Jewish people?
Kedar said that we urgently
require an international television station that broadcasts in English and
Arabic and that simply tells the truth. People have access to CNN and a
host of other stations biased against Israel, while Israel is simply missing
from that broadcast discussion.
He further observed that the
courts should have nothing to do with determination of borders. This is a
political issue, for the Knesset. The courts should be involved strictly with
legal issues, which he believes calls for a change in Basic Law.
Kedar, an expert on Muslim/Arab
culture, said that only those who are victors can secure their place in
the Middle East. Those who seek peace are seen as vanquished and get
kicked.
~~~~~~~~~~
Caroline Glick,
columnist, senior editor at the Jerusalem Post and senior fellow
for Middle Eastern Affairs for the Center for Security Policy, was one of four persons on a panel that discussed the issue
of the status of Arabs after the application of sovereignty over Judea and
Samaria.
Credit:
sassywire
People are afraid of the
demographic issue, she said -- the fear that if we incorporate Judea and Samaria
into Israel fully we will be demographically overwhelmed. Birthrates are
shifting, however, and the public needs to be educated on this. She sees a
population 2/3 Jewish and 1/3 Arab.
The precedents that exist on this
issue were with Jerusalem and the Golan, and there were no problems encountered
in either of these areas. Every Arab would be given the opportunity to
request citizenship, provided he or she met the criteria established by the
Ministry of the Interior -- with regard to renouncing terrorism and accepting
Israel as a Jewish state.
Glick says we are now entering a
period that is historically revolutionary. To proceed the issue must
happen in the context of a larger change in the Israeli public, and changes in
the Israeli legal system will be required. People are tired of the way things
currently operate, specifically with regard to the High Court
(B'gatz).
She noted the fact that Habayit
Hayehudi is expected to be part of the next coalition (from her mouth to
Heaven!) and it is advocating annexation of Area C. This represents a huge
change.
~~~~~~~~~~
Other participants on the panel
included MK Arieh Eldad, Adv. Elyakim Haetzni, and Dr. Martin
Sherman.
You can see the entire conference
dubbed in English here (skip the first five minutes, as that is a film of last
years conference):
In a few days Women in Green will
be providing links to each speaker separately, in English and
Hebrew.
~~~~~~~~~~
©
Arlene Kushner. This material is produced by Arlene Kushner,
functioning as an independent journalist. Permission is granted for it to be
reproduced only
with
proper attribution.
If
it is reproduced and emphasis is added, the fact that it has been added must be
noted.
This material
is transmitted by Arlene only to persons who have requested it or agreed to
receive it. If you are on the list and wish to be removed, contact Arlene and
include your name in the text of the
message.
No comments:
Post a Comment