Maandelijks archief: mei 2025

Noten 89 en 90/Israel raast en tiert!

[89]
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL EN HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH OVER HET
ISRAELISCHE APARTHEIDSREGIME
ASTRID ESSED
[90]

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL INVESTIGATION CONCLUDES ISRAEL

IS COMMITTING GENOCIDE AGAINST PALESTINIANS IN GAZA

5 DECEMBER 2024

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/12/amnesty-international-concludes-israel-is-committing-genocide-against-palestinians-in-gaza/

Amnesty International’s research has found sufficient basis to conclude that Israel has committed and is continuing to commit genocide against Palestinians in the occupied Gaza Strip, the organization said in a landmark new report published today.

The report, ‘You Feel Like You Are Subhuman’: Israel’s Genocide Against Palestinians in Gaza, documents how, during its military offensive launched in the wake of the deadly Hamas-led attacks in southern Israel on 7 October 2023, Israel has unleashed hell and destruction on Palestinians in Gaza brazenly, continuously and with total impunity.

“Amnesty International’s report demonstrates that Israel has carried out acts prohibited under the Genocide Convention, with the specific intent to destroy Palestinians in Gaza. These acts include killings, causing serious bodily or mental harm and deliberately inflicting on Palestinians in Gaza conditions of life calculated to bring about their physical destruction. Month after month, Israel has treated Palestinians in Gaza as a subhuman group unworthy of human rights and dignity, demonstrating its intent to physically destroy them,” said Agnès Callamard, Secretary General of Amnesty International.

“Our damning findings must serve as a wake-up call to the international community: this is genocide. It must stop now.

“States that continue to transfer arms to Israel at this time must know they are violating their obligation to prevent genocide and are at risk of becoming complicit in genocide. All states with influence over Israel, particularly key arms suppliers like the USA and Germany, but also other EU member states, the UK and others, must act now to bring Israel’s atrocities against Palestinians in Gaza to an immediate end.”

Over the past two months the crisis has grown particularly acute in the North Gaza governorate, where a besieged population is facing starvation, displacement and annihilation amid relentless bombardment and suffocating restrictions on life-saving humanitarian aid.

“Our research reveals that, for months, Israel has persisted in committing genocidal acts, fully aware of the irreparable harm it was inflicting on Palestinians in Gaza. It continued to do so in defiance of countless warnings about the catastrophic humanitarian situation and of legally binding decisions from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ordering Israel to take immediate measures to enable the provision of humanitarian assistance to civilians in Gaza,” said Agnès Callamard.

“Israel has repeatedly argued that its actions in Gaza are lawful and can be justified by its military goal to eradicate Hamas. But genocidal intent can co-exist alongside military goals and does not need to be Israel’s sole intent.”

Amnesty International examined Israel’s acts in Gaza closely and in their totality, taking into account their recurrence and simultaneous occurrence, and both their immediate impact and their cumulative and mutually reinforcing consequences. The organization considered the scale and severity of the casualties and destruction over time. It also analysed public statements by officials, finding that prohibited acts were often announced or called for in the first place by high-level officials in charge of the war efforts.

“Taking into account the pre-existing context of dispossession, apartheid and unlawful military occupation in which these acts have been committed, we could find only one reasonable conclusion: Israel’s intent is the physical destruction of Palestinians in Gaza, whether in parallel with, or as a means to achieve, its military goal of destroying Hamas,” said Agnès Callamard.

“The atrocity crimes committed on 7 October 2023 by Hamas and other armed groups against Israelis and victims of other nationalities, including deliberate mass killings and hostage-taking, can never justify Israel’s genocide against Palestinians in Gaza.”

International jurisprudence recognizes that the perpetrator does not need to succeed in their attempts to destroy the protected group, either in whole or in part, for genocide to have been committed. The commission of prohibited acts with the intent to destroy the group, as such, is sufficient.

Amnesty International’s report examines in detail Israel’s violations in Gaza over nine months between 7 October 2023 and early July 2024. The organization interviewed 212 people, including Palestinian victims and witnesses, local authorities in Gaza, healthcare workers, conducted fieldwork and analysed an extensive range of visual and digital evidence, including satellite imagery. It also analysed statements by senior Israeli government and military officials, and official Israeli bodies. On multiple occasions, the organization shared its findings with the Israeli authorities but had received no substantive response at the time of publication.

Unprecedented scale and magnitude

Israel’s actions following Hamas’s deadly attacks on 7 October 2023 have brought Gaza’s population to the brink of collapse. Its brutal military offensive had killed more than 42,000 Palestinians, including over 13,300 children, and injured over 97,000 more, by 7 October 2024, many of them in direct or deliberately indiscriminate attacks, often wiping out entire multigenerational families. It has caused unprecedented destruction, which experts say occurred at a level and speed not seen in any other conflict in the 21st century, levelling entire cities and destroying critical infrastructure, agricultural land and cultural and religious sites. It thereby rendered large swathes of Gaza uninhabitable.

Mohammed, who fled with his family from Gaza City to Rafah in March 2024 and was displaced again in May 2024, described their struggle to survive in horrifying conditions:

“Here in Deir al-Balah, it’s like an apocalypse… You have to protect your children from insects, from the heat, and there is no clean water, no toilets, all while the bombing never stops. You feel like you are subhuman here.”

Israel imposed conditions of life in Gaza that created a deadly mixture of malnutrition, hunger and diseases, and exposed Palestinians to a slow, calculated death. Israel also subjected hundreds of Palestinians from Gaza to incommunicado detention, torture and other ill-treatment.

Viewed in isolation, some of the acts investigated by Amnesty International constitute serious violations of international humanitarian law or international human rights law. But in looking at the broader picture of Israel’s military campaign and the cumulative impact of its policies and acts, genocidal intent is the only reasonable conclusion.

Intent to destroy

To establish Israel’s specific intent to physically destroy Palestinians in Gaza, as such, Amnesty International analysed the overall pattern of Israel’s conduct in Gaza, reviewed dehumanizing and genocidal statements by Israeli government and military officials, particularly those at the highest levels, and considered the context of Israel’s system of apartheid, its inhumane blockade of Gaza and the unlawful 57-year-old military occupation of the Palestinian territory.

Before reaching its conclusion, Amnesty International examined Israel’s claims that its military lawfully targeted Hamas and other armed groups throughout Gaza, and that the resulting unprecedented destruction and denial of aid were the outcome of unlawful conduct by Hamas and other armed groups, such as locating fighters among the civilian population or the diversion of aid. The organization concluded these claims are not credible. The presence of Hamas fighters near or within a densely populated area does not absolve Israel from its obligations to take all feasible precautions to spare civilians and avoid indiscriminate or disproportionate attacks. Its research found Israel repeatedly failed to do so, committing multiple crimes under international law for which there can be no justification based on Hamas’s actions. Amnesty International also found no evidence that the diversion of aid could explain Israel’s extreme and deliberate restrictions on life-saving humanitarian aid.

In its analysis, the organization also considered alternative arguments such as ones that Israel was acting recklessly or that it simply wanted to destroy Hamas and did not care if it needed to destroy Palestinians in the process, demonstrating a callous disregard for their lives rather than genocidal intent.

However, regardless of whether Israel sees the destruction of Palestinians as instrumental to destroying Hamas or as an acceptable by-product of this goal, this view of Palestinians as disposable and not worthy of consideration is in itself evidence of genocidal intent.

Many of the unlawful acts documented by Amnesty International were preceded by officials urging their implementation. The organization reviewed 102 statements that were issued by Israeli government and military officials and others between 7 October 2023 and 30 June 2024 and dehumanized Palestinians, called for or justified genocidal acts or other crimes against them.

Of these, Amnesty International identified 22 statements made by senior officials in charge of managing the offensive that appeared to call for, or justify, genocidal acts, providing direct evidence of genocidal intent. This language was frequently replicated, including by Israeli soldiers on the ground, as evidenced by audiovisual content verified by Amnesty International showing soldiers making calls to “erase” Gaza or to make it uninhabitable, and celebrating the destruction of Palestinian homes, mosques, schools and universities.

Killing and causing serious bodily or mental harm

Amnesty International documented the genocidal acts of killing and causing serious mental and bodily harm to Palestinians in Gaza by reviewing the results of investigations it conducted into 15 air strikes between 7 October 2023 and 20 April 2024 that killed at least 334 civilians, including 141 children, and wounded hundreds of others. Amnesty International found no evidence that any of these strikes were directed at a military objective.

In one illustrative case, on 20 April 2024, an Israeli air strike destroyed the Abdelal family house in the Al-Jneinah neighbourhood in eastern Rafah, killing three generations of Palestinians, including 16 children, while they were sleeping.

While these represent just a fraction of Israel’s aerial attacks, they are indicative of a broader pattern of repeated direct attacks on civilians and civilian objects or deliberately indiscriminate attacks. The attacks were also conducted in ways designed to cause a very high number of fatalities and injuries among the civilian population.

Inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about physical destruction

The report documents how Israel deliberately inflicted conditions of life on Palestinians in Gaza intended to lead, over time, to their destruction. These conditions were imposed through three simultaneous patterns that repeatedly compounded the effect of each other’s devastating impacts: damage to and destruction of life-sustaining infrastructure and other objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population; the repeated use of sweeping, arbitrary and confusing mass “evacuation” orders to forcibly displace almost all of Gaza’s population; and the denial and obstruction of the delivery of essential services, humanitarian assistance and other life-saving supplies into and within Gaza.

After 7 October 2023, Israel imposed a total siege on Gaza cutting off electricity, water and fuel. In the nine months reviewed for this report, Israel maintained a suffocating, unlawful blockade, tightly controlled access to energy sources, failed to facilitate meaningful humanitarian access within Gaza,  and obstructed the import and delivery of life-saving goods and humanitarian aid, particularly to areas north of Wadi Gaza. They thereby exacerbated an already existing humanitarian crisis. This, combined with the extensive damage to Gaza’s homes, hospitals, water and sanitation facilities and agricultural land, and mass forced displacement, caused catastrophic levels of hunger and led to the spread of diseases at alarming rates. The impact was especially harsh on young children and pregnant or breastfeeding women, with anticipated long-term consequences for their health.

Time and again, Israel had the chance to improve the humanitarian situation in Gaza, yet for over a year it has repeatedly refused to take steps blatantly within its power to do so, such as opening sufficient access points to Gaza or lifting tight restrictions on what could enter the Strip  or their obstruction of aid deliveries within Gaza while the situation has grown progressively worse.

Through its repeated “evacuation” orders Israel displaced nearly 1.9 million Palestinians – 90% of Gaza’s population – into ever-shrinking, unsafe pockets of land under inhumane conditions, some of them up to 10 times. These multiple waves of forced displacement left many jobless and deeply traumatized, especially since some 70% of Gaza’s residents are refugees or descendants of refugees whose towns and villages were ethnically cleansed by Israel during the 1948 Nakba.

Despite conditions quickly becoming unfit for human life, Israeli authorities refused to consider measures that would have protected displaced civilians and ensured their basic needs were met, showing that their actions were deliberate.

They refused to allow those displaced to return to their homes in northern Gaza or relocate temporarily to other parts of the Occupied Palestinian Territory or Israel, continuing to deny many Palestinians their right to return under international law to areas they were displaced from in 1948. They did so knowing that there was nowhere safe for Palestinians in Gaza to flee to.

Accountability for genocide

“The international community’s seismic, shameful failure for over a year to press Israel to end its atrocities in Gaza, by first delaying calls for a ceasefire and then continuing arms transfers, is and will remain a stain on our collective conscience,” said Agnès Callamard.

“Governments must stop pretending they are powerless to end this genocide, which was enabled by decades of impunity for Israel’s violations of international law. States need to move beyond mere expressions of regret or dismay and take strong and sustained international action, however uncomfortable a finding of genocide may be for some of Israel’s allies.

“The International Criminal Court’s (ICC) arrest warrants for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for war crimes and crimes against humanity issued last month offer real hope of long-overdue justice for victims. States must demonstrate their respect for the court’s decision and for universal international law principles by arresting and handing over those wanted by the ICC.

“We are calling on the Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) to urgently consider adding genocide to the list of crimes it is investigating and for all states to use every legal avenue to bring perpetrators to justice. No one should be allowed to commit genocide and remain unpunished.”

Amnesty International is also calling for all civilian hostages to be released unconditionally and for Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups responsible for the crimes committed on 7 October to be held to account.

The organization is also calling for the UN Security Council to impose targeted sanctions against Israeli and Hamas officials most implicated in crimes under international law.

Background

On 7 October 2023 Hamas and other armed groups indiscriminately fired rockets into southern Israel and carried out deliberate mass killings and hostage-taking there, killing 1,200 people, including over 800 civilians, and abducted 223 civilians and captured 27 soldiers. The crimes perpetrated by Hamas and other armed groups during this attack will be the focus of a forthcoming Amnesty International report.

Since October 2023, Amnesty International has conducted in-depth investigations into the multiple violations and crimes under international law committed by Israeli forces, including direct attacks on civilians and civilian objects and deliberately indiscriminate attacks killing hundreds of civilians, as well as other unlawful attacks on and collective punishment of the civilian population. The organization has called on the Office of the ICC Prosecutor to expedite its investigation into the situation in the State of Palestine and is campaigning for an immediate ceasefire.

For the Hebrew translation of this press release, click here.

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL

ISRAEL/OCCUPIED PALESTINIAN TERRITORY:

”YOU FEEL YOU ARE SUBHUMAN”:

ISRAEL’S GENOCIDE AGAINST PALESTINIANS IN GAZA

5 DECEMBER 2024

https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/mde15/8668/2024/en/

This report documents Israel’s actions during its offensive on the occupied Gaza Strip from 7 October 2023. It examines the killing of civilians, damage to and destruction of civilian infrastructure, forcible displacement, the obstruction or denial of life-saving goods and humanitarian aid, and the restriction of power supplies. It analyses Israel’s intent through this pattern of conduct and statements by Israeli decision-makers. It concludes that Israel has committed genocide against Palestinians in Gaza.
A stand-alone executive summary is available in English and other languages: ‘You Feel Like You Are Subhuman’: Israel’s Genocide Against Palestinians in Gaza: Executive Summary (Index: MDE 15/8744/2024).

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL REPORT

YOU FEEL YOU ARE SUBHUMAN

ISRAEL’S GENOCIDE AGAINST PALESTINIANS IN GAZA

DECEMBER 2024

file:///C:/Users/Astrid/Downloads/MDE1586682024ENGLISH%20(2).pdf

Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Noten 89 en 90/Israel raast en tiert!

Opgeslagen onder Divers

Noot 88/Israel raast en tiert!

[88]

”As part of the blockade, Israel prohibited travel in and out of Gaza, the import of goods into Gaza – including restrictions on food items, toys and paper – and export to Israel, the West Bank or foreign countries.”

BTSELEM.ORG

THE GAZA STRIP

11 NOVEMBER 2017

The Gaza Strip is the scene of a humanitarian disaster that has nothing to do with natural causes – it is entirely man-made, a direct result of official Israeli policy. Israel can choose to change this policy and considerably improve the lives of Gaza’s residents. It can also choose to continue this cruel, unjustifiable policy, which sentences the nearly two million people living in Gaza to a life of abject poverty and nearly inhuman conditions.

In early September 2015, the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development published a report on the situation in Gaza after eight years of blockade and three rounds of fighting between Israel and the Palestinians. The report cautioned that without significant changes to Israel’s policy, Gaza has no chance of recovery and will become unlivable by 2020. Rather than change its policies in the time that has elapsed since the report, Israel has made them stricter, the situation has deteriorated and Gaza has long since become unliveable.

Israel’s responsibility

Israel contends that its role as occupying power in the Gaza Strip ended in September 2005, when it dismantled all settlements there, withdrew its military forces and declared the end of the military government. Further to this position, Israel contends that it no longer has any obligations or responsibilities toward Gaza residents, other than minimal humanitarian duties designed to prevent a serious crisis in the Gaza Strip.

This position is entirely baseless. In the early years following the implementation of Israel’s Disengagement Plan, there was some vagueness regarding Israel’s legal obligations toward Gaza. However, since then, the conception of degree of responsibility as commensurate with degree of control has taken root. Though Israel is clearly no longer responsible for keeping the peace inside Gaza, and is not generally obliged to see to the welfare of its residents under the laws of occupation, it is still the power that shapes the daily lives of Gaza residents, and as such, also bears responsibility towards them.

Although Israel declared an end to its military administration in Gaza, it continues to control critical aspects of life there. It controls all border crossings by land, apart from Rafah, as well as Gaza’s sea and air space. This control allows Israel to exclusively monitor the movement of people and goods in and out of Gaza, which it regulates according to Israeli interests. This holds true even when Gaza residents wish only to transit through Israel in order to reach the West Bank or other countries.

Rafah Crossing, which is subject to Egyptian control, has been closed for the past few years.  Egyptian authorities open it only a few days every year. Yet even then, it may be used only by individuals who meet strict criteria – which are changed every so often. Regardless, using this crossing to travel to other countries involves a long and often dangerous journey; when the destination is no further than the West Bank (including East Jerusalem), or Jordan, this lengthy journey is particularly unreasonable.

The blockade and its ramifications

Isolating Gaza from the rest of the world, including separating it from the West Bank, is part of a longstanding Israeli policy. The implementation began in the 1990s, with the imposition of a closure on all the Occupied Territories and the introduction of the requirement for every Palestinian from these territories – with the exception of areas annexed to Israel – to request a personal permit to enter Israel, even if only for the purpose of travel between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip or abroad. Over the years, Israel has made it increasingly difficult to obtain these permits.

After the second intifada broke out, Israel tightened the restrictions on Palestinian travel, imposing serious restrictions on travel to and from the Gaza Strip, and cutting it off from the West Bank almost completely. Entry of Gaza residents into Israel for the purpose of family visits or reunification with a spouse was prohibited. Visits by Palestinian citizens of Israel and residents of East Jerusalem to relatives in Gaza were reduced to a minimum. In addition, Israel severely restricted the ability of the entire population of Gaza to travel abroad, with many prohibited from doing so altogether. Import and export were restricted and often halted. Israel also banned most Gaza residents from working inside Israel, taking away the source of income of tens of thousands. The restrictions Israel imposed on the movement of goods and workers caused a deep recession in Gaza, impaired its residents’ earning capacity and caused a sharp decline in living standards.

In the summer of 2007, after Hamas took over the Gaza Strip, Israel used its control over the crossings to put Gaza under a blockade overnight, turning almost two million people into prisoners inside the Gaza Strip, effecting an economic collapse and propelling Gaza residents into almost full dependency on international aid.

As part of the blockade, Israel prohibited travel in and out of Gaza, the import of goods into Gaza – including restrictions on food items, toys and paper – and export to Israel, the West Bank or foreign countries. According to documents exposed in October 2010 following a Freedom of Information petition filed by the Gisha organization, it emerged that Israel had employed a “deliberate reductive policy”, based on calculations of the minimal caloric intake required for Gaza residents to survive.

In June 2010, following international pressure on Israel after the takeover of the Turkish flotilla to Gaza, Israel decided to lift some of these restrictions. Among other things, Israel agreed to expand the list of goods cleared for entry into Gaza and allowed the entry of building materials for public and housing projects. As part of this new policy, Israel replaced the narrow list of items allowed into Gaza with a list of strictly prohibited items, such as weapons, as well as a list of “dual-use” items that Israel believes could have both civilian and military uses, which require an individual permit. The second list includes hundreds of items, the lack of which prevents development of factories and restoration of civilian infrastructure. The restrictions on export remained in place even after June 2010, leaving Gaza isolated and with no real opportunity for economic development.

One aspect of the blockade is the reduction of the area where fishing is allowed in Gaza. The Oslo Accords stipulate a range of 20 nautical miles (about 37 km) off the Gaza shoreline, but Israel has never allowed fishing farther than 12 nautical miles out to sea. Over the years, Israel has gradually narrowed the fishing zone, sometimes to three nautical miles only, and currently between six and nine. The Israeli military also restricts fishing in areas bordering Israel and Egypt. Soldiers fire at fishermen alleging they have sailed beyond the restricted zone, arrest them and confiscate their equipment. In this way, Israel prevents Gaza fishermen from reaching the rich fishing grounds located further out to sea, impedes the ability of thousands of fishermen and people working in related sectors to provide for themselves and their families, and denies Gaza residents an essential source of food.

The blockade has driven Gaza’s economy into collapse. In the first quarter of 2022, unemployment reached 47%. In the under 29 age bracket, it was 75%. Some 80% of Gaza’s residents depend on humanitarian aid, and about 60% suffer from food insecurity. In the year 2000, before the blockade was imposed, Gaza’s unemployment rate was 18.9%.

Infrastructure and public services in Gaza are collapsing. Of the water pumped in the Gaza Strip, 96.2% is contaminated and unpotable. Electricity is supplied for just a few hours every day, partly because of a fuel shortage caused by high costs, and partly because of restrictions Israel imposes on the entry of spare parts to maintain existing systems – including repairing the power station it bombed in 2006.

The lack of consistent power supply has disastrous effects. Routine power cuts damage medical equipment. Hospitals are forced to rely on generators and scale back services, including delaying non-urgent surgeries and releasing patients early. The intermittent power supply also impedes the routine operation of water pumps and wells. This interferes with the supply of water for household use and public institutions, which has been greatly reduced. Residents have no choice but to cut back on the amount of water they drink and buy desalinated drinking water from private suppliers. It is estimated that 68% of the desalinated water is also contaminated, increasing the risk of disease spreading among the population. Sewage treatment facilities are not fully functional. Treatment cycles have been reduced, and sewage is pumped into the sea after being only partially treated.

The blackouts also keep Gaza residents from leading reasonable lives: they preclude normal use of washing machines, refrigerators, water heating tanks and more. These appliances are an inseparable part of life for billions of people all over the world, including people who live mere kilometers away. In Gaza, residents can only use them during the few hours in which power is available.

The level of health services offered in the Gaza Strip falls far short of meeting the needs of the population, and many essential treatments are not available there. Israel prevents doctors from traveling to medical conferences and seminars to keep abreast of innovations in their field. In addition, bringing new medical equipment into Gaza, or spare parts to repair existing equipment, requires Israeli consent, which is often given after many delays and sometimes, not given at all. Patients requiring treatment that is unavailable in Gaza have to ask Israel for permits to travel to hospitals in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem. Israel rarely grants the permits, and restricts them to cases it defines as “life threatening” – a far cry from meeting the patients’ needs.

Military operations

Since the disengagement in 2005, Israel has launched several rounds of fighting in the Gaza Strip, killing thousands of people, destroying thousands of structures and severely harming infrastructure that was already on the brink of collapse. These attacks exacerbated the already dire situation in Gaza. The continued blockade prevents reconstruction, and tens of thousands of persons are still homeless in Gaza.

Operation Cast Lead: On 27 December 2008, Israel launched Operation Cast Lead, which lasted until 18 January 2009. According to data collected by B’Tselem, Israel killed 1,391 Palestinians during the fighting, at least 759 of them civilians who had not taken part in the hostilities. Of these, 318 were under the age of 18. Israel also caused extensive damage to structures and to infrastructure, including electricity, water and sewage facilities that were on the brink of collapse even before the fighting and were now rendered completely dysfunctional. According to UN figures, Israel destroyed more than 3,500 homes, leaving tens of thousands of people without shelter or a home to return to. During the offensive, Palestinians fired rocket and mortar shells toward Israel, with the deliberate intention of harming civilians. Three Israeli civilians and one member of the Israeli security forces were killed as a result. In addition, nine Israeli soldiers were killed, four of them from friendly fire.

Operation Pillar of Defense: On 14 November 2012, Israel launched Operation Pillar of Defense. The fighting lasted eight days, during which, according to B’Tselem figures, Israel killed 167 Palestinians, at least 87 of whom had not participated in the fighting. Of these, 32 were under the age of 18. Over the course of the fighting, four Israeli civilians and two members of the security forces were killed by rockets and shells that Palestinians fired from the Gaza Strip.

Operation Protective Edge: On 8 July 2014, Israel launched Operation Protective Edge. The fighting lasted 50 days, until 26 August 2014, with Israel wreaking havoc on Gaza’s civilian infrastructure. According to B’Tselem figures, during the fighting, Israel killed 2,203 Palestinians, including 1,371 who did not take part in the fighting. About a quarter of all the casualties, 548, were under age 18 and 527 of them did not take part in the fighting. During the fighting, Palestinians killed five Israeli civilians, including one child, as well as one foreign national and 63 soldiers. Three other soldiers were killed by friendly fire, and another was killed in an accident.

Guardian of the Walls: On 10 May 2021, Israel launched Operation Guardian of the Walls. The fighting lasted 11 days, until 21 May 2021, with Israel destroying buildings and civilian infrastructure. According to B’Tselem’s figures, during the fighting, Israel killed 232 Palestinians, including 137 who did not take part in the fighting, 53 of whom were under age 18. During the fighting, six Israeli civilians and three foreign nationals were killed by rockets that Palestinians fired. One member of the security forces was killed by Palestinian fire.

“No go” zones

Israel treats an area inside the Gaza Strip, near the border fence, as its own territory, using it to create a “buffer zone” inside the already narrow Strip. After the second intifada broke out, the military declared a vast area near the Gaza-Israel border, much of it farmland, off-limits to Palestinians. It never officially announced this policy or clarified to the residents which areas exactly were off limits to them, which increases the danger they face.

To enforce this access ban, the military has introduced open-fire regulations that permit firing at Palestinians found inside the zone – even if they pose no threat to anyone’s life. The implementation of these regulations has resulted in the killing of at least 87 Palestinians who did not take part in fighting from the time the Disengagement Plan was implemented in September 2005 until the end of May 2022, excluding rounds of fighting. Of these casualties, 41 were killed when they were in these zones as part of their daily routine, including local residents and farmers. Fourteen more people were killed when they approached the fence, planning to cross it in search of work inside Israel.

Another measure employed by the military to enforce the prohibition on approaching the fence is spraying herbicides on crops near the fence – on the Gazan side. The spraying is done without advance notice, and without alerting residents that they must protect crops that lie several hundred meters away from the fence, which are also harmed by the spraying. Israel has also destroyed vast areas near the border during the rounds of fighting, including demolishing entire neighbourhoods.

In the past, Gaza residents grew fruit trees and kept hothouses in these areas. Some were used for grazing livestock raised for food. However, because of Israel’s policy, and after the military destroyed various crops in the area, many farmers had to switch to crops that require less maintenance and that the army cannot claim block its field of vision. Today, the area is mostly home to dryland farming crops, which require no irrigation, such as wheat, barley, beans and various kinds of vegetables.

The Great March of Return protests

On 30 March 2018 – Land Day – Palestinians in the Gaza Strip began to hold regular protests along the perimeter fence, demanding an end to the blockade Israel has imposed on the Strip since 2007 and fulfillment of the right of return. The protests, held mostly on Fridays with tens of thousands participating, including children, women and seniors, continued until the end of 2019.

Israel was quick to frame the protests as illegitimate even before they began. It made various attempts to prevent the demonstrations and declared in advance it would violently disperse the protesters. The military deployed dozens of snipers along the fence, and various officials clarified that the open-fire regulations would permit lethal fire against anyone attempting to approach the fence or damage it. When Gaza residents went ahead with the demonstrations regardless, Israel made good on its threats and its open-fire regulations permitted use of live fire against unarmed protestors. As a result, 223 Palestinians, 46 of them under the age of 18, were killed and some 8,000 injured. The vast majority of the persons killed or injured were unarmed and posed no threat to the well-armored soldiers standing on the other side of the fence.

Israel responded to international criticism of the casualty toll by saying it would investigate the incidents. Yet today, more than forty months after the first demonstration, it is clear that the military’s investigations in relation to the Gaza protests were never intended to ensure justice for the victims or to deter troops from similar action. These investigations – much like the investigations conducted by the military law enforcement system in other cases in which soldiers have harmed Palestinians – are part of Israel’s whitewashing mechanism, and their main purpose remains to silence external criticism, so that Israel can continue to implement its policy unchanged.

EINDE BERICHT

”GENEVA, 14 June 2013 – The United Nations Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied by Israel since 1967, Richard Falk, called today on Israel to end its blockade over the Gaza Strip, six years after it was tightened following the Hamas takeover in June 2007”

UNITED NATIONS

COLLECTIVE PUNISHMENT IN GAZA MUST END:

ISRAEL’S BLOCKADE ENTERS IN IT’S 7TH YEAR-

UN SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR

14 JUNE 2013

https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2013/06/collective-punishment-gaza-must-end-israels-blockade-enters-its-7th-year-un

GENEVA, 14 June 2013 – The United Nations Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied by Israel since 1967, Richard Falk, called today on Israel to end its blockade over the Gaza Strip, six years after it was tightened following the Hamas takeover in June 2007. The human suffering of the land, sea and air blockade imposed on the 1.75 million Palestinians living in one of the most densely populated and impoverished areas of the world has been devastating.

“Six years of Israel’s calculated strangulation of the Gaza Strip has stunted the economy and has kept most Gazans in a state of perpetual poverty and aid dependency,” said the UN expert. “Whether it is fishermen unable to go beyond six nautical miles from the shore, farmers unable to access their land near the Israeli fence, businessmen suffering from severe restrictions on the export of goods, students denied access to education in the West Bank, or patients in need of urgent medical attention refused access to Palestinian hospitals in the West Bank, the destructive designs of blockade have been felt by every single household in Gaza. It is especially felt by Palestinian families separated by the blockade,” he added.

“The people of Gaza have endured the unendurable and suffered what is insufferable for six years. Israel’s collective punishment of the civilian population in Gaza must end today,” said the Special Rapporteur.

“Israel has the responsibility as the Occupying Power to protect the civilian population. But instead of allowing a healthy people and economy to flourish, Israeli authorities have sealed off the Gaza Strip. According to statistics released by the Israeli Ministry of Defense, last month’s exports out of Gaza consisted of 49 truckloads of empty boxes, three truckloads of spices, one truckload of cut flowers, and one truckload of furniture,” he said. In 2012, the total number of truckloads of exports leaving Gaza was 254, compared to 9,787 in 2005 before the tightening of the blockade.

“It does not take an economist to figure out that such a trickle of goods out of Gaza is not the basis of a viable economy,” noted the UN expert. “The easing of the blockade announced by Israel in June 2010 after its deadly assault on the flotilla of ships carrying aid to the besieged population resulted only in an increase in consumer goods entering Gaza, and has not improved living conditions for most Gazans. Since 2007, the productive capacity of Gaza has dwindled with 80 percent of factories in Gaza now closed or operating at half capacity or less due to the loss of export markets and prohibitively high operating costs as a result of the blockade. 34 percent of Gaza’s workforce is unemployed including up to half the youth population, 44 percent of Gazans are food insecure, 80 percent of Gazans are aid recipients,” he said.

“To make matters worse, 90 percent of the water from the Gaza aquifer is unsafe for human consumption without treatment, and severe fuel and electricity shortage results in outages of up to 12 hours a day. Only a small proportion of Gazans who can afford to obtain supplies through the tunnel economy are buffered from the full blow of the blockade, but tunnels alone cannot meet the daily needs of the population in Gaza.”

“Last year, the United Nations forecast that under existing conditions, Gaza would be uninhabitable by 2020. Less optimistic forecasts presented to me were that the Gaza Strip may no longer be viable only three years from now,” said the Special Rapporteur. “It’s clear that the Israeli authorities set out six years ago to devitalize the Gazan population and economy,” he said, referring to a study undertaken by the Israeli Ministry of Defense in early 2008 detailing the minimum number of calories Palestinians in Gaza need to consume on a daily basis to avoid malnutrition. The myriad of restrictions imposed by Israel do not permit civilians in Gaza to develop to their full potential, and enjoy and exercise fully their human rights.

ENDS

ENDS

In 2008, the UN Human Rights Council designated Richard Falk (United States of America) as the fifth Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights on Palestinian territories occupied since 1967. The mandate was originally established in 1993 by the UN Commission on Human Rights.

Learn more, log on to: http://www2.ohchr.org/english/countries/ps/mandate/index.htm

UN Human Rights – Occupied Palestinian Territories: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/countries/MENARegion/Pages/PSIndex.aspx

UN Human Rights – Israel: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Countries/MENARegion/Pages/ILIndex.aspx

For more information and media requests, please contact Kevin Turner (kturner@ohchr.org) or Kiyohiko Hasegawa khasegawa@ohchr.org) or write to sropt@ohchr.org

For media inquiries related to other UN independent experts:
Cécile Pouilly, UN Human Rights – Media Unit (+ 41 22 917 9310 / cpouilly@ohchr.org)

UN Human Rights, follow us on social media:
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/unitednationshumanrights
Twitter: http://twitter.com/UNrightswire
Google+ gplus.to/unitednationshumanrights
YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/UNOHCHR
Storify: http://storify.com/UNrightswire

HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH

LETTER TO OLMERT: STOP THE BLOCKADE OF GAZA

20 NOVEMBER 2008

https://www.hrw.org/news/2008/11/20/letter-olmert-stop-blockade-gaza

November 20, 2008
Dear Prime Minister Olmert,
We are writing to express our deep concern about Israel’s continuing blockade of the Gaza Strip, a measure that is depriving its population of food, fuel, and basic services, and constitutes a form of collective punishment.

The latest measures, a complete closure of all Gaza border crossings since November 5, are part of an ongoing policy by your government that has prevented the normal flow of goods and people in and out of Gaza since January 2006. It has contributed to a humanitarian crisis, deepened poverty and ruined the economy. We urge your government to abandon this policy.

Your government states that this latest blockade was in response to Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel, in which two Israel civilians were injured (on November 14 and 16), and over a dozen others treated for shock. Human Rights Watch has repeatedly condemned deliberate and indiscriminate Palestinian rocket attacks on Israeli communities as violations of the laws of war. We recently sent a letter to Hamas leaders calling on them to renounce such attacks, and arrest and prosecute those who carry out or encourage attacks on civilians.

However, violations of the laws of war by one party to a conflict do not justify violations by the other. As such, illegal attacks by Palestinian armed groups do not justify an illegal Israeli response. Israel’s blockade of the Gaza Strip, an occupied territory under the Fourth Geneva Convention, constitutes collective punishment in violation of the laws of war.
While your government has eased the restrictions for one day on November 17 the humanitarian situation in Gaza is now critical as the borders remain closed. Food distribution by the United Nations to 750,000 people—half of Gaza’s population—was forced to a halt last week, and remains severely disrupted.

Israel permitted 30 trucks to enter Gaza on November 17, delivering just eight trucks of food aid for the United Nations relief agency distribution centers, enough to feed 20,000 people. Those supplies are now almost gone, according to UN officials. The agency has to import at least 15 truckloads of food daily to meet the territory’s needs. Food stocks in three UN warehouses have also been emptied.

Gaza’s main power station needs over 21 million liters of industrial diesel before it can restart power production, according to the relief agency. Gaza is currently suffering widespread power shortages with power cuts of up to 16 hours a day. On average 650,000 people–over a third of the population—are without power at any one time amid rolling power cuts throughout the territory.

The fuel and power shortages have disrupted the pumping of water from 80 percent of Gaza water wells according to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA). Twenty percent of the population has access to water for six hours five times a week. Forty percent have access to water four days a week, and the remaining 40 percent have water for just three days a week.

No wheat grain has entered Gaza for 16 days, prompting Gaza’s largest flour mill al-Philistiniya to close, according to OCHA. A lack of cooking gas has closed 28 out of 47 pita-bread bakeries in Gaza, and bread is being rationed. There are no bakeries in production in Rafah in the south of Gaza.

The latest closures have compounded the already severe effects of a longer term blockade your government implemented when Hamas took full control of Gaza in June 2007. Other restrictions have been in place since December 2005, when Hamas won legislative elections in the West Bank and Gaza. Over the last year, this policy has deepened poverty in Gaza and cut its industrial production by over 90 percent, according to the World Bank. The Palestinian Federation of Industries estimates that as a result of import restrictions and the inability to export, only 23 of the 3,900 industries in Gaza are operating, six of which produce wheat flour, one clothing, and the remainder food processing.

These restrictions are impacting a population that is already among the poorest in the world. Close to 70 percent of the population lives in deep poverty, according the UN relief agency, UNRWA. (The agency defines deep poverty as a family of six persons or more living on income of less than US$467 per month.) Egypt has been complicit in the blockade by keeping its borders with Gaza closed for much of the past year, in cooperation with your government.

Israel made a commitment in June to ease some of these restrictions – but the movement of goods into Gaza and people in and out the territory remains a fraction of what it was when borders were last opened for free trade. October’s imports represented only 21 percent of the December 2005 level (13,430 truckloads), that is prior to the Palestinian Legislative Council elections, and 26 percent of the May 2007 level, immediately before the Hamas takeover of the Gaza Strip, according to OCHA. Exports from Gaza are not allowed by your government.

In September and October, Egypt and Israel allowed around 6000 pilgrims, hospital patients and some businessmen to pass through the Rafah and Erez border crossings. However, the Israeli and Egyptian governments have prevented over 800 students from leaving the territory to study abroad. Restrictions on freedom of movement for the large majority of the population remain in place, preventing their access to work, healthcare, and family outside of Gaza.

Even though Israel withdrew its permanent military forces and settlers in 2005, it remains an occupying power in Gaza under international law because it continues to exercise effective day-to-day control over key aspects of life in Gaza. Under the Fourth Geneva Convention, Israel is obliged to ensure the provision of food and medical supplies to the civilian population to the fullest extent possible.

We urge your government to immediately lift restrictions on the flow into Gaza of food, medicines, and other supplies essential for the well-being of the civilian population and to cease all measures that amount to collective punishment of the civilian population, including disruptions to the electricity supply and fuel cuts. We also urge your government to respect the right to freedom of movement, especially for those who need to travel for reasons of health or education.

We look forward to your response to this matter.

Yours sincerely,

SarahLeah Whitson
Executive Director
Middle East and North Africa Division
Human Rights Watch

Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Noot 88/Israel raast en tiert!

Opgeslagen onder Divers

Noot 87/Israel raast en tiert!

[87]
GAZA IN EEN WURGGREEP
2014
Israël en Hamas vochten van 8 juli tot 26 augustus 2014 hun derde gewapende conflict in zes jaar tijd uit. Voor buitenstaanders is het onbegrijpelijk dat de moord op drie Israëlische tieners en een Palestijnse jongen kon ontaarden in een zoveelste zinloze oorlog. Tegen de achtergrond van de aanhoudende bezetting en Israëls blokkade van de Gazastrook komt deze nieuwe ronde van geweld echter niet als een verrassing. Maar ook het falende optreden van de VS en de EU, en de marginalisatie van het internationaal recht, zijn belangrijke pijnpunten.

HET RECHT VAN DE STERKSTE

Twintig jaar vredesgesprekken brachten het vooruitzicht op een Palestijnse staat niet dichterbij. In 1993 schaarden Israël en de Palestijnse Bevrijdingsorganisatie zich achter de Principeverklaring. Onder het motto ‘land voor vrede’ zou Israël zich geleidelijk aan terugtrekken uit de Palestijnse gebieden en een staat binnen de grenzen van vóór 1967 mogelijk maken. De Palestijnse Autoriteit (PA) werd opgericht om de proto-staat op te bouwen. Als leider van het diplomatieke proces stelde de Verenigde Staten zich voor als eerlijke bemiddelaar. Snel werd duidelijk dat de VS de kaart van Israël trok. Het vredesproces verzandde in een steriel proces. Er was een consensus over de bestemming – de tweestatenoplossing – al werd de weg erheen nooit uitgestippeld. Zo werden de Westoever en Gaza als een eenheid gedefinieerd en moesten ze via een brug of een tunnel verbonden worden. Israël vertikte dat en ontwikkelde een scheidingsbeleid.

Het Oslo-akkoord gaf de PA slechts beperkte territoriale controle over de Palestijnse gebieden. De struikelblokken zoals nederzettingen, grenzen, het statuut van Jeruzalem en water werden uitgesteld tot de finale statusonderhandelingen. Bovendien stelden de VS het internationaal recht als een obstakel voor, conform Israëls positie. Als bezettende macht heeft Israël duidelijke verplichtingen. Zo moet het instaan voor de veiligheid en het welzijn van de Palestijnse burgers en mag het zijn burgers niet overbrengen naar bezet gebied. In de gesprekken waren hier geen verwijzingen naar. In werkelijkheid zou Israël beslissen wat de Palestijnen krijgen.

Het vredesproces wekte de schijn dat Israël zijn bezetting zou opgeven, maar het behield de essentiële regeringsfuncties zoals controle over land, grenzen en het recht op residentie. Als een bezettende macht mag Israël de effectieve controle over de Palestijnse gebieden behouden, indien het zijn verplichtingen naleeft. Israël geniet echter de lusten maar niet de lasten van de bezetting. De PA heeft beperkte civiele bevoegdheden, maar geen vooruitzicht op soevereiniteit. Premier Netanyahu stelde in juli 2014 onomwonden dat hij nooit zal toestaan dat de PA soevereiniteit over de Westoever krijgt.

Het bewustzijn over de urgentie van de tweestatenoplossing groeit bij Europese diplomaten, ze waarschuwen dat de tijd tikt.1 Toch ondernemen de EU en de VS weinig om de situatie te veranderen. Van bij het begin van het vredesproces, zag de EU af van druk op Israël omdat dit de gesprekken zou ondermijnen. Europa hoopte dat Israël geleidelijk aan land zou opgeven. Tot op vandaag gelooft het dat de bilaterale relaties een gunstige impact op Israël zullen hebben. Door het proces van socialisering zal Israël zich conform internationale waarden gaan gedragen.

WEST BANK FIRST = GAZA LAST?

Door de meegaandheid van de VS en de EU kon Israël zijn expansiebeleid voortzetten. Het stelde dat een terugtrekking moet stroken met Israëls veiligheid. Onder het mom van veiligheid confisqueerden opeenvolgende regeringen Palestijns land en bouwden ze de nederzettingen uit. Anno 2014 wonen er meer dan 500.000 Israëlische kolonisten in 200 nederzettingen. De EU en de VS betreuren dit, maar treffen geen sancties. Israël bevindt zich in een ideale positie. Door zijn deelname aan vredesgesprekken toont het zich welwillend, het heeft een geprivilegieerd partnerschap met de EU en kan de bezetting handhaven. In plaats van zich geleidelijk terug te trekken, maakte Israël een lappendeken van de Westoever en sneed het Oost-Jeruzalem ervan af.

De afgelopen jaren waren de EU en de VS gefocust op de Westoever en de opbouw van staatsinstellingen, of liever de ineenstorting ervan. Beleidsmakers verzuchtten dat ze hun schaarse invloed moesten aanwenden om de nederzettingenbouw te beteugelen, laat staan dat ze de Palestijnse politieke en territoriale verdeeldheid ongedaan konden maken. Het motto was ‘West Bank first’. Bij de gesprekken die de VS in juli 2013 hadden opgestart, kwam Gaza nauwelijks aan bod. De gesprekken liepen in april vast wegens de nederzettingenbouw en Israëls weigering om Palestijnse gevangenen vrij te laten. Fatah en Hamas sloten een verzoeningsakkoord en kwamen overeen om een nationale consensusregering te vormen. Toen trok Israël de stekker definitief uit de gesprekken. Het wil immers niet dat er getornd wordt aan de isolatie van Gaza en doet er alles aan om eenheidsregering te voorkomen. Dit zou zijn verdeel-een-heersbeleid ondermijnen.

DE BESTRAFFING VAN GAZA

De isolatie van Gaza startte vóór de verkiezingsoverwinning van Hamas in 2006. Israël initieerde dit proces in 1991, met de bouw van een hek rond Gaza en het weren van Gazaanse arbeiders in Israël. Hiermee ving de on-ontwikkeling van Gaza aan, een ooit welvarend gebied werd economisch gewurgd en hulpafhankelijk gemaakt. Toen de Israëlische regering er in 2005 de nederzettingen ontmantelde, luidde dit geen ommekeer in. Voor Israël was de unilaterale terugtrekking een manier om zijn controle over de Westoever te behouden. Het wilde geen politieke en economische opportuniteiten creëren. Ook al trok Israël zijn soldaten terug, toch bleef het een bezettende macht door zijn controle over het luchtruim, de zee en de grensovergangen (met uitzondering van Rafah, met Egypte). Palestijnse gewapende groeperingen dreven hun raketaanvallen op en lokten hierdoor militaire operaties uit.

Toen Hamas in 2007 met geweld de macht greep in Gaza, en Fatah verjoeg, riep Israël het tot ‘vijandelijke entiteit’ uit en installeerde het de blokkade. De Israëlische regering legde beperkingen op aan commerciële import, verbood bijna alle export, en legde het verkeer van personen aan banden. Deze ‘economische oorlogsvoering’ moest de druk op Hamas vergroten. Maar vooral de bevolking werd getroffen.2 De VN bestempelde de afsluiting als een vorm van ‘collectieve bestraffing’ in strijd met Israëls verplichtingen als bezettende macht. Ondertussen versterkte Hamas zijn controle, onder meer via smokkeltunnels tussen Egypte en Rafah. Periodieke uitbarstingen van geweld waren de daaropvolgende jaren de regel.

Maar eind 2008 escaleerde het geweld en brak er een oorlog uit. Op 28 december lanceerde Israël ‘Gegoten Lood’ om de raketaanvallen te stoppen. Het leger voerde massale bombardementen uit en zette ook grondtroepen in. De Palestijnse gewapende groepen bleven echter tot op de laatste dag, 18 januari 2009, raketaanvallen op Israël uitvoeren. De balans van de oorlog was 1400 Palestijnse doden en 13 Israëlische doden. Israël had op grote schaal burgerinfrastructuur getroffen en ook de economie van Gaza in puin gelegd. Door Israëls afsluiting en het verbod op de invoer van onder meer bouwmateriaal werd de wederopbouw sterk bemoeilijkt.

November 2012 zag een nieuw gewapend conflict tussen Israël en Hamas. Na acht dagen kwamen beide partijen onder bemiddeling van Egypte overeen tot een staakt-het-vuren. Ze zouden de vijandelijkheden staken en de Israëlische regering zou de blokkade versoepelen. De eerste maanden na het conflict werden er geen raketten uit Gaza afgevuurd, maar deed het Israëlische leger wel regelmatig invallen in Gaza. Israël weet de rust aan zijn afschrikkingsbeleid en zelfbehoud van Hamas. Het stelde indirecte gesprekken over de implementatie van het staakt-het-vuren uit en verlichtte de blokkade niet. In de bufferzones, landbouwgebied aan de grens, werden boeren beschoten. De grensovergangen werden geregeld gesloten. Toch hield Hamas zich grotendeels aan het staakt-het-vuren. Het focuste op het heropbouwen van zijn arsenaal en de volgende ronde waarbij het de afsluiting met geweld zou proberen op te heffen.

Toen generaal Sisi in juli 2013 de macht in Egypte overnam en president Morsi afzette, zakte Gaza nog dieper weg. De Egyptische regering strafte Hamas, de bondgenoot van de Moslimbroeders, en vernielde het merendeel van de smokkeltunnels, waardoor Hamas een groot deel van zijn inkomsten verloor. Het verminderde ook de passage via Rafah, de enige poort naar de buitenwereld. Eind 2013 werd de situatie onhoudbaar: stroomonderbrekingen duurden 12 à 18 uur per dag, dieseltekort veroorzaakte enorme wachtrijen aan benzinestations, vuilnis stapelde zich op, de riolering begaf het, de watercrisis bereikte een dieptepunt.3

DE ONVERMIJDELIJKE VOLGENDE RONDE

De directe aanleiding tot de volgende ronde was de ontvoering en de moord op drie Israëlische jongeren bij de nederzetting Gush Etzion bij Hebron op 12 juni 2014. Toen hun lichamen op 30 juni werden teruggevonden, ontvoerden en doodden Israëlische extremisten een Palestijnse tiener. Hierop braken onlusten uit in Jeruzalem, de Negev en Galilea (waar veel Palestijnse burgers van Israël wonen). Israël legde de schuld bij Hamas en startte een grootschalige campagne van arrestaties en raids in de Westoever, ‘Brother’s Keeper’. Later kwam aan het licht dat de Israëlische veiligheidsdiensten snel na de ontvoering wisten dat de jongens dood waren. Ook kon Israël de directe betrokkenheid van het leiderschap van Hamas niet bewijzen. Israël maakte van de gelegenheid om een strafexpeditie tegen Hamas te starten en de eenheidsregering te ondermijnen. Dat was het einde van de periode van ‘rust’.

Als respons op de protesten startten andere Palestijnse gewapende groeperingen met raket- en mortieraanvallen op Israël. Hamas wou niet aan de zijlijn blijven staan en hervatte zijn raketaanvallen op 7 juli. Daags erna lanceerde Israël de operatie ‘Protective Edge’. Na tien dagen begon het leger ook met een grondoffensief. Oorspronkelijk was het doel de raketten te stoppen. Na een zware aanval via een tunnel stelde het leger zijn doel bij tot de vernieling van de tunnels. Verschillende pogingen om tot een staakt-het-vuren te komen strandden, voornamelijk omdat Hamas niet aanvaardde dat zijn eisen niet werden ingewilligd. Uiteindelijk werd op 26 augustus onder leiding van Egypte een staakt-het-vuren voor een maand afgesloten. Israël ging akkoord met de opening van Rafah en liet meer humanitaire hulp toe. Ondertussen vinden in Caïro gesprekken plaats over de heikele punten: de opening van de luchthaven, de haven en de vrijlating van gevangenen.

Het conflict maakte meer dan 2100 Palestijnse slachtoffers, waarvan 70% burgers. Aan Israëlische zijde werden er 6 burgers en 64 soldaten gedood. Opnieuw werden de burgers van Gaza het zwaarst getroffen. Moskeeën, scholen, ziekenhuizen en volledige buurten werden verwoest. Israël gebruikte massaal zware artillerie en vuurde meer dan 30.000 granaten af.4 Dat is een veelvoud van wat Israël in de oorlog van 2008-2009 afschoot. ‘Toen ik de beelden op de televisie zag, dacht ik ‘Gegoten Lood’ op steroïden’, stelt Yehuda Shaul van de Israëlische organisatie Breaking the Silence. Hij wijst erop dat artillerie geschikt is in klassieke, interstatelijke oorlogen. Maar in een dichtbevolkt gebied is het gebruik ervan bijzonder gevaarlijk. ‘Het is geen accuraat wapen. Het ontploft en doodt mensen in een straal van 50 meter en verwondt mensen in een straal van 100 meter. Bovendien vuur je ook nooitéén granaat, maar tien granatenaf om je doel te treffen. Het Israëlische leger kan niet stellen dat het alles deed om burgerslachtoffers te voorkomen’.5

WAT WIL ISRAËL BEREIKEN?

Israëls houding tegenover Hamas is dubbelzinnig. Enerzijds bestempelt het Hamas als een terroristische organisatie waar niet mee te onderhandelen valt. Anderzijds weet Israël dat het alternatief voor Hamas in Gaza niet zozeer Fatah is, dan wel nog radicalere salafistisch-jihadistische partijen. Bovendien onderhandelde Israël reeds met Hamas bij de gevangenenruil in 2011 en het staakt-het-vuren in 2012. Toch zal Israël nooit afstappen van zijn officiële discours. Sinds het losbarsten van de strijd tussen Fatah en Hamas in 2006 kant het zich tegen verzoening en ondermijnt het pogingen om tot eenheidsregering te komen.

Daarom koos de Israëlische regering voor de confrontatie. Toch schatte ze de situatie niet goed in. Ze had geen politiek doel, maar wilde veiligheid verkrijgen, en dit via luchtaanvallen. Israël wilde een grondoperatie vermijden, maar werd ertoe genoodzaakt door de aanvalstunnels van Hamas. Ook al stelde premier Netanyahu dat de operatie slaagde omdat Israël geen enkele eis van Hamas inwilligde, toch is ze geen strategisch succes.6 Hamas zaaide terreur in Israël en zette de blokkade op de agenda. De meeste Israëli’s steunden deze operatie omdat ze geen alternatief zien voor militair geweld tegen Hamas. De zelfmoordaanslagen sloegen diepe wonden en bevestigden de idee dat de Palestijnen geen kans zullen laten liggen om ‘Israël in de zee te drijven.’ Ook de raketaanvallen stuitten op veel onbegrip. ‘We trokken ons terug uit Gaza en kregen raketten als cadeau’, is een veelgehoorde verzuchting.

Het veiligheidsdenken domineert de Israëlische maatschappij. Sociologe Eva Illouz ziet de humanitaire gevoeligheid met de jaren afnemen. Palestijnen worden geweerd, wat dehumanisering in de hand werkt. Bovendien staat angst centraal in de Israëlische pysche. De angst voor de Shoah, het antisemitisme, enzovoort creëert een ‘catastrofalistisch’ denken, waarbij wordt uitgegaan van het worst case scenario. Dat maakt het makkelijker om morele normen te overschrijden.7 De onverschilligheid van veel Israëli’s voor politiek, geeft de regering ook het vrijgeleide om haar beleid voort te zetten. Slechts weinig burgers leggen de link tussen de stijgende inkomenskloof en de hoge uitgaven voor defensie en de nederzettingen.

WAT WIL HAMAS BEREIKEN?

Hamas stond vlak voor het recente conflict erg zwak. Het was de steun van Egypte en ook van Syrië, door zijn stellingname tegenover het regime, verloren. In Gaza zelf boette Hamas aan invloed in ten nadele van de Islamitische Jihad en andere salafistisch-jihadistische groepen. Hamas had het staakt-het-vuren met Israël afgedwongen maar plukte er geen vruchten van. Het gevoel groeide binnen Hamas dat het niet zoveel zou verliezen bij een conflict met Israël.8 Het zou zijn populariteit opkrikken en Israël mogelijk kunnen dwingen de blokkade te verlichten.

De noodgedwongen verzoening met Fatah had ook niet veel opgeleverd. Hamas had de voorwaarden van Fatah aanvaard. Het zou het bestuur van Gaza overdragen aan functionarissen die Fatah zou aanstellen en de grensovergangen zouden door de veiligheidsdiensten van de PA worden bemand. De eenheidsregering die in juni was gevormd, omvatte geen lid van Hamas en aanvaardde de drie voorwaarden van het Kwartet (opgeven van geweld, respect voor de vorige akkoorden en aanvaarding van Israël). De voorwaarden van Hamas werden echter niet vervuld: de opening van de overgang met Egypte en de betaling van 45.000 ambtenaren, waar Israël zich tegen kantte.

De ontwikkelingen na de moord op de Israëlische tieners zetten Hamas tot militaire actie aan. Het zag dit als een gevecht om zijn voortbestaan. Ofwel onderging Hamas Israëls langzame verstikking ofwel initieerde het een oorlog die kon leiden tot de opheffing van de blokkade.9 Hamas had zich voorbereid op deze ronde en beschouwde zichzelf naderhand als overwinnaar. Het is niet opgewassen tegen het vierde machtigste leger ter wereld, maar kan Israël pijn doen. Door de aanvalstunnels gingen strijders voor het eerst in decennia de grens over, het legde de luchthaven van Ben Goerion twee dagen plat en vuurde raketten af op alle grote steden.

Toch behaalde Hamas geen overwinning. Het ging akkoord met een staakt-het-vuren waarbij zijn voornaamste eisen zoals de opening van de luchthaven, de haven en de vrijlating van de gevangenen niet werden ingewilligd. Na Israëls uitschakeling van enkele militaire leiders zag het geen voordeel meer in de voortzetting van de strijd.10 Hamas slaagde er wel in om de blokkade op de politieke agenda te zetten. De EU en zelfs de VS erkennen dat een terugkeer tot de status quo ante onmogelijk is.

DE INTERNATIONALE GEMEENSCHAP MEET OPNIEUW MET TWEE MATEN

De VS en de Europese lidstaten riepen Israël geen halt toe en verklaarden dat Israël het recht op zelfverdediging heeft. Ze veroordeelden zijn schendingen van het internationaal humanitair recht in algemene termen. Minister Reynders stelde dat Israël en Hamas niet vergeleken kunnen worden, dat Hamas een terreurbeweging is terwijl Israël het recht en de plicht heeft om zijn bevolking te verdedigen. In de Commissie Buitenlandse Zaken ging hij nog een stap verder. ‘Het respect voor het internationaal recht, in het bijzonder het internationaal humanitair recht, is een verantwoordelijkheid van alle betrokken partijen. Dit geldt voor Israël maar ook voor andere organisaties die als terroristisch worden bestempeld. We constateren echter dat burgers geregeld als menselijke schilden worden gebruikt om militaire doelwitten te beschermen. Het leiderschap van Hamas bouwt ook bunkers onder hospitalen. Gisteren veroordeelde UNRWA dat Hamas raketten in scholen opslaat’.11

Hiermee neemt minister Reynders de retoriek van Israël over. Het voorbeeld van de menselijke schilden is problematisch omdat dit het steeds wederkerende excuus van Israël voor de vele burgerslachtoffers overneemt. En dat terwijl de VN-onderzoekscommissie na de oorlog van 2008-09 (waarin dezelfde beschuldiging werd geuit) geen aanwijzingen vond voor het gebruik van menselijke schilden door Palestijnse groepen.12 Het internationaal humanitair recht verbiedt oorlogvoering in stedelijk gebied niet. Dat kan niet gelijkgesteld worden aan het gebruik van menselijke schilden, zoals Israël doet. Het concept ‘menselijk schild’ veronderstelt dat strijders bewust de aanwezigheid van burgers gebruiken om zichzelf of andere militaire doelwitten tegen vijandelijke aanvallen te beschermen. Minister Reynders vergeet dat talloze Palestijnse burgers omkwamen bij aanvallen waar een legitiem militair doelwit afwezig was (bijvoorbeeld woningen van Hamas-leden) of die in een onaanvaardbare hoge ‘collateral damage’ resulteerden en disproportioneel waren. De Israëlische mensenrechtenorganisatie B’Tselem stelde vast dat honderden Palestijnse burgers in hun woning gedood werden.13 Met het zogenaamde gebruik van menselijke schilden door Hamas heeft dat weinig te maken.

Ook is het problematisch dat Hamas verengd wordt tot een terreurbeweging. Dat is een vrijbrief voor Israël om Hamas met alle middelen uit te schakelen. Dat is in tegenspraak met minister Reynders’ oproepen tot een wapenstilstand en zijn voorkeur voor een onderhandelde oplossing. Ondanks zijn onvoorzichtige taalgebruik lijkt hij te beseffen dat Hamas méér is dan een terreurorganisatie en dat een politieke oplossing de enig mogelijke is.

Net als de EU stelde België dat een terugkeer naar het status quo van vóór het recente conflict onaanvaardbaar is. Indien de EU een ommekeer wil , moet ze aandringen op Israëls respect voor het internationaal humanitair recht, zoals ze dit ook terecht verwacht en eist van Hamas. Dat is enige manier om het klimaat van wetteloosheid te stoppen en een echt vredesproces mogelijk te maken. Eerst en vooral moet ze Israël onder druk zetten om de blokkade daadwerkelijk op te heffen, en niet enkel de humanitaire hulp toe te laten. Israël zal zich immers verzetten tegen de wederopbouw van Gaza, de heropleving van de economie en de verbinding tussen de Westoever en Gaza. Toch moeten Europese beleidsmakers alles inzetten op ‘Gaza first’ en het plan van president Abbas om Gaza prioriteit te geven in het vredesproces.

Brigitte Herremans
Medewerker Midden Oosten bij Pax Christi en Broederlijk Delen

Noot
1/ EU Heads of Mission Jerusalem Report 2012, gelekt rapport, http://972mag.com/resource-eu-heads-of-mission-report-on-israeli-settlements/66814/.
2/ Rapporten van de Israëlische mensenrechtenorganisatie Gisha.
3/ Thrall N., Hamas’s Chances, London Review of Books, 21 augustus 2014.
4/ Harel A., Massive artillery shelling may have caused numerous civilian fatalities in Gaza, Ha’aretz, 15 augustus 2014.
5/ Gesprek met Yehuda Shaul, 3 september 2014.
6/ Sharon A., Failure in Gaza, New York Review of Books, 3 september 2014.
7/ Heyer J.A., Interview with Eva Illouz, Gaza Crisis: The Real Danger comes from Withinhttp://www.spiegel.de/international/world/interview-with-sociologist-eva-illouz-about-gaza-and-israeli-society-a-984536.html, 5 augustus 2014.
8/ International Crisis Group, The Next Round in Gaza, rapport 149, 15 maart 2014.
9/ Thrall N., Hamas’s Chances, London Review of Books, 21 augustus 2014.
10/ Harel A., Real Test for Gaza Truce still lies ahead, 27 augustus 2014.
11/ Minister Reynders, interventie in de Commissie Buitenlandse Zaken van de Kamer, http://www.dekamer.be/doc/CCRI/pdf/54/ic002.pdf, p. 15, 28 juli 2014.
12/ Human Rights Council, Report of the UN- Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict, A/HRC/12/48, http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/12session/A-HRC-12-48.pdf, 25 september 2009.
13/ B’tselem, Families Bombed at Homehttp://www.btselem.org/gaza\_strip/201407\_families, juli-augustus 2014.

EINDE
ZIE OOK WEBSITE ASTRID ESSED OVER GAZA
[BLADER DEZE GOED DOOR,
VOOR ISRAELISCHE AANVALLEN OP GAZA EEN AANTAL JAREN GELEDEN]

Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Noot 87/Israel raast en tiert!

Opgeslagen onder Divers

Noten 85 en 86/Israel raast en tiert!

[85]
MONDOWEISS
THE SLOW ETHNIC CLEANSING OF EIN SAMIYA’S BEDOUIN
COMMUNITY
31 MAY 2023
Israeli settlers and military systematically made life unbearable for the Bedouin community living in the West Bank’s Ein Samiya region. On May 22 they were forced to leave their lands and were displaced for the fourth time since 1969.

On Monday, May 22, at least 16 Palestinian families (almost 170 people) were forcibly expelled from their homes near the Ein Samiya spring and the Palestinian village of Kufr Malek, 27 kilometers northeast of Ramallah.

The spring is wedged between Kufr Malek and the illegal Jewish-only colony of Kohav HaShahar and the nearby illegal outpost of Moaz Ester. The Bedouin community, part of the Ka’abneh clan, has lived in that area for more than three decades, comprising 16 families living as herders and working in agriculture.

On Wednesday evening, May 24, the Ka’abneh clan finished moving the last of their belongings to a new location a few hundred meters away from their former homes. It was a forced resettlement following weeks of settler and police harassment that made life unbearable for the community.

“What happened yesterday was a neo-Nakba,” Abu Najeh Ka’abneh, 81, told Mondoweiss on Thursday evening outside of the village of al-Mughayyir, where the community had relocated.

Record, record,” Abu Najeh said firmly. “Don’t get the information wrong. I’ll speak slower, but focus and write.”

Sitting among a circle of men from his community as children dart in and out of the main sitting tent, Abu Najeh spoke with frustration and fear as he recounted the harrowing experience of the past week.

“The attack on Monday, May 22, was preceded by several days of continuous harassment,” Abu Najeh told Mondoweiss. “On May 16, settlers came and stole 37 sheep from our community in Ein Samiya, and I called the Red Cross to help us,” he said.

Abu Najeh had reached out to the Red Cross because the Israeli police had assaulted a 51-year-old herder from the community on May 16, claiming that his sheep belonged to one of the settlers of the Kohav HaShachar settlement.

“When the herder, Ata, wanted to say something, the police handcuffed him,” Abu Najeh said, taking a deep breath before continuing. “And when the herder — he’s the owner of the sheep — used his phone to try and call one of us, the police took it from him.”

The community’s youth eventually saw the altercation with the police and spread the news about the incident until it reached Abu Najeh. “This is a kidnapping, no?”

According to the community members, Ata was released at around 9:00 p.m. on Tuesday, the 16th. “He was fined 1500 shekels, and his 37 sheep were never returned,” Abu Najeh testified. “The price of a single sheep is between 1200-2000 shekels. Do the math,” Abu Najeh said, repeating once more the number of sheep stolen: “Thirty-seven.” The man’s entire livelihood depended on the livestock, with a family of 20 dependent on him for their daily needs.

A few days later, Abu Najeh and 170 others in his community were forced to pack up what they could manage to carry from their homes and belongings.

“As Palestinians, who must protect us? Shouldn’t it be our representatives?” Khader Ka’abneh, another member of the Bedouin community, told Mondoweiss. Standing up from his seated position, Khader began to release his pent-up indignation. “Unfortunately, during the Oslo Accords, our issues were not discussed, and what we experienced days ago is an even bigger Nakba.

For the Bedouin communities across Palestine, the herding lifestyle they uphold allows them to travel around Palestine’s landscape, further solidifying the presence of Palestinians in various areas around Jericho, the Jordan Valley, and the Mua’arajat — all at risk of Israeli annexation. Yet the burdens of surviving, coupled with the internalization of a feeling of duty towards protecting the land from settler theft, weigh heavily on Palestinian Bedouins.

“That was the only home my family has known,” Umm Najeh, Abu Najeh’s wife, told Mondoweiss as she sat on a plastic chair in a newly erected Bedouin tent less than 12 hours after the expulsion. “I have given birth to all eight of my children on that land.”

Umm Najeh’s eldest son is 32 years old, and her youngest is 12. Neither knows a home outside of the hills they have wandered with their sheep near Kufr Malek their entire lives.

“The children are constantly afraid of them,” Umm Najeh said as Jamal, 12, passed the tent where she and other women from the community sat, rebuilding their homes and arranging what little remained of their belongings.

Slow ethnic cleansing

“The settlers just kept coming more often, every night and almost daily,” Umm Najah told Mondoweiss as she washed and chopped some parsley for dinner.

“Look, before we used to be able to call the police to interfere when settlers attack,” Abu Najeh explained. “Now, in the last two years or so, the police themselves have been initiating the assaults.”

According to the community, Israeli border police have not only been guarding settlers during their rampages but have at times directly joined in on the violence. “If the police saw our blood spilling in front of them from the settlers, they would still call us liars,” Abu Najeh explained.

Palestinian Bedouins mostly live in Area C, which according to the Oslo Accords comprises more than 65% of the West Bank, and is under settler and Israeli military rule. This means that the Palestinian Authority (PA) has no jurisdiction in the area, so for Palestinian Bedouins, the only recourse in the face of settler violence is to appeal to the Israeli authorities.

In addition to the intensified violence to which the Ka’abneh community has been exposed over the past five years, the Bedouin clan has also become financially drained due to the theft of their sheep and livestock. Coupled with settlers’ night incursions aiming to push them out, they were eventually forced to relocate to the village of al-Mughayyer — the product of a policy of slow ethnic cleansing by making life so unbearable that they leave.

The community fears they may be seen as having given up on their lands in Ein Samiya. “There are people that say we just chose to leave,” Khader told Mondoweiss, in a voice more angry than pained. “I see on social media, some said we just chose to leave. But those five years of settler attacks on our children and women, that was enough pain. That was enough,” he said.

At that moment, his 12-year-old son Jamal held up his arm, hiding underneath a black scarf tied to his neck, serving as a makeshift sling — he had broken his arm running away from settlers in the moments leading up to the community’s violent expulsion on May 24.

“We couldn’t take it anymore. I swear, I promise, if we had support — at least take the women and children to keep them safe — we would have stayed and remained guardians of the land,” Khader said.

“Yesterday was the biggest Nakba we experienced,” Abu Najeh said. “Look at us, we don’t know how to sit, how to eat.”

“In two days, we had to rebuild a home,” Umm Najeh pointed to the cluster of small metal barracks and tents which now served as the community’s temporary home. “Look at this, we were able to at least rebuild these rooms for receiving guests, and here we are with the grace of God, rebuilding still,” she said with a smile that seemed to hold back a flow of tears.

‘The settler is the state, and the state is the settler’

During the first three months of 2023, Israeli settlers in the West Bank escalated their attacks on Palestinian farmers and herders. The Israeli human rights organization, B’tselem, recorded at least 108 different incidents where settlers, often joined by the police or the military, assaulted farmers, uprooted trees, and beat Palestinian civilians and children. As for the year before that, 2022 saw a record high of settler attacks in the West Bank, while between 2010 and 2019, thousands of settler attacks were also recorded. In February of this year, Israeli settlers committed a pogrom in the Palestinian town of Huwwara outside of Nablus, killing a Palestinian man, injuring dozens, terrorizing thousands in an arson rampage, and costing millions of shekels’ worth of property damage.

The displacement of the Bedouins of the Ein Samiya region is a part of this trajectory of rising settler violence, but it is also tied to the evolution of the neighboring settlements of Moaz Esther and Kohav HaShachar.

The Kohav HaShahar settlement, founded in 1980 for 280 Israeli settler families, is situated between the Palestinian towns and villages of Ramon, the final Palestinian town before the Jordan Valley. Currently, over 400 settler families live in the settlement, which advertises itself as a “religious settlement with a community that permeates warmhearted and caring family life.”

On the other hand, the Moaz Esther illegal outpost is marketed as the only “all-girl hilltop” promoting women’s participation in settlement expansion as a duty incumbent upon every Jewish person. The outpost was founded in 2006 in memory of Esther Galia, killed in a drive-by shooting near the settlement of Rimonim at the peak of the Second Intifada when Israeli forces committed crimes against humanity in the West Bank and Gaza.

By February 2020, Israeli authorities and police had dismantled two Israeli settler tents at the illegal outpost of Kohav HaShachar, clashing with settlers and arresting at least one rioter who hurled stones and assaulted police. However, following the Unity Intifada of 2021, when Palestinians engaged in collective mass mobilization from the river to the sea for the first time in decades, Israeli violence from settlers and the army increased. At the time, Benjamin Netanyahu, who was facing corruption charges, gave the green light for joint settler, military, and police violence against Palestinians.

“You need to focus, and please understand,” Khader Ka’abneh tells Mondoweiss. “The settler is the state and the state is the settler. They are one and the same.”

While Israel has attempted to separate the settlers in the West Bank from those in the army, Israeli policymakers represent settler aspirations. Those aspirations have tended to gather steam during periods of heightened Palestinian resistance. In 2018, for instance, then Agriculture Minister Uri Ariel had vowed that “our revenge is settlement and holding tight to the land,” which he said following the stabbing of Israeli settler Adiel Kolman during the peak of Israel’s attempts to solidify control over East Jerusalem.

“I hope we’ll continue to advance construction in Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria and make a clear decision that between the Jordan [River] and [Mediterannean] Sea there will only be one sovereign state — the State of Israel,” Ariel affirmed alongside Nir Barakat, then Mayor of Jerusalem.

Abu Najeh confirmed that period as one of heightened settler and military theft of land and property. “In the last five years, the police have been bringing settlers who have sheep, and they would come to those herding areas,” Abu Najeh explained.

A lifetime of expulsions

Tender and shy, Umm Najeh laments the lands she has known for over three decades. “That was my home, a dear place to me,” she told Mondoweiss. “I had all my eight children on that land,” she said. “Here we are now, displaced.”

Unlike Umm Najeh, the most recent expulsion, and the string of harassment and theft that preceded it, is not where the story of Abu Najeh begins — he has been forcibly expelled from his land four times ever since 1969.

“Pay attention. Record,” Abu Najeh reiterated as the 81-year-old narrated the trail of dispossession that colored his life. “I was born in the area of Hebron, and grew up in al-Ouja, where I stayed until 1967, when we were given documents to stay there.”

Al-Ouja, an area ten kilometers north of Jericho consisting of the Ouja valley, receives a stream of water originating from Ein Samiya near Ramallah. From there, the Ouja stream flows into the Jordan River. Due to the herding lifestyle of Bedouin communities, natural water sources and their relationship with the wider ecosystem dictates how they select their area of living.

“In September of 1969, [Israeli authorities and forces] gave us 24 hours to gather everything and leave for the Ramallah area,” Abu Najeh said, recalling his first experience of expulsionThat September was when the Ka’abneh community moved to the Mua’rajat area near Ramallah.

Six months later, in March of 1970, the community was forced out of their homes again, marking Abu Najeh’s second experience of expulsion.

“It was raining and [the army] came and began forcing us out. They did it in the rain.” The Israeli army was pushing the family out under the pretext of using the area for military purposes. “[The military] took us almost 3-4 kilometers away in their vehicles,” Abu Najeh recalled.

“They practiced on us, on our homes, so they can drive us out.”

Abu Najeh

Israeli authorities displaced the community to an area 500 meters away from where they began building a new home six months earlier. This pushed them further into Ramallah, but the terror campaign didn’t stop there.

“Four or five military tents came and stayed for three or two months,” Abu Najeh said. “Then they came and started shooting bullets at us and our homes. The bullets would enter the homes and the children would run,” Abu Najeh said. “[The soldiers] left all the empty lands around us and began shooting in our direction,” Abu Najeh said bitterly. “You understand why? So they can expel us, drive us out,” he said.

That was when their third expulsion took place, as the Ka’abneh clan escaped the Mu’arajat under Israeli gunfire and resettled in the Ein Samiya region. Before the fourth and most recent expulsion in May of this year, the community had spent several uninterrupted decades living near Ein Samiya. “Allah kept us safe from them, and so we managed to go to Ein Samiyawhere we have been since the 70s,” Abu Najeh said, his tone betraying a nostalgia for the home that he has now known for decades.

During their third expulsion in 1970, the Israeli army had converted their lands in the Mu’arajat region into closed military “firing zones.”

“They practiced on us, on our homes, so they can drive us out,” Abu Najeh said.

This policy of building “firing zones” and “military bases” continues to this day as an instrument of slow ethnic cleansing, sectioning off vast swathes of land for military use and hence justifying land theft based on “national security” needs.

In the Jordan Valley and Dead Sea areas in Jericho, Israeli authorities declared almost half of the region as a “firing zone.” These areas, which have the largest land reserves, constitute almost a third of the West Bank and are home to almost 80,000 Palestinians, 15,000 of whom are Palestinian Bedouins, sprawled across a few dozen community clusters. All of them are slowly being driven toward Ramallah.

“Indirect and direct forcible transfer is currently at the forefront of Israel’s ideological agenda in area C,” a report published by MAAN Development Agency in 2015 reported. “Firing zones, initially established as a means of land control, are now being used to create an environment so hostile that Palestinians are forced to leave the area or live in conditions of deteriorating security,” the report concluded.

The web of experiences tracing four different expulsions allows Abu Najeh to judge the unfolding of the Israeli state’s ethnic cleansing project over the years. “This year is worse than the war of 1967,” he said.

Losing to the ongoing Nakba

The experiences of the Ka’abneh clan have taught them that this recent expulsion will not be their last.

“Tomorrow is darker than today, and the day after will be darker than tomorrow,” Abu Najeh said bitterly around a group of men from his community the day after the expulsion from Ein Samiya.

The community’s skepticism of a less violent future stems from the repeated memories of expulsion and assault by settlers. In the early 1970s, almost as soon as the Ka’abneh clan found some stability in Ein Samiya, Israeli courts began pushing one expulsion order after another. The community has spent year after year fighting them in court.

“Since 1980 we have been fighting through courts against every expulsion order,” Abu Najeh told Mondoweiss. The orders from Israeli authorities for the expulsion of the community began in 1974, according to Abu Najeh.

This year, mirroring the experience of the Ka’abneh clan, other Bedouin communities in the Mu’arajat area were forced to leave their homes in February of this year, also relocating due to the severity of the attacks by Israeli forces and the lack of protection.

As for the Ka’abneh community, their relocation to the village of al-Mughayyir near Ramallah has put them in hostile terrain. Shortly after the clan arrived in the village, Israeli settlers attacked al-Mughayyir and its farmers. At around that same time, Palestinians faced a wave of lethal violence from Israeli settlers and the army in other West Bank towns and villages.

This has only further cemented the conviction that no place is safe from Israeli colonists.

For Palestinians, this is nothing new and is seen as a continuation of what started in 1948. And while Palestinians have witnessed the resurgence of resistance to Israeli colonialism across the West Bank since early 2022, some communities have been unable to withstand the constant harassment and daily indignities of colonial erasure.

“I cannot resist the Israeli state alone,” Khader Ka’abneh told Mondoweiss, reiterating his earlier statement: “The settler is the state. The settler is the government. I can’t fight that alone.”

Ata, the 51-year-old herder, echoed the disappointment, admitting that he can longer fight the settler attacks. “I have been trying these past five years, and I can’t anymore.”

END

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL

ISRAEL/OPT: OVER 300 PALESTINIAN BEDOUIN

FACE FORCED EVICTIONS FOLLOWING MASS

HOME DEMOLITIONS IN NEGEV/NAQAB

9 MAY 2024

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/05/israel-opt-over-300-palestinian-bedouin-face-forced-evictions-following-mass-home-demolitions-in-negev-naqab/

The Israeli authorities’ demolition on 8 May 2024 of 47 homes in Wadi al-Khalil, an unrecognized Palestinian/Bedouin village in the Negev/Naqab, without proper consultation or compensation underscores the urgency to dismantle Israel’s apartheid system, said Amnesty International today.

The demolition orders against the Abu Assa neighbourhood in Wadi al-Khalil were issued by Israeli planning authorities in 2019 to make way for the extension of the route of Highway 6 southwards. The demolitions, the highest in a single day since the demolitions of Al-Araqib in 2010, amount to the forced eviction of over 300 residents of Wadi al-Khalil, one of nine unrecognized villages at risk of forced eviction under the guise of urban development.

“The scenes of hyper-militarized police units, including the notorious Yoav and border police units, storming Wadi al-Khalil to bulldoze homes and confiscate residents’ belongings are yet another chilling demonstration of the cruelty and ongoing injustices and human rights violations meted by Israeli authorities upon Palestinian citizens of Israel, especially those living in the Negev/Naqab,” said Heba Morayef, Amnesty International’s Regional Director for the Middle East and North Africa.

“Instead of meaningfully consulting with the local communities in an inclusive decision-making process on planning, infrastructure development and access to land, Israeli authorities, particularly the Bedouin Authority for Development and Settlement, continue to use urban development as a tool to displace Bedouins, disenfranchise them and force them into smaller and smaller pockets of land, in a clear illustration of Israel’s apartheid system. They must immediately stop all forced evictions and ensure those affected have access to effective remedy and those made homeless are granted adequate housing.”

Among the units that participated in the demolition is the police unit Yoav, a unit established in 2011 with the declared aim of “enforcing the law” and halting unauthorized construction in Bedouin localities in the Negev/Naqab.

Jabr Abu Assa, a resident of Wadi al-Khalil whose home was demolished earlier this morning, told Amnesty International:

“We cannot stop this plan; Highway number 6 would pass over our bodies regardless of how hard we resisted, so we asked the authorities for a fair and just alternative, to relocate us to a place where we can live in peace and dignity, to Mtalla neighbourhood in Tall al-Sabe’. However, the only option we were given is to move to a neighbourhood in the nearby village of Um al-Batin, where local residents already said they have no room for us and that we are not welcome; this means pitting us up against them. This means forcing us and them to have to fight over the scarce resources that are barely enough for them.”

Abu Assa added that neither he nor any of the residents whose homes and other structures were demolished have received any form of compensation.

“We don’t know where to go next”

On 31 December, the Israeli Supreme Court rejected the appeal of Wadi Al-Khalil’s residents against their forced relocation to Umm al-Batin, allowing the Bedouin Authority for the Development and Settlement of the Negev, a government body that has long served to entrench the domination and oppression of the Bedouin community, to decide where it can relocate the residents.

Hussein al-Rabaya’a, a community activist from the Negev/Naqab, told Amnesty International: “Here you have no choice: they deny you recognition then they decide to displace you, they decide where you can go, and if you protest and ask for a fair alternative, they say it’s not up to you to decide your own fate.”

Another resident of the neighbourhood whose home was destroyed, told the organization: “We don’t know where to go next; we cannot move to Umm al-Batin because we are unwanted there; we’ll do what the residents of al-Araqib did: we’ll set up a tent on the ruins of our bulldozed homes, we have no other choice.

The demolitions in Wadi al-Khalil come less than a year after the Israeli District Court had approved the forced eviction of the unrecognized village of Ras Jrabah, to make way for the expansion of nearby Jewish town of Dimona. The residents of Ras Jrabah remain embroiled in a legal battle against their village’s demolition.

“Israeli authorities must put an end to the systematic discrimination and oppression faced by these communities, including by putting an end to forced evictions and the policy of home demolition. Instead, they should grant villages recognition and repeal all laws, policies and practices designed to dispossess the community – including through planning processes,” said Heba Morayef.

Background

Over the years, Israeli authorities have employed numerous pretexts to push for the displacement and segregation of the Bedouin community in the Negev/Naqab; from expanding highways to building industrial zones, establishing forests for the Jewish National Fund and the designation of military zones.

Amnesty International’s 2022 report on Israel’s apartheid system sets out how discriminatory laws on planning and zoning designed to maximize land and resources for Jewish Israelis at the expense of Palestinians in both Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

END

HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH

REPORT

OFF THE MAP

LAND AND HOUSING RIGHTS VIOLATIONS IN

ISRAEL’S UNRECOGNIZED BEDOUIN VILLAGES

30 MARCH 2008

https://www.hrw.org/report/2008/03/30/map/land-and-housing-rights-violations-israels-unrecognized-bedouin-villages

STOP THE WALL

ETHNIC CLEANSING OF BEDOUINS IN JORDAN

VALLEY

https://stopthewall.org/2014/09/30/ethnic-cleansing-bedouins-jordan-valley/

Ever since Israel occupied the West Bank, the Bedouins have been forced to relocate several times to make space for new Israeli settlements, new so-called ‘nature reserves’ and military firing zones. The so-called Civil administration, the Israeli military authority that implements the occupation in the West Bank, has filed for objections plans for establishing a new settlement in the Jordan Valley. The public now has 60 days to submit objections. Mohamed Elias, representing the Wall and Settlement Unit in the Palestinian Authorities following the legal cases of the Bedouin communities, says that it is yet another plan to confiscate land in area C. He has sent an objection to the occupation authorities based on the fact that the public has scarce knowledge of what is going on and no consultation process has been implemented. According to Mohamed Elias the construction of the new settlement will force around 15000 Bedouins from their lands.

The Jordan Valley is a sparsely populated area and Israel considers it the West Bank’s most important land reserve with great natural resources as fertile land and water as well as a geostrategically central area. The Jordan Valley is part of what is called “Area C’. According the Oslo agreement Area C parts of the West Bank are under full Israeli military and civil control. This was supposed to be handed over to Palestinian authorities by the year 2000, but this has never been fulfilled. 61% of the West Bank are Area C. The new areas to which the Bedouin are supposed to be confined are located in area A and B, which are under control of Palestinian authorities.

Bedouins not consulted
According to the Israeli Administration the construction of ‘development towns’ will give the Bedouin communities better living standards, providing proper housing conditions, claiming its proposal suitable to the “dynamic changes” the Bedouins are undergoing. In reality, it is nothing more than part of Israel’s ethnic cleansing policies, which will destroy the Bedouin life and dump them anywhere, where they are not an obstacle to Israeli colonialism.

Fact is that the Bedouins communities have not been consulted in the planning stages. As the Palestinian legal submission to the courts states, the plan is forced upon them in the interest of the colonizer and does not consider the Bedouins traditional way of living. Bedouins live in small communities and their main livelihood is livestock. In total 46 Bedouin communities, around 15000 people, will be deprived of their land and livelihoods. The plan is to build a new town called, Ramat Nu’eimeh in Fasayel, both north of Jericho. Ramat Nu’eimeh is supposed to confine about 12 500 people.

Seperation of Palestinian territory
Since time Israel is working on the ethnic cleansing of the Bedouin in the so-called area E1 to the area of Abu Dis near East Jerusalem. Israel needs to make space for the settlement projects of the so-called E1-area, an area between Jerusalem and the Israeli settlement Maale Adummim. Israeli authorities want to expand construction in order to connect the two cities. This will practically cut off the contact between the north and south part of the West Bank, according to Elias.

Evacuating Bedouins from East Jerusalem, Jericho and the Dead Sea will enable Israel to close the road between Jerusalem and Jericho and by that close the area between Jerusalem and the Dead Sea to Palestinians. This will separate the Palestinian territory and create an uninterrupted line between Jerusalem and the Israeli settlements in Jordan Valley. This will make it possible for Israel to expand the settlements in area E1 towards the Jordan Valley. The Stop the Wall Campaign says that this strategy is a part of Israel’s disengagement plan for a ‘Palestinian state’ made up of isolated Bantustans: Ramallah and Salfeet in the center will be separated from Nablus in the north by a belt of settlements and from Bethlehem and Hebron in the south by the E1 plan. According to Stop the Wall another part of the plan is the expansion of the road between Taybeh village east of Ramallah until al Oja. This will then be the only Palestinian connection for the West Bank to Jericho and the Jordan Valley.

Stop the Wall insists: “The Palestinian Bedouin communities as well as the Palestinian people as a whole are resisting these plans of ethnic cleansing and Bantustanization. We are working on many levels, including legal procedures, grassroots mobilizations, lobbying and campaigning. If the international community is serious about their statements for peace and human rights, then they need to act now. The United Nations Agencies – and with this the entire international community – have been officially informed about these plans years ago by the Israeli authorities. What are they waiting for to take effective action?”

END

[86]
ZIE NOOT 85

Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Noten 85 en 86/Israel raast en tiert!

Opgeslagen onder Divers

Noot 84/Israel raast en tiert!

[84]
DE ISRAELISCHE NEDERZETTINGEN IN BEZET PALESTIJNS GEBIED/
ILLEGAAL VOLGENS HET INTERNATIONAAL RECHT
ASTRID ESSED
THE SETTLEMENTS

From 1967 to the end of 2017, more than 200 Israeli settlements were established in the West Bank. They include:

  • 131 settlements officially recognized by the Israeli Ministry of the Interior;
  • About 110 settlements built without official authorization but with governmental support and assistance (known as “illegal outposts”);
  • Several settlement enclaves inside the city of Hebron;
  • 11 neighborhoods in the areas of the West Bank that Israel annexed to the municipal jurisdiction of Jerusalem in 1967, and several settlement enclaves within Palestinian neighborhoods in East Jerusalem.

Another 16 settlements that had been established in the Gaza Strip, and four in the northern West Bank, were dismantled in 2005 as part of the Disengagement Plan.

More than 620,000 Israeli citizens currently reside in settlements. Of these, about 209,270 live in the parts of the West Bank that Israel annexed to the municipal jurisdiction of Jerusalem (according to Jerusalem Institute for Policy Research figures from late 2016), and 413,400 live throughout the rest of the West Bank (according to Central Bureau of Statistics figures from late 2017).

The settlements are the single most important factor in shaping life in the West Bank. Their destructive impact on the human rights of Palestinians extends far beyond the hundreds of thousands of dunams [1 dunam = 1,000 sq. meters], including farmland and grazing areas, that Israel appropriated from Palestinians in order to build them. More land has been expropriated to pave hundreds of kilometers of roads for settler use only; roadblocks, checkpoints, and other measures that limit Palestinian movement only have been erected based on the location of settlements; Palestinian landowners have been effectively denied access to much of their farmland, both within settlements and outside them; and the winding route of the Separation Barrier, which severely violates the rights of Palestinians living near it, was established inside the West Bank in order to leave as many settlements as possible – and large tracts of land for expanding them – on the western side of the barrier.

All the settlement practices in the West Bank share the same objective, although those employed in the urban areas of Hebron and East Jerusalem – where Palestinians have also been dispossessed of their homes and of other structures – take a different form.

In the early years of the occupation, the main ploy that Israel used to take over land for building settlements was to seize the land “for military purposes”. Military seizure orders were issued for some 31,000 dunams, most of which were earmarked for building settlements. In June 1979, the military issued a seizure order for privately-owned land near Nablus, which was slated for establishing the settlement of Elon Moreh. Several Palestinians petitioned Israel’s High Court of Justice (HCJ), arguing that the seizure violated international law, since it served a civilian purpose of building a settlement rather than true military needs. The court had rejected this argument in previous petitions, accepting the state’s claim that settlements contribute to security.

In this case, however, top security officials stated that building a settlement at that location would serve no military purpose. Also, some of the settlers joined the proceedings as respondents, explaining to the court that it was their intention to settle in the area permanently, for religious and political reasons, rather than to promote security. Given these unique circumstances, the court could not rule that the establishment of the settlement would serve military needs – although it did not rule out such a possibility in general. The justices restricted their decision to the specific case of Elon Moreh, ruling that the land seizure was meant to serve a civilian rather than military purpose and therefore breached international law. The court did not completely deny the possibility of seizing private land for building settlements, but held that when the dominant reason for issuing a seizure order is the establishment of a civilian settlement rather than military considerations, the order is unlawful.

This ruling made it difficult for Israel to continue seizing Palestinian land as it had done until that point. Instead, it required the state to obtain agreement between top security officials on the military advantage of every planned settlement, and to ensure that the settlers kept their intentions to themselves. To circumvent this, the government announced that it would thereafter build settlements only on land that had been declared state land.

However, when the state sought such land, it discovered that only some 687,000 dunams were considered state land at the time, mostly in the Jordan Valley and in the Judean Desert. This frustrated the governmental plan to build settlements along the central mountain ridge of the West Bank. Therefore, the state came up with a new system for declaring state land.

This system was founded on rewriting legal provisions and applying a completely different approach to the Ottoman Land Code, which governs land ownership in the West Bank, than the standard interpretation applied until then. The new approach made it much easier to declare state land, even when the land in question was considered private or collective Palestinian property under British and later Jordanian rule. One method for achieving this was requiring Palestinians to regularly cultivate farmland as a prerequisite to acquiring ownership rights; another was to disregard the provisions of local law, which grants Palestinian communities collective rights to use grazing areas and other public land. By employing these new tactics, from 1979 to 2002 Israel declared more than 900,000 dunams as state land. There are now some 1,200,000 dunams of state land in Area C, constituting 36.5% of Area C and 22% of the entire West Bank. An additional 200,000 dunams of state land are located in areas A and B, where planning is in the hands of the Palestinian Authority.

A comparative survey carried out by B’Tselem in the area of Ramallah revealed massive differences between the amount of land that Jordan defined as government property in areas registered before the occupation, and the amount that Israel declared state land in areas that the Jordanians had not managed to register prior to 1967. The results of the survey indicate that a significant proportion of the land that Israel declared as state land is actually private Palestinian property that was taken from its lawful owners through legal maneuvering, in breach of both local and international law.

This process of land takeover also contravenes basic tenets of due process and natural justice. In many cases, the Palestinian residents were not aware that their land had been registered as state property and when they found out, it was too late to appeal. The burden of proof always lies with Palestinians claiming ownership; even if landowners did manage to prove their ownership over the land, in some cases it was registered state land based on the claim that it had been handed over to a settlement “in good faith”.

Even if all the declarations of state land were lawful, public land – including the land declared as government property prior to 1967 – is meant to serve the population of the occupied territory, i.e. the Palestinian public, not the State of Israel or its citizens. However, Israel prohibits Palestinian use of this land almost entirely and considers it Israeli property. In keeping with this policy, Israel has allocated to settlement vast tracts of this “state land”, stretching far beyond their built-up sections. The lands allocated to settlements have been declared closed military zones and are off limits to Palestinians, except by special permit. In contrast, Israeli citizens, Jews from around the world and tourists can enter them freely.

At present, settlements cover 538,130 dunams – almost 10% of the West Bank. Their regional councils control another 1,650,370 dunams, including vast open areas that have not been attached to any particular settlement. This brings the total area under the direct control of settlements to 40% of the West Bank, and 63% of Area C.

Along with this governmental land grab, settlers have exploited the forced separation between Palestinians and their land to build houses, outposts and roads, sow fields and groves, graze livestock and take over natural water sources – all outside the vast areas already allocated to the settlements. This is attended by routine violence against Palestinians. These actions play a major role in the implementation of Israel’s policy in the West Bank by complementing official measures. The settlers’ apparently independent actions serve as a privatized system for taking over land, allowing Israel to establish and expand entire settlement blocs through an unofficial sidetrack while formally disavowing these actions.

Unlike the restrictive planning policy enforced upon Palestinian communities, Israeli settlements are fully represented in the planning process, enjoying detailed outline plans and advanced infrastructure. Although the state uses the same professional and legal terms to refer to both Israeli and Palestinian construction in the West Bank with– such as building and planning laws, urban master plans, planning procedures and illegal construction – it applies them very differently in practice. When it comes to Israeli settlements, the state turns a blind eye and offers support and retroactive approval, all as part of an overarching policy to de facto annex parts of the West Bank to Israel’s sovereign territory. Palestinian communities, on the other hand, are subjected to painstaking bureaucracy, stalled plans and widespread demolitions, in keeping with Israel’s policy to prevent Palestinian development in the West Bank and continue dispossessing Palestinians of their land.

The establishment of the settlements contravenes international humanitarian law (IHL), which states that an occupying power may not relocate its own citizens to the occupied territory or make permanent changes to that territory, unless these are needed for imperative military needs, in the narrow sense of the term, or undertaken for the benefit of the local population.

The existence of settlements also leads to the violation of many human rights of Palestinians, including the rights to property, equality, an adequate standard of living and freedom of movement. In addition, the radical changes that Israel has made to the map of the West Bank preclude any real possibility of establishing an independent, viable Palestinian state in fulfilment of the right to self-determination. Although the West Bank is not part of Israel’s sovereign territory, Israeli has applied most of its domestic laws to the settlements and their residents. As a result, the settlers enjoy almost all the same privileges as citizens living within Israel. Meanwhile, Palestinians continue to live under martial law and are thereby systematically deprived of their rights and denied the ability to have any real impact on policymaking with respect to the territory in which they live. In creating this reality, Israel has formed a regime in which a person’s rights depend on his or her national identity.

Israel has refrained from formally annexing the West Bank (except in East Jerusalem). In practice, however, it treats the settlements established throughout Area C as extensions of its sovereign territory and has virtually eliminated the distinction for Israeli citizens – while concentrating the Palestinian population in 165 disconnected “islands” (Areas A and B). This double movement, of Israeli settlers taking over more and more West Bank land and Palestinians being pushed aside, has been a consistent mainstay of Israeli policy in the West Bank since 1967, with all Israeli legislative, legal, planning, funding and defense bodies working towards that end.

END

BTSELEM.ORG

SETTLER VIOLENCE=STATE VIOLENCE

https://www.btselem.org/settler_violence_updates_list

Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Noot 84/Israel raast en tiert!

Opgeslagen onder Divers

Noten 80 t/m 83/Israel raast en tiert!

[80]
WIKIPEDIA
NAKBA
[81]
WIKIPEDIA
1948 ARAB-ISRAELI WAR
[82]
REACTIE ASTRID ESSED OP ZIONISTISCHE POST OVER
DE ZOGENAAMDE ”ISRAELISCHE ONAFHANKELIJKHEIDSOORLOG”
ZIE EERST ZIONIST/REACTIE ASTRID ESSED DAARONDER
QUORA
Why is it that Israel’s war for independence is far from over?
Profile photo for David Dresin

David Dresin

·

Follow
Author of Bubby’s Story: A Concise History of the Holocaust.5y

Great question. It never will.

First we need to define war in this case as definition 2 of Webster’s dictionary; a state of hostility, conflict, or antagonism.

Without getting into any long drawn out academic analysis, in a nutshell, the roots of the conflict go back to Mandate Palestine and the Balfour Declaration, where the British who took control of the Levant from the defeated Ottoman Empire after WW1 pledged to “view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people”.

This for obvious reasons do not sit too well with many Muslim Arabs already living there.

In 1947, to try and molify the Arabs as well as find a home for the hundreds of thousands of displaced Jews of Europe who survived the Holocaust, the United Nations voted to Partition Palestine into two states; one Jewish and one Palestinian.

The Muslim Palestinian Arabs flat out rejected the plan and as soon as the British authority left, the Jews declared independence, accepting the Partition Plan, and the Arab League of Nations attacked.

This war of Israeli Independance and what the Palestianin Muslim Arabs refer to as Al Naqba (The Tragedy) created what is now called the Palestinian refugee crisis.

Before I get into to that let’s take a step back and examine what a Democratic, Sovereign Jewish State in the ancestrial home of the Jewish People actually means. In order to be defined as a Jewish State yet at the same time be a democracy, the demographic majority of the population must identify as and be Jewish (I will get into what defines one as being Jewish another time).

During the 1948 War of Indepednace, many Palestinian Arabs fled their homes as people often due during conflict. When the cease fire was established and the final demarcation lines set, many of these Arabs could not return home as their villages were now within the Jewish State of Israel.

So?, one might ask, let them come home and just become Citizens of the newly formed State of Israel. Ah ha! Can’t do that! If you do that then demographics change. Remember what I said above. If the county no longer is majority Jewish and still democratic, it can no longer be called a Jewish State.

Fast forward to 1967. Israel under immenant threat from Egypt, launches a preemptive strike and in the ensuing conflict now referred to as the Six Day War, Israel concurs the West Bamk, Gaza, the Sinai Peninsula and the Golan Heights.

I doing so, also acquired Egyptian, Jordanian (former Palestinian) and Syrian Citizens along with Palestinian Refugees from the 1948 conflict.

What to do. At least Israel now had some territorial strategic depth to defend against their hostile Arab neighbors as well as some chips to negotiate with, which they would ultimately use to make a peace treaty with Egypt in 1979 by returning them the Sinai Peninsula (Egypt refused to take back the Gaza Strip comprised mostly of Palestinian Refugees and in 1988 Jordan ceded all claims to the West Bank stripping their former citizens there under Israeli Occupation, of their Jordanian Citizenship).

Well we know Israel just walked away from Gaza in 2005, they annexed the Golan Heights in 1981 and generously offered Israeli citizenship to the mostly Druze (non-Muslim Arabs) that still remained (the majority of Syrian Arabs fled into Syria during the Six Day war) but what to do with the now millions of Palestenians in the West Bank? Can’t annex that and offer citizenship, bye bye Jewish State if they did that.

So that is the current state of affairs. In spite of technically being occupied, the 1993 Oslo Accords afford the Palestinians in the West Bank their own Civilian autonomy and they do fare much better than their Arab counterparts in Jordan, Egypt and certainly Syria.

Barring the occasional terrorist attack and the inevitable Israeli crackdowns in response, things seem to be pretty quite right now. That could all change in the blink of an eye with another Intifada or what have you, so ultimately a more permanent solution and disengagement needs to happen.

Problem is, unlike Gaza, where there was essentially just one big settlement to disband, the West Bank is loaded with them, some as large as small cities.

I believe the ultimate plan, which was no doubt always part of Israel’s long term strategic negotiating chip, is to annex certain parts of the West Bank comprised of large blocks of Jewish Settlements and just give the Palestianes the rest with maybe some land swaps and money and then build a big wall.

Regarding the hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refugees from Israel proper (1948 boundaries) they will probably offer some form of monetary settlement. All this will likely have to be done unilaterally.

So you can see, since Israël will never allow itself to not have a Jewish majortiy, there could never be peace from the perspective of the Palestinians.

One final note to leave on.

If the Arabs laid down their weapons, there would be peace. If the Israelis laid down theirs, there would be genocide.

Thanks for reading.

Astrid Essed

· Just now

WAR OF INDEPENDENCE?/COLONIAL ETHNIC CLEANSING WAR IS

A BETTER TERM

The 1948 Israeli Arab war WAS no ”Israeli War of Independence”, but a

colonial zionist war with the aim of cutting the Palestinians of their right

to selfdestination and independence!

It all began at the end of the 19th Century, when the Austrian Jewish

journalist, Theodor Herzl, founded the zionist movement, confirmed

at the first zionist Congress of Basel [1897]

AIM:

The foundation of a Jewish State in Palestine, then part of the Ottoman

Empire, since antisemitism was growing and growing in Europe

see Dreyfuss Affair, pogroms in Eastern Europe]

Now I can understand Jewish people wanted to escape the century old

European antisemitism [since the 8th century!, but NOT by founding a

State in the land of other people.

Now the idea to settle in other mans country and ”found a State” was

common to colonial thinking in that time, but contrary the right of selfdetermination!

And contrary with zionist propaganda, Palestine was NOT a ”Country without

a people”, since Arab Palestinians lived in Palestine for centuries!

In 1917 the zionist movement got an agreement with the British government

”to found a National Home for the Jewish People” [Balfour Declaration

1917], and when the Ottoman Empire lost all his provinces including Palestine

[since they sided in WOI with the German Empire and lost the war] and

Palestine became a British Mandate, the zionist aspirations could be

realized, eventually resulting in an Arab and Jewish part of Palestine!

[UN AV Resolution 181, 1947 ”The Partition of Palestine”

Of course this outraged the original Palestunian population,

that saw their land given away to newcomers!

No people in the world nowaday would accept a division of their land

in two parts without their consent to people who lived there more than 2000 years ago!

Pure colonialism!

So the war that broke out then-between Palestinian Arabs and their Arab allies

onesided and Zionist militia’s and their supporters at the other side-was a

colonial war, resulting in the ethnic cleansing of Palestined and eventually

ending in occupation, apartheid and genocide!

Look what Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have to say

about that.

https://la.indymedia.org/news/

2007/06/201927.php

It was a shameless colonial operation, with as result what they now call Israel!!

ASTRID ESSED, AVENGER OF EVIL

[83]
”Sinds 1967 is er sprake van de Israelische bezetting van de Palestijnse gebieden op de Westelijke Jordaanoever, Gaza [14] en Oost-Jeruzalem ondanks Vn Veiligheidsraadsresolutie 242, die Israel in 1947 opriep, zich terug te trekken uit de in de juni oorlog veroverde gebieden, waaronder de bovengenoemde Palestijnse. ”
CIVIS MUNDI

Zweedse fotograaf wint World Press Photo 2012. Misdaden Israëlische politiek in beeld gebracht.

ASTRID ESSED
ZIE VOOR GEHELE TEKST

Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Noten 80 t/m 83/Israel raast en tiert!

Opgeslagen onder Divers

Noot 79/Israel raast en tiert!

[79]
JOURNAL OF PALESTINE STUDIES
PUBLISHED IN FALL 2006
THE 1948 ETHNIC CLEANSING OF PALESTINE
BY ILAN PAPPE
[ARTICLE]
WIKIPEDIA
ILAN PAPPE
”Books

Articles

 
WIKIPEDIA
ILAN PAPPE/PUBLISHED WORK
 
 
ORIGINELE BRON
WIKIPEDIA
ILAN PAPPE

DOELBEWUST VERDREVEN

Terwijl Israël de gebeurtenissen van mei 1948 al 75 jaar met grote vreugde viert, herdenken Palestijnen deze gebeurtenissen jaarlijks met grote droefheid. Zij gedenken wat toen gebeurde als een ramp: de Nakba, Arabisch voor de catastrofe. Minstens 750.000 mensen werden uit hun huizen, steden en dorpen verdreven of sloegen op de vlucht uit wat vandaag de staat Israël is. Naar schatting 450 dorpen werden vernietigd. De Palestijnse wijken in de grote gemengde steden werden etnisch gezuiverd. De beschaving die honderden jaren in Palestina had bestaan, werd grotendeels en brutaal vernietigd. De gruwel en het trauma dragen deze mensen en hun nakomelingen tot op vandaag mee.

SAMPOL.BE

75 JAAR NAKBA: ISRAEL IS GEBOUWD OP EEN GROOT ONRECHT
14 MEI 2023

https://www.sampol.be/2023/05/75-jaar-nakba-israel-is-gebouwd-op-een-groot-onrecht

ZIE VOOR GEHELE TEKST, NOOT 68

DISASTER OVER PALESTINE/THE REFUGEE PROBLEM AND
THE IDEOLOGY OF TRANSFER
ASTRID ESSED
2007
by Astrid Essed Thursday, Jun. 28, 2007 at 12:03 AM
 

In contrary with the allegations of zionist non-deniers, the expulsion of the Palestinians in 1948 and 1967 was no ad hoc war-crime, but a yearlong deliberate planned strategy

 

Dear Editor and Readers,

This month june, it had been 40 years ago, Resolution 242 has passed, which urged Israel to withdraw from among else the Palestinian areas, which it had conquered in the june-war in 1967
As you all shall know, Israel completely has ignored, over 40 years, to fullfill this resolution

The occupation was the last fullfillment of the conquest of ”historical Palestine”, which was the very aim of zionism

Another aim was the expulsion of the original and autochton Palestinian population from their own country, which has been executed in 1948 [750.000 people] and 1967 [250.000 people]

In contrary with the allegations of zionist non-deniers [regarding the expulsion] this, however, was not an ad hoc war-crime, but a deliberate strategy, which was based on the views of the early zionist thinkers and is a ‘necessity” for the fullfillment of the political zionism

To expose and unmask this process and in remembrance of all the nameless victims of this ethnic cleansings, I have written underlying article

May justice be like a river

Kind regards
Astrid Essed
The Netherlands

See for picture of Palestinian refugees:

http://www.palestineremembered.com/Articles/General/Story1649.html

The Naqba

Disaster over Palestine
The Palestinian Refugee-problem and the ideology of transfer

Dedicated to the anonymous Palestinian victims of expulsion

In solemn remembrance and respect for Count Folke Bernadotte, who, being UN mediator for Palestine in 1948, has paid with his life by defending the rights of the Palestinian Arabs, who were victims of the expulsion by the Israeli-zionist militias. [1]

“The Arabs will have to go, but one needs an opportune moment for making it happen, such as a war.”

Part of a letter of the zionistic-Israeli politician David Ben Gurion, to his son, dd 1937

UN General Assembly Resolution 194 dd 11-12-1948

The General Assembly,
Having considered further the situation in Palestine

………….
………….
………….
………….

Resolves that the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible

Instructs the Conciliation Commission to facilitate the repatriation, resettlement and economic and social rehabilitation of the refugees and the payment of compensation, and to maintain close relations with the Director of the United Nations Relief for Palestine Refugees and, through him, with the appropriate organs and agencies of the United Nations;

Few things in life are so tragic like streams of refugees, who, fleeing for the violence of war or directly expelled, are moving painfully forward, towards an uncertain future.
Those images are daily seen on TV and leave behind a non-erasable memory

A Refugees and military activities:

There are few photographs and archives about this tragic fate of Palestinian refugees, on the eve of the one-sided exclamation of the State of Israel, by the zionistic politician Mr Ben Gurion [2] and the military confrontations thereafter, between the Israeli-zionistic military organisations [the Hagana, Palmach and the terrorgangs Irgun and Stern] on the one hand, and the armies of several Arabic countries [3], on the other hand

However, contrary with the pro-Israeli-propaganda, no great impression should be made of the strength of the Arabic troops, since it concerned countries, which had become independent recently [for that time under British or French mandatory or ”protective” authority], and therefore couldn’t have formed an extended army, while the zionist troops were very well armed, partly due to own effort, partly due to British military training

Also the Transjordanian army [the present Jordan], which was the biggest army, only fought in the evironments of Jerusalem
A further problem was also the lack of harmony on Arab side, because of mutual conflicts

The result of the military confrontation between the zionist-Israeli troops and the Arab troops is known.
Not only the zionist army won the war, also it occupied 20% of the area, which was granted to the Arabs according to the UN Partition Plan for Palestine [resulting in UN General Assembly-resolution, nr 181,which was accepted dd december 1947]
The rest of the curtailed Arab area was occupied by respective Trans-Jordan [namely the present Westbank and Eastern-Jerusalem] and Egypt [the present Gaza-area]

Jerusalem, which would have a corpus separatum-status [an international character], according to the Partition Plan, was partly occupied by the newly exclaimed State of Israel [Western Jerusalem], partly by Trans-Jordan [Eastern Jerusalem]

B The humanitarian toll of the war

The humanitarian toll of the war was very high, especially on the Arab-Palestine side.

Although it has to be admitted, that war-crimes and grave human rights violations took place on both sides [4], the fact remains, that, yet apart from the horrible character as such, a number of massacres in Arabic villages, instigated by zionist/Israeli terrorgangs, has had disasterous consequences for the Palestinian/Arab population in Palestine

The most notorious was the massacre in the Arab village of Deir Yassin in the night of april the 9th to the 10th, in which 100 to 120 Palestinian/Arab inhabitants were killed.
Those responsible, who have been actually never brought to justice, were units of the Israeli-zionistic terror-gangs Irgun and Stern [with knowlegde of the regular zionist army the Haganah, which would later deny any responsibility], with as commanders the later Israeli prime-ministers mr Begin and mr Shamir.

Moreover, in his book ”The Revolt”, the Israeli prime-minister Mr Begin alleged, that without the ”victory” (his words) of Deir Yassin, the State of Israel probably wouldn’t be founded at all.
Although this allegation could have referred to the intimidating effect on the Palestinian civilian population, without a deliberated plan to provoke this, it must be noticed, that this bery allegation was made by one of the responsible commanders for the attack on Deir Yassin.

Yet apart from the massacres and the following immense stream of refugees, on which I shall refer, also 400 Arab villages were destroyed [5]

C Military aims of Plan Dalet and other Israeli military operations:

Although I will not go as far as to assume, that the massacres were aimed deliberately to expell the Arab population, it is highly probable, that Plan Dalet (the zionist-Israeli military operations between april the 1st and may the 15th 1948] has had as main goals as well the occupation of parts of the Arab area [according to the decision by UN resolution 181], as the destruction of Arab villages in the Jewish area [according to the decision by UN resolution 181]

Referring to that occupation, I quote the ”introduction” to Plan Dalet:

´´a) “The objective of this plan is to gain control of the areas of the Hebrew state and defend its borders. It also aims at gaining control of the areas of Jewish settlements and concentration which are located outside the borders (of the Hebrew state) against regular, semi-regular, and small forces operating from bases outside or inside the state.´´

Regarding the deliberate destruction of Arab villages I quote Section B of the Plan:

´´Destruction of villages (setting fire to, blowing up, and planting mines in the debris), especially those population centers which are difficult to control continuously. … Mounting search and control operations according to the following guidelines: encirclement of the village and conducting a search inside it. In the event of resistance, the armed force must be destroyed and the population expelled outside the borders of the state. ´´

Also the later Israeli-zionist plans were embroidering on the mourning clothes of military attacks on Arab villages and the occupation of as much as Arab area as possible.

D Stream of refugees:

It will not be a surprise to the reader, that as a consequence of this dirty war, hunderd-thousands of Arab people fled, due to the ditect and indirect expulsion from their houses and lands

Indirectly because of fear for new massacres, directly because of expulsions by the Israeli-zionistic regulary troops, as well the terrorgangs Irgun and Stern.
More than 750.000 Arab refugees were the victims of those expulsions

Not only those expulsions are definitely inhuman, morover, being ethnic cleanings, they belong to the gravest war-crimes

The humanitarian toll has its consequences till today and is still enlarged by the second ethnic cleansing in 1967, after the Israeli victory in the Six Day war [the socalled ”june-war], by which more than 250.000 people fled or were expulsed.

Further it needs to be said, that this expulsion of the Arab-Palestinian population was not only one of the aims of Plan Dalet, but was also rooted in the political-ideological ideas of great number of prominent zionist leaders
I will refer to this later

1 Israeli version of the cause of the Refugee-stream:

Evidently, the need of an official apologetic Israeli version of the tragic events was high, not only as a justification for the ”outside world”, but also to keep up the myth of the ”high standard” principles of the ”Jewish State”, in contrast with the ”barbarism” of the Arabs, thus corresponding with the Western-European racist views about Arab people.

Except for those racist views, there were more reasons for believing the Israeli version and supporting the new-founded State of Israel, like Western guilt-feelings about the holocaust, religious fantasies about the refoundation of the ”Promised Land” by people, who called themselves ”christians” and colonial thought [which didn’t consider it as unacceptable to ”found a State” in the country of the autochtonous people, in casu the Palestinian Arabs]

In the Israeli version, the emphasis was being laid on the voluntarily departure of the Arab-Palestinian population, in response to an Arab broadcast-call, which urged the Palestinian Arabs to leave Palestine, waiting for the victory over ”the Jews” [thus referring to the zionist-Israeli armies]

However, neither the official Israeli ”first generation” historians, nor the later New Historians, who are contradicting the official version, ever have found any proof of the existence of this socalled ”broadcast-call”

2 Unmasking of the official Israeli version: The New Historians

However, another important discovery, which would throw a whole different light on the official Israeli history, was made by the New Historians like Benny Morris, Ilan Pappe and others, namely the evident proof, that no ”voluntarily depart” had taken place, but either a mass expulsion or a flight in panic, out of fear for future massacres

The proof was found in Israeli governmental and army papers, archive-materials and other documentation.

Yet apart from the official governmental and army material, it is highly unlikely anyway, that a great deal of the civilian population, consisting of complete families, would abamdon homes and lands to depart because of a broadcast-call of one or more Arab leaders.
Further, the flight behaviour [a mother without her children, a man without his wife, a family without an old father or mother], as well as the leaving behind of neccessary tools [like clothes] shows a hurried and unvoluntarily depart.

To complete the zionist ”hall of shame”, some films have been discovered, which show pictures of the actual expulsion of the civilian population by Israeli military units.

E The deeperlying motivation for the ethnic cleansings:

1 The views of the zionist leaders

Untill recently the reality of the expulsions, as well as the criminal character of them, has been unmasked, but yet too little, the deeperlying causes have been emphasized

It must be said, that there are critical zionists, who have the moral decency, not to deny the scientific findings of the New Historians, but they assumpt mosltly, that the ethnic cleansings were not a part of a deliberate plan.

That is not correct

The historian Ilan Pappe states in his book ”The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine”, that the decision to this ethnic cleansing has been made in the socalled ”Red House” [located on the present Sheraton Tel Aviv], on the 30th of march 1948, during a meeting, headed under the chairmanship of the Israeli politician David Ben Gurion.

That this isn’t a new view, is being confirmed by a number of statements, made by zionist leaders in the past, who obviously have shown no moral objections against the expulsion of the Arab-Palestinian population.

In the introduction to this article I have quoted already a sentence of a letter, the already named politician David Ben Gurion wrote to his son in 1937.

Another notorious example is article III of the draft charter, which Theodor Herzl [6] proposed to the Sultan of Turkey [7] in 1901, which would give the Jews the right to deport the existing rural population [8]

However, it needs to be said, that not all zionist leaders hold this opinion.
So at the 7th zionistic Congress in Basel in 1905, Hillel Zeitlin [9] challenged the defenders of the transfer-idea by stating:

”Everyone seems to forget, that Palestine belongs to others and that the country is fully populated” [10]
The removal of the Jews to Palestine couldn’t be succesfull, according to Zeitlins opinion, unless the others should be transferred ”which shouldn’t be executed by anyone ”

Probably without realizing fully, this conscientious man referred to the very essence of the latter unscrupulous actions of the zionist leaders in the war of 1948.

2 The demografical problem

Although is being shown, that the perversity of the ethnical cleansing is based on zionist views from the time of Theodor Herzl, which are related to the then colonial contempt for the autochton population, also another motive must be named, the socalled ”demografical problem”

This ”demografical problem” has played a part in early Israeli politics till nowadays and can be in shortly characterized as the fear for a Palestinian population-majority in Israel.

It is clear

When a society is based on equal rights for everyone, regardless race, religion or descent, the number of different population-groups are of no importance.
However, when State policy is based on unequal rights, or stronger, on the denial of the right of existence of a certain part of the population, the demografical situation does matter.

It is clear also, that the Arab Palestinians were the autochton population of Palestine.
Further it is a fact, that they would have obtained the de facto political power in Palestine, when there had been a normal decolonization-process, like in the surrounding countries [Syria, Jordan, the then Trans-Jordan, Iraq, Lebanon etc]

However, due to Jewish immigration from the outside and the unjust claim of zionist leaders on Palestine, with the Balfour Declaration in their hands, the Palestinian right on selfdetermination was fundamentally and seriously violated.

The international legitimation for the violation of their own UN/Charter [11] was consolidated in UN resolution 181, by which Palestine was divided in a Jewish and Arab part, completely ignoring the right of selfdetermination of the autochton Arab population.
Quite rightly, the representive of the Arabic High Committee called the resolution a colonial decision

However, to legimate this ”Jewish State” [12] [the part of Palestine, that according to Resolution 181, was granted to the zionists] as much as possible [13], it was of the utmost importance, to make it as ”empty” as possible [14], since the zionist idea was hardly to defend, when there was an Arab majority.

Further the zionist leaders wanted to make ”room” for the immigration of Jewish peope from Europe and the rest of the world.

F After the june-war, ethnic cleansing again

It is of importance, to focus on the relation between the zionist idea and the ethnic cleansings, because of its next role in the ethnic cleansings after the Six Day War [june war] in 1967.

Of course the zionist leaders knew, that the occupation of the remaining Palestinian areas [the Westbank and Gaza, which were conquered by Jordan and Egypt in the war of 1948] would meet important critics, especially because of the extension of members of the UN, since 1948.

The old bastion of colonial powers with some subject semi-colonies [like a number of South-American countries, the Fillippines and the very poor Haiti] had been extended with a large number of ex-colonies, which could see a comparison between the fate of the Palestinians and their own colonial past.

However, given the nature of zionist ”necessity”, again ethnic cleansings took place, with as tragic result 250.000 Palestinian refugees.
Only this time the zionists didn’t succeed in fullfilling the dirty game, because of the above named extension of the UN and the Palestinians, who had become wiser by the former bitter experiences.

The occupation of the remaining of historial Palestine was a fact and despite the unanimously accepted Security Resolution 242 [15], which Israel summoned to withdraw from the Palestinian territories [The Westbank, the Gaza-area and Eastern Jerusalem] , the occupation still lasts, 40 years later, with as humanitarian consequences, numerous human rights violations of the Palestinian civilian population, mass-expropriations by the illegal settlementspolicy and the building of the Israeli Wall through occupied Palestinian area.

5 june 2007
A sad jubilee.

G Tragical fate of the refugees and UN General Assembly resolution 194:

When it was too late for the 750.000 fled or expelled Palestinian Arabs, the international community reacted.
In General Assembly Resolution 194 [dd december 1948] Israel was summoned to permit the refugees to return to their homes or that compensation should be paid for their property.
It is a known fact, that Israel is ignoring this resolution now for 59 years, with as a consequence, that the most of the refugees are living since 1948 in refugee-camps, in often miserable circumstances, without much chance on better conditions, as well in the occupied Palestinian territories as in surrounding countries.

Yet apart from the bad conditions, for which Israel is head-responsible, at least in the occupied territories [16], it has been said already, that Israel always has refused to acknowledge the right to return of the Palestinian refugees or to compensate them for their loss of property.

Except inhuman, it is also discriminatory, since every Jew in the world has the right to ”return”, while this right has been denied to the original autochton population.

Epilogue:

I have tried to make clear, that the Palestine refugee-problem is not only the tragic result of the warcrimes in 1948, but is founded on a conscious ideology of transfer, which is a ”necessity” in the concept of an artificially created ”Jewish State”

On this ”Jewish State” concept, the idea of transfer has been based, which is still vivid in Israeli society

As long as there is an artificially created ”Jewish State”, which came to this world with the assistance of unholy midwives, being the UN countries, who approved the UN partition-plan, resulting in resolution 181, there will be no peaceful existence with the neigbouring Arab countries.

Neither a peaceprocess, based on International Law, is possible, since occupation, the construction of the Wall and settlementspolicy are considered as the very tools for the safety of the State of Israel.

Therefore, lasting peace and a just solution of the refugee problem will be possible only in a non-zionist, secular Palestine with equal rights for all inhabitants, based on a one man, one vote government

Astrid Essed
Amsterdam
The Netherlands

Notes:

[1] Count Folke Bernadotte was assissinated in september 1948 by 3 members of the Stern gang, among else the later Israeli prime-minister Shamir, who was also responsible for the Deir Yassin massacre in april 1948
The reason for this assisination was his courageous defence of the human rights of the Palestinian Arabs, trying to prevent their expulsion

See also:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folke_Bernadotte

http://www.counterpunch.org/himmelstein09162004.html

http://www.wrmea.com/backissues/0995/9509083.htm

[2] Although the UN partition-plan for Palestine had been approved by the UN [by means of UN resolution 181], it didn’t imply yet the official acknowledgment of the ”Jewish State”, since there was still UN-discussion about the ”tutelage” of Palestine
Of course this ”tutelage” would be based on the approved UN resolution 181, in respect with the percentage of Palestine, which would be ”Jewish” [56,4] and ”Arab” [42,8] and Jerusalem, being a ”corpus separatum” [international status]

[3] The respective Arabic States were Egypt, Trans-Jordan [the present Jordan], Syria, Lebanon and Iraq

[4] At april 13th, 4 days after the Deir Yassin massacre, there was an Arab military attack on a medical convoy travelling to Haddassah Hospital, with as a tragic result the death of 77 doctors, nurses, and other Jewish civilians.

[5] The Israeli Prof I Pappe is referring to even 531 villages

[6] Founder of the zionism

[7] The draft charter was part of the request to the Sultan of Turkey dd 1901, to establish a ”Judisch-Ottomanische LandCompagnie zur Besiedlung von Palestina und Syrien”, simply said, the establishment of a Jewish community in Palestine [which has been often described as a ”Syrian province”]

[8] See: Rabbi Dr. Chaim Simons, A Historical Survey of Proposals to
Transfer Arabs from Palestine
1895 – 1947

For the part III of the draft charter: See

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/7854/transfer03.html

[9] About Hillel Zeitlin:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillel_Zeitlin

[10] By this he challenged the early zionist propaganda, that Palestine was barely populated, embodied in the slogan of
“A land without a people for a people without a land”, which was uttered and propagated by the Jewish writer Israel Zangwill

[11] Article 1, 2, about the selfdetermination of all people, referring among else to the decolonisation-process
Evidently this principle was being ignored regarding the Arab-Palestinian population of Palestine
See
http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/

[12] the part of Palestine, that according to UN Resolution 181, was granted to the zionists

[13] In the ”Jewish” part of Palestine [according to UN Resolution 181], the Arab Palestinians formed during the fisrt months of 1948, nearly the half of the whole population

[14] ”free” from the Arab Palestinian population

[15] The text of the UN Security Resolution 242
See

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_242#Text_of_Resolution

[16] in respect with the international judicial obligation, according to the 4th Geneva Convention, of an occupying power for the welfare, wellbeing and safety of the ”protected persons” [people, who live under an occupation]

Further backgroundinformation:

About UN General Assembly resolution 194

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UN_General_Assembly_Resolution_194

About the Deir Yassin massacre:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deir_Yassin_massacre

http://www.deiryassin.org/index.html

Testimony of Mr de Reynier, head of the Red Cross-delegation in Palestine

http://www.debriefing.org/1026.html

Eyewitness-testimony of Colonel Meir Pael [the former mr Meir Pilevsky], who had been a Palmach-soldier during the tragic events in Deir Yassin

http://www.ariga.com/peacewatch/dy/dypail.htm

Further information about Deir Yassin:

http://www.deiryassin.org/shimontzabar.html

http://www.deiryassin.org/mh2001.html

About the Israeli human rights organisation Zochrot, trying to raise awareness of the Naqba, at the Israeli public opinion:

http://www.afsc.org/israel-palestine/profiles-of-peace/eitan-bronstein.htm

http://www.nakbainhebrew.org/index.php?lang=english

About Theodor Herzl:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodor_Herzl

http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Famous-Zionist-Quotes/Story643.html

Theodor Herzl: The Jewish State

http://www.geocities.com/Vienna/6640/zion/judenstaadt.html

Rabbi Dr. Chaim Simons, A Historical Survey of Proposals to
Transfer Arabs from Palestine
1895 – 1947

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/7854/transfer.html

Hillel Zeitlin:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillel_Zeitlin

About the historian Mr Benny Morris:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benny_Morris

http://hnn.us/articles/3166.html

Website of Prof Ilan Pappe:

http://www.ilanpappe.org/

http://www.ilanpappe.org/Articles/Ilan%20Pappe%20on%20how%20Israel%20was%20founded%20on%20ethnic%20cleansing.html

END
WIKIPEDIA
DEIR YASSIN MASSACRE
PALESTINE REMEMBERED
IF AMERICANS KNEW
REFUGEES AND ETHNIC CLEANSING
ORIGINELE BRON
IF AMERICANS KNEW

Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Noot 79/Israel raast en tiert!

Opgeslagen onder Divers

Noot 78/Israel raast en tiert!

[78]

D. ECONOMIC UNION AND TRANSIT

The Provisional Council of Government of each State shall enter into an undertaking with respect to Economic Union and Transit. This undertaking shall be drafted by the Commission provided for in section B, paragraph 1, utilizing to the greatest possible extent the advice and cooperation of representative organizations and bodies from each of the proposed States. It shall contain provisions to establish the Economic Union of Palestine and provide for other matters of common interest. If by 1 April 1948 the Provisional Councils of Government have not entered into the undertaking, the undertaking shall be put into force by the Commission.

The Economic Union of Palestine

The objectives of the Economic Union of Palestine shall be:

A customs union;

A joint currency system providing for a single foreign exchange rate;

Operation in the common interest on a non-discriminatory basis of railways inter-State highways; postal, telephone and telegraphic services and ports and airports involved in international trade and commerce;

Joint economic development, especially in respect of irrigation, land reclamation and soil conservation;”

UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION 181

NOVEMBER 29, 1947

https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/res181.asp

ZIE VOOR GEHELE TEKST, NOOT 76

Corpus separatum (Latin for “separated body“) was the internationalization proposal for Jerusalem and its surrounding area as part of the United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine. It was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly with a two-thirds majority in November 1947. ”

WIKIPEDIA

CORPUS SEPARATUM (JERUSALEM)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corpus_separatum_(Jerusalem)#:~:text=Corpus%20separatum%20(Latin%20for%20%22separated,thirds%20majority%20in%20November%201947.

Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Noot 78/Israel raast en tiert!

Opgeslagen onder Divers

Noot 77/Israel raast en tiert!

[77]

”n favour (33 countries, 72% of total votes)

Latin American and Caribbean (13 countries):

Western European and Others (8 countries):

Eastern European (5 countries):

African (2 countries):

Asia-Pacific (3 countries)

North America (2 countries)

Against (13 countries, 28% of total votes)

Asia-Pacific (9 countries, primarily Middle East sub-area):

Western European and Others (2 countries):

African (1 country):

Latin American and Caribbean (1 country):

Abstentions (10 countries)

Latin American and Caribbean (6 countries):

Asia-Pacific (1 country):

African (1 country):

Western European and Others (1 country):

Eastern European (1 country):

Absent (1 country)

Asia-Pacific (1 country):

 
WIKIPEDIA
UNITED NATIONS PARTITION PLAN FOR PALESTINE/FINAL VOTE
 
ORIGINELE BRON
WIKIPEDIA
UNITED NATIONS PARTITION PLAN FOR PALESTINE

Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Noot 77/Israel raast en tiert!

Opgeslagen onder Divers

Noot 76/Israel raast en tiert!

[76]
”Op 29 november 1947 is door de Algemene Vergadering van de VN bij meerderheid het zogeheten Verdelingsplan (Resolutie 181) aangenomen met 33 stemmen vóór, 13 tegen en 10 onthoudingen (1 lidstaat was bij de stemming afwezig). Van de Europese lidstaten stemden België, Denemarken, Frankrijk, Luxemburg, Nederland, Noorwegen, Polen en Zweden vóór; Griekenland stemde tegen; Groot-Brittannië onthield zich van stemming uit vrees voor problemen met moslim-onderdanen in Brits-Indië en elders. Het verslagen Duitsland en Italië waren nog niet in de VN opgenomen. Ook de Verenigde Staten en de Sovjet-Unie hadden vóór het Verdelingsplan gestemd.”
NPK
NEDERLANDS PALESTINA KOMITEE
KWESTIE PALESTINA
ZIE VOOR GEHELE TEKST, NOOT 75
”The partition resolution was finally adopted on 29 November with 33 votes in favor, 13 votes against, and 10 abstentions.”
INTERACTIVE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF THE
PALESTINE QUESTION
UN PARTITION PLAN, 29 NOVEMBER 1947

On 29 November 1947, the UN General Assembly adopted Resolution 181 recommending the partition of Palestine into Jewish and Arab states (along with an international zone encompassing Jerusalem and Bethlehem ). Specifically, the plan proposed a Jewish state on more than half of Mandate Palestine at a time when Jews comprised less than a third of the population and owned less than 7 percent of the land. Passage of the UN Partition Plan , in the face of strong Arab opposition, is among the most significant dates of modern Palestinian history, for in essence it gave international legitimacy to the Zionist conquest of Palestine by force of arms.

The notion of eventually dividing Palestine into Jewish and Arab states was first floated in official British discourse by the 1937 Peel Commission . Compared to the UN Partition Plan, the Peel Commission proposed a much smaller Jewish state. The plan was accepted by the Jewish Agency , the international body representing the World Zionist Organization , and the leadership of the Mapai (Labor) Party, the dominant Jewish force on the ground. However, large numbers of Zionists—including the “>Revisionists and the Union of Po’alei Tzion —objected to a plan falling so far short of their goals. The Peel Commission suggestion that the feasibility of partition required the transfer of Palestinian Arabs outside the Jewish state softened the opposition, and after fierce debate the Zionist Congress accepted the plan as a first step, providing a secure base where Jewish immigration could continue uninhibited and which could subsequently be expanded. For the Palestinian Arabs, who then constituted over 70 percent of the population, partition never ceased to be anathema: the depth of their popular opposition can be gauged by the immediate escalation of the Great Palestinian Rebellion launched in 1936. The British Woodhead Commission , formed to study the feasibility the Peel plan, concluded in November 1938 that partition was “impracticable.”

The Palestine situation became increasingly unmanageable after World War II , and in February 1947 Britain announced its intention to terminate the Mandate. In May 1947, a month after Britain formally turned the Palestine case over to the United Nations , the UN created the Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP ) comprising representatives of Australia , Canada , Czechoslovakia , Guatemala , India , Iran , the The Netherlands , Peru , Sweden , Uruguay , and Yugoslavia . UNSCOP’s September 1947 report listed eleven unanimous recommendations on general principles, including the transition of Palestine from Mandated territory to independence, preservation of the pre-existing “status quo ” on the holy places and rights of the religious communities as well as of the foreign privileges conceded by the Ottomans, and—crucially—linking the Palestine question to a solution to the postwar Jewish refugee problem. In addition to its unanimous recommendations, UNSCOP presented two plans devised by two different working groups: a Plan of Partition with Economic Union (supported by Canada, Czechoslovakia, Guatemala, the Netherlands, Peru, Sweden, and Uruguay) and a Federal State Solution (supported by India, Iran, and Yugoslavia).

On 23 September 1947, the UN General Assembly formed an Ad Hoc Committee to consider UNSCOP’s report. Representatives of the Arab Higher Committee (Hay’a) (AHC) and the Jewish Agency attended. The AHC rejected the proposals of both UNSCOP working groups, arguing that any solution that privileged the claims of Jews to Palestine was inconsistent with the UN Charter . The Jewish Agency—which in August 1946 had submitted its own partition proposal, with a Palestinian rump state whose boundaries bear some resemblance to those of the post-1948 West Bank —accepted the partition proposal but lobbied for the inclusion of Jerusalem and the western Galilee (e.g., Acre , Nazareth ) in the Jewish state. The ad hoc committee made some revisions to the UNSCOP report’s boundaries, and the proposal for partition proceeded to the General Assembly for a vote.

The proposed Jewish state covered some 56 percent of Mandate Palestine divided into three barely contiguous parts/areas: the eastern Galilee (including Safad , Tiberias , Baysan , and the Sea of Galilee ), a coastal area (about two-thirds of Palestine’s coast, including Haifa , Tel Aviv , and the fertile lowland plains), and most of the Negev (excluding Bir al-Sabi’ and a strip/area running about half-way down the border with Egypt , but giving access to the Red Sea ). Of Mandate Palestine’s sixteen districts, nine were allotted to the Jewish state, only one of which had a Jewish majority; the UN-proposed Jewish state as a whole had an Arab “minority” approaching 47 percent.

The Arab state—which was to be linked to Transjordan —comprised some 43 percent of Mandate Palestine for an Arab population exceeding two-thirds. It, too, constituted three parts/areas in addition to the tiny Jaffa enclave (surrounded by the Jewish state). Its main areas were Western Galilee down to Acre and including Nazareth; the central Palestinian highland areas around Jenin , Nablus , and Hebron , extending west to include Tulkarm , Qalqilya , Lydda , and Ramla , and south to include the central southern desert hub of Bir al-Sabi’; and a coastline strip (including Gaza ) running from Isdud to the Egyptian border and following that border southwards. The international enclave around Jerusalem and Bethlehem (the corpus separatum) had a slight Arab majority.

The UN vote was originally scheduled for 26 November, but proponents of partition feared that the proposal would not receive the required two-thirds majority and succeeded in delaying the vote for three days, giving more time for the intense lobbying and pressures brought to bear on member states, primarily by Washington and Zionist organizations. The partition resolution was finally adopted on 29 November with 33 votes in favor, 13 votes against, and 10 abstentions. The announcement of the UN acceptance of partition was met in Arab Palestine by a general strike and demonstrations; some—in Jerusalem and elsewhere—turned to destructive riots. Meanwhile, emboldened by the international imprimatur given by the UN decision, the Zionist military organizations attacked Arab villages and residential quarters before launching the highly organized campaigns of Plan Dalet starting in early April 1948. Villagers together with the more organized Arab volunteer and irregular forces defended their territory and attacked Zionist areas. This “civil war” phase of the 1947–49 Palestine War ended with Israel’s declaration of statehood on 15 May 1948.

By emphasizing their acceptance of the idea of partition and Arab rejection of it, while ignoring the deep injustice written into the details of the proposal in terms of both land and population, Zionists were able to cloak the ensuing conquest and displacement of Palestinians as both legitimate and defensive. The UN Partition Plan thus represents both the fruits of Zionist efforts to secure international recognition of Jewish sovereignty in Palestine and the immediate precursor to the establishment of the State of Israel in May 1948, predicated as it was on the expulsion of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians from their lands.

Selected Bibliography:

Gilbert, Martin. “The Jewish Agency’s Partition Plan, August 1946” (map). In The Routledge Atlas of the Arab-Israeli Conflict (7th ed., p. 35). New York: Routledge.

Khalidi, Walid. “Revisiting the UNGA Partition Resolution.” Journal of Palestine Studies 27, no.1 (Autumn 1997): 5–21.

McCarthy, Justin. The Population of Palestine: Population, History, and Statistics of the Late Ottoman Period and the Mandate. Washington, DC: Institute for Palestine Studies; New York: Columbia University Press, 1990.

Rogan, Eugene L., and Avi Shlaim. The War for Palestine: Rewriting the History of 1948. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007.

WIKIPEDIA

UNITED NATIONS PARTITION PLAN FOR PALESTINE

https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine

UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION 181

NOVEMBER 29, 1947

https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/res181.asp

The General Assembly, Having met in special session at the request of the mandatory Power to constitute and instruct a Special Committee to prepare for the consideration of the question of the future Government of Palestine at the second regular session;

Having constituted a Special Committee and instructed it to investigate all questions and issues relevant to the problem of Palestine, and to prepare proposals for the solution of the problem, and

Having received and examined the report of the Special Committee (document A/364)(1) including a number of unanimous recommendations and a plan of partition with economic union approved by the majority of the Special Committee,

Considers that the present situation in Palestine is one which is likely to impair the general welfare and friendly relations among nations;

Takes note of the declaration by the mandatory Power that it plans to complete its evacuation of Palestine by l August 1948;

Recommends to the United Kingdom, as the mandatory Power for Palestine, and to all other Members of the United Nations the adoption and implementation, with regard to the future Government of Palestine, of the Plan of Partition with Economic Union set out below;

Requests that

The Security Council take the necessary measures as provided for in the plan for its implementation;

The Security Council consider, if circumstances during the transitional period require such consideration, whether the situation in Palestine constitutes a threat to the peace. If it decides that such a threat exists, and in order to maintain international peace and security, the Security Council should supplement the authorization of the General Assembly by taking measures, under Articles 39 and 41 of the Charter, to empower the United Nations Commission, as provided in this resolution, to exercise in Palestine the functions which are assigned to it by this resolution;

The Security Council determine as a threat to the peace, breach of the peace or act of aggression, in accordance with Article 39 of the Charter, any attempt to alter by force the settlement envisaged by this resolution;

The Trusteeship Council be informed of the responsibilities envisaged for it in this plan;

Calls upon the inhabitants of Palestine to take such steps as may be necessary on their part to put this plan into effect;

Appeals to all Governments and all peoples to refrain from taking any action which might hamper or delay the carrying out of these recommendations, and

Authorizes the Secretary-General to reimburse travel and subsistence expenses of the members of the Commission referred to in Part 1, Section B, Paragraph I below, on such basis and in such form as he may determine most appropriate in the circumstances, and to provide the Commission with the necessary staff to assist in carrying out the functions assigned to the Commission by the General Assembly.*

The General Assembly,

Authorizes the Secretary-General to draw from the Working Capital Fund a sum not to exceed 2,000,000 dollars for the purposes set forth in the last paragraph of the resolution on the future government of Palestine.

PLAN OF PARTITION WITH ECONOMIC UNION

Part I. – Future Constitution and Government of Palestine

A. TERMINATION OF MANDATE, PARTITION AND INDEPENDENCE

The Mandate for Palestine shall terminate as soon as possible but in any case not later than 1 August 1948.

The armed forces of the mandatory Power shall be progressively withdrawn from Palestine, the withdrawal to be completed as soon as possible but in any case not later than 1 August 1948.

The mandatory Power shall advise the Commission, as far in advance as possible, of its intention to terminate the mandate and to evacuate each area. The mandatory Power shall use its best endeavours to ensure that an area situated in the territory of the Jewish State, including a seaport and hinterland adequate to provide facilities for a substantial immigration, shall be evacuated at the earliest possible date and in any event not later than 1 February 1948.

Independent Arab and Jewish States and the Special International Regime for the City of Jerusalem, set forth in Part III of this Plan, shall come into existence in Palestine two months after the evacuation of the armed forces of the mandatory Power has been completed but in any case not later than 1 October 1948. The boundaries of the Arab State, the Jewish State, and the City of Jerusalem shall be as described in Parts II and III below.

The period between the adoption by the General Assembly of its recommendation on the question of Palestine and the establishment of the independence of the Arab and Jewish States shall be a transitional period.

B. STEPS PREPARATORY TO INDEPENDENCE

A Commission shall be set up consisting of one representative of each of five Member States. The Members represented on the Commission shall be elected by the General Assembly on as broad a basis, geographically and otherwise, as possible.

The administration of Palestine shall, as the mandatory Power withdraws its armed forces, be progressively turned over to the Commission, which shall act in conformity with the recommendations of the General Assembly, under the guidance of the Security Council. The mandatory Power shall to the fullest possible extent coordinate its plans for withdrawal with the plans of the Commission to take over and administer areas which have been evacuated.

In the discharge of this administrative responsibility the Commission shall have authority to issue necessary regulations and take other measures as required.

The mandatory Power shall not take any action to prevent, obstruct or delay the implementation by the Commission of the measures recommended by the General Assembly.

On its arrival in Palestine the Commission shall proceed to carry out measures for the establishment of the frontiers of the Arab and Jewish States and the City of Jerusalem in accordance with the general lines of the recommendations of the General Assembly on the partition of Palestine. Nevertheless, the boundaries as described in Part II of this Plan are to be modified in such a way that village areas as a rule will not be divided by state boundaries unless pressing reasons make that necessary.

The Commission, after consultation with the democratic parties and other public organizations of the Arab and Jewish States, shall select and establish in each State as rapidly as possible a Provisional Council of Government. The activities of both the Arab and Jewish Provisional Councils of Government shall be carried out under the general direction of the Commission.

If by 1 April 1948 a Provisional Council of Government cannot be selected for either of the States, or, if selected, cannot carry out its functions, the Commission shall communicate that fact to the Security Council for such action with respect to that State as the Security Council may deem proper, and to the Secretary-General for communication to the Members of the United Nations.

Subject to the provisions of these recommendations, during the transitional period the Provisional Councils of Government, acting under the Commission, shall have full authority in the areas under their control including authority over matters of immigration and land regulation.

The Provisional Council of Government of each State, acting under the Commission, shall progressively receive from the Commission full responsibility for the administration of that State in the period between the termination of the Mandate and the establishment of the State’s independence.

The Commission shall instruct the Provisional Councils of Government of both the Arab and Jewish States, after their formation, to proceed to the establishment of administrative organs of government, central and local.

The Provisional Council of Government of each State shall, within the shortest time possible, recruit an armed militia from the residents of that State, sufficient in number to maintain internal order and to prevent frontier clashes.

This armed militia in each State shall, for operational purposes, be under the command of Jewish or Arab officers resident in that State, but general political and military control, including the choice of the militia’s High Command, shall be exercised by the Commission.

The Provisional Council of Government of each State shall, not later than two months after the withdrawal of the armed forces of the mandatory Power, hold elections to the Constituent Assembly which shall be conducted on democratic lines.

The election regulations in each State shall be drawn up by the Provisional Council of Government and approved by the Commission. Qualified voters for each State for this election shall be persons over eighteen years of age who are (a) Palestinian citizens residing in that State; and (b) Arabs and Jews residing in the State, although not Palestinian citizens, who, before voting, have signed a notice of intention to become citizens of such State.

Arabs and Jews residing in the City of Jerusalem who have signed a notice of intention to become citizens, the Arabs of the Arab State and the Jews of the Jewish State, shall be entitled to vote in the Arab and Jewish States respectively.

Women may vote and be elected to the Constituent Assemblies.

During the transitional period no Jew shall be permitted to establish residence in the area of the proposed Arab State, and no Arab shall be permitted to establish residence in the area of the proposed Jewish State, except by special leave of the Commission.

The Constituent Assembly of each State shall draft a democratic constitution for its State and choose a provisional government to succeed the Provisional Council of Government appointed by the Commission. The Constitutions of the States shall embody Chapters 1 and 2 of the Declaration provided for in section C below and include, inter alia, provisions for:

Establishing in each State a legislative body elected by universal suffrage and by secret ballot on the basis of proportional representation, and an executive body responsible to the legislature;

Settling all international disputes in which the State may be involved by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered;

Accepting the obligation of the State to refrain in its international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purpose of the United Nations;

Guaranteeing to all persons equal and non-discriminatory rights in civil, political, economic and religious matters and the enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms, including freedom of religion, language, speech and publication, education, assembly and association;

Preserving freedom of transit and visit for all residents and citizens of the other State in Palestine and the City of Jerusalem, subject to considerations of national security, provided that each State shall control residence within its borders.

The Commission shall appoint a preparatory economic commission of three members to make whatever arrangements are possible for economic co-operation, with a view to establishing, as soon as practicable, the Economic Union and the Joint Economic Board, as provided in section D below.

During the period between the adoption of the recommendations on the question of Palestine by the General Assembly and the termination of the Mandate, the mandatory Power in Palestine shall maintain full responsibility for administration in areas from which it has not withdrawn its armed forces. The Commission shall assist the mandatory Power in the carrying out of these functions. Similarly the mandatory Power shall co-operate with the Commission in the execution of its functions.

With a view to ensuring that there shall be continuity in the functioning of administrative services and that, on the withdrawal of the armed forces of the mandatory Power, the whole administration shall be in the charge of the Provisional Councils and the Joint Economic Board, respectively, acting under the Commission, there shall be a progressive transfer, from the mandatory Power to the Commission, of responsibility for all the functions of government, including that of maintaining law and order in the areas from which the forces of the mandatory Power have been withdrawn.

The Commission shall be guided in its activities by the recommendations of the General Assembly and by such instructions as the Security Council may consider necessary to issue.

The measures taken by the Commission, within the recommendations of the General Assembly, shall become immediately effective unless the Commission has previously received contrary instructions from the Security Council.

The Commission shall render periodic monthly progress reports, or more frequently if desirable, to the Security Council.

The Commission shall make its final report to the next regular session of the General Assembly and to the Security Council simultaneously.

C. DECLARATION

A declaration shall be made to the United Nations by the Provisional Government of each proposed State before independence. It shall contain, inter alia, the following clauses:

General Provision

The stipulations contained in the Declaration are recognized as fundamental laws of the State and no law, regulation or official action shall conflict or interfere with these stipulations, nor shall any law, regulation or official action prevail over them.

Chapter 1: Holy Places, Religious Buildings and Sites

Existing rights in respect of Holy Places and religious buildings or sites shall not be denied or impaired.

In so far as Holy Places are concerned, the liberty of access, visit, and transit shall be guaranteed, in conformity with existing rights, to all residents and citizen of the other State and of the City of Jerusalem, as well as to aliens, without distinction as to nationality, subject to requirements of national security, public order and decorum.

Similarly, freedom of worship shall be guaranteed in conformity with existing rights, subject to the maintenance of public order and decorum.

Holy Places and religious buildings or sites shall be preserved. No act shall be permitted which may in an way impair their sacred character. If at any time it appears to the Government that any particular Holy Place, religious, building or site is in need of urgent repair, the Government may call upon the community or communities concerned to carry out such repair. The Government may carry it out itself at the expense of the community or community concerned if no action is taken within a reasonable time.

No taxation shall be levied in respect of any Holy Place, religious building or site which was exempt from taxation on the date of the creation of the State.

No change in the incidence of such taxation shall be made which would either discriminate between the owners or occupiers of Holy Places, religious buildings or sites, or would place such owners or occupiers in a position less favourable in relation to the general incidence of taxation than existed at the time of the adoption of the Assembly’s recommendations.

The Governor of the City of Jerusalem shall have the right to determine whether the provisions of the Constitution of the State in relation to Holy Places, religious buildings and sites within the borders of the State and the religious rights appertaining thereto, are being properly applied and respected, and to make decisions on the basis of existing rights in cases of disputes which may arise between the different religious communities or the rites of a religious community with respect to such places, buildings and sites. He shall receive full co-operation and such privileges and immunities as are necessary for the exercise of his functions in the State.

Chapter 2: Religious and Minority Rights

Freedom of conscience and the free exercise of all forms of worship, subject only to the maintenance of public order and morals, shall be ensured to all.

No discrimination of any kind shall be made between the inhabitants on the ground of race, religion, language or sex.

All persons within the jurisdiction of the State shall be entitled to equal protection of the laws.

The family law and personal status of the various minorities and their religious interests, including endowments, shall be respected.

Except as may be required for the maintenance of public order and good government, no measure shall be taken to obstruct or interfere with the enterprise of religious or charitable bodies of all faiths or to discriminate against any representative or member of these bodies on the ground of his religion or nationality.

The State shall ensure adequate primary and secondary education for the Arab and Jewish minority, respectively, in its own language and its cultural traditions.

The right of each community to maintain its own schools for the education of its own members in its own language, while conforming to such educational requirements of a general nature as the State may impose, shall not be denied or impaired. Foreign educational establishments shall continue their activity on the basis of their existing rights.

No restriction shall be imposed on the free use by any citizen of the State of any language in private intercourse, in commerce, in religion, in the Press or in publications of any kind, or at public meetings.(3)

No expropriation of land owned by an Arab in the Jewish State (by a Jew in the Arab State)(4) shall be allowed except for public purposes. In all cases of expropriation full compensation as fixed by the Supreme Court shall be said previous to dispossession.

Chapter 3: Citizenship, International Conventions and Financial Obligations

1. Citizenship Palestinian citizens residing in Palestine outside the City of Jerusalem, as well as Arabs and Jews who, not holding Palestinian citizenship, reside in Palestine outside the City of Jerusalem shall, upon the recognition of independence, become citizens of the State in which they are resident and enjoy full civil and political rights. Persons over the age of eighteen years may opt, within one year from the date of recognition of independence of the State in which they reside, for citizenship of the other State, providing that no Arab residing in the area of the proposed Arab State shall have the right to opt for citizenship in the proposed Jewish State and no Jew residing in the proposed Jewish State shall have the right to opt for citizenship in the proposed Arab State. The exercise of this right of option will be taken to include the wives and children under eighteen years of age of persons so opting.

Arabs residing in the area of the proposed Jewish State and Jews residing in the area of the proposed Arab State who have signed a notice of intention to opt for citizenship of the other State shall be eligible to vote in the elections to the Constituent Assembly of that State, but not in the elections to the Constituent Assembly of the State in which they reside.

2. International conventions

The State shall be bound by all the international agreements and conventions, both general and special, to which Palestine has become a party. Subject to any right of denunciation provided for therein, such agreements and conventions shall be respected by the State throughout the period for which they were concluded.

Any dispute about the applicability and continued validity of international conventions or treaties signed or adhered to by the mandatory Power on behalf of Palestine shall be referred to the International Court of Justice in accordance with the provisions of the Statute of the Court.

3. Financial obligations

The State shall respect and fulfil all financial obligations of whatever nature assumed on behalf of Palestine by the mandatory Power during the exercise of the Mandate and recognized by the State. This provision includes the right of public servants to pensions, compensation or gratuities.

These obligations shall be fulfilled through participation in the Joint Economic Board in respect of those obligations applicable to Palestine as a whole, and individually in respect of those applicable to, and fairly apportionable between, the States.

A Court of Claims, affiliated with the Joint Economic Board, and composed of one member appointed by the United Nations, one representative of the United Kingdom and one representative of the State concerned, should be established. Any dispute between the United Kingdom and the State respecting claims not recognized by the latter should be referred to that Court.

Commercial concessions granted in respect of any part of Palestine prior to the adoption of the resolution by the General Assembly shall continue to be valid according to their terms, unless modified by agreement between the concession-holders and the State.

Chapter 4: Miscellaneous Provisions

The provisions of chapters 1 and 2 of the declaration shall be under the guarantee of the United Nations, and no modifications shall be made in them without the assent of the General Assembly of the United Nations. Any Member of the United Nations shall have the right to bring to the attention of the General Assembly any infraction or danger of infraction of any of these stipulations, and the General Assembly may thereupon make such recommendations as it may deem proper in the circumstances.

Any dispute relating to the application or interpretation of this declaration shall be referred, at the request of either party, to the International Court of Justice, unless the parties agree to another mode of settlement.

D. ECONOMIC UNION AND TRANSIT

The Provisional Council of Government of each State shall enter into an undertaking with respect to Economic Union and Transit. This undertaking shall be drafted by the Commission provided for in section B, paragraph 1, utilizing to the greatest possible extent the advice and cooperation of representative organizations and bodies from each of the proposed States. It shall contain provisions to establish the Economic Union of Palestine and provide for other matters of common interest. If by 1 April 1948 the Provisional Councils of Government have not entered into the undertaking, the undertaking shall be put into force by the Commission.

The Economic Union of Palestine

The objectives of the Economic Union of Palestine shall be:

A customs union;

A joint currency system providing for a single foreign exchange rate;

Operation in the common interest on a non-discriminatory basis of railways inter-State highways; postal, telephone and telegraphic services and ports and airports involved in international trade and commerce;

Joint economic development, especially in respect of irrigation, land reclamation and soil conservation;

Access for both States and for the City of Jerusalem on a non-discriminatory basis to water and power facilities.

There shall be established a Joint Economic Board, which shall consist of three representatives of each of the two States and three foreign members appointed by the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations. The foreign members shall be appointed in the first instance for a term of three years; they shall serve as individuals and not as representatives of States.

The functions of the Joint Economic Board shall be to implement either directly or by delegation the measures necessary to realize the objectives of the Economic Union. It shall have all powers of organization and administration necessary to fulfil its functions.

The States shall bind themselves to put into effect the decisions of the Joint Economic Board. The Board’s decisions shall be taken by a majority vote.

In the event of failure of a State to take the necessary action the Board may, by a vote of six members, decide to withhold an appropriate portion of the part of the customs revenue to which the State in question is entitled under the Economic Union. Should the State persist in its failure to cooperate, the Board may decide by a simple majority vote upon such further sanctions, including disposition of funds which it has withheld, as it may deem appropriate.

In relation to economic development, the functions of the Board shall be planning, investigation and encouragement of joint development projects, but it shall not undertake such projects except with the assent of both States and the City of Jerusalem, in the event that Jerusalem is directly involved in the development project.

In regard to the joint currency system, the currencies circulating in the two States and the City of Jerusalem shall be issued under the authority of the Joint Economic Board, which shall be the sole issuing authority and which shall determine the reserves to be held against such currencies.

So far as is consistent with paragraph 2(b) above, each State may operate its own central bank, control its own fiscal and credit policy, its foreign exchange receipts and expenditures, the grant of import licences, and may conduct international financial operations on its own faith and credit. During the first two years after the termination of the Mandate, the Joint Economic Board shall have the authority to take such measures as may be necessary to ensure that – to the extent that the total foreign exchange revenues of the two States from the export of goods and services permit, and provided that each State takes appropriate measures to conserve its own foreign exchange resources – each State shall have available, in any twelve months’ period, foreign exchange sufficient to assure the supply of quantities of imported goods and services for consumption in its territory equivalent to the quantities of such goods and services consumed in that territory in the twelve months’ period ending 31 December 1947.

All economic authority not specifically vested in the Joint Economic Board is reserved to each State.

There shall be a common customs tariff with complete freedom of trade between the States, and between the States and the City of Jerusalem.

The tariff schedules shall be drawn up by a Tariff Commission, consisting of representatives of each of the States in equal numbers, and shall be submitted to the Joint Economic Board for approval by a majority vote. In case of disagreement in the Tariff Commission, the Joint Economic Board shall arbitrate the points of difference. In the event that the Tariff Commission fails to draw up any schedule by a date to be fixed, the Joint Economic Board shall determine the tariff schedule.

The following items shall be a first charge on the customs and other common revenue of the Joint Economic Board:

The expenses of the customs service and of the operation of the joint services;

The administrative expenses of the Joint Economic Board;

The financial obligations of the Administration of Palestine, consisting of:

The service of the outstanding public debt;

The cost of superannuation benefits, now being paid or falling due in the future, in accordance with the rules and to the extent established by paragraph 3 of chapter 3 above.

After these obligations have been met in full, the surplus revenue from the customs and other common services shall be divided in the following manner: not less than 5 per cent and not more than 10 per cent to the City of Jerusalem; the residue shall be allocated to each State by the Joint Economic Board equitably, with the objective of maintaining a sufficient and suitable level of government and social services in each State, except that the share of either State shall not exceed the amount of that State’s contribution to the revenues of the Economic Union by more than approximately four million pounds in any year. The amount granted may be adjusted by the Board according to the price level in relation to the prices prevailing at the time of the establishment of the Union. After five years, the principles of the distribution of the joint revenue may be revised by the Joint Economic Board on a basis of equity.

All international conventions and treaties affecting customs tariff rates, and those communications services under the jurisdiction of the Joint Economic Board, shall be entered into by both States. In these matters, the two States shall be bound to act in accordance with the majority of the Joint Economic Board.

The Joint Economic Board shall endeavour to secure for Palestine’s exports fair and equal access to world markets.

All enterprises operated by the Joint Economic Board shall pay fair wages on a uniform basis.

Freedom of Transit and Visit

  • The undertaking shall contain provisions preserving freedom of transit and visit for all residents or citizens of both States and of the City of Jerusalem, subject to security considerations; provided that each State and the City shall control residence within its borders.Termination, Modification and Interpretation of the Undertaking

    The undertaking and any treaty issuing therefrom shall remain in force for a period of ten years. It shall continue in force until notice of termination, to take effect two years thereafter, is given by either of the parties.

    During the initial ten-year period, the undertaking and any treaty issuing therefrom may not be modified except by consent of both parties and with the approval of the General Assembly.

    Any dispute relating to the application or the interpretation of the undertaking and any treaty issuing therefrom shall be referred, at the request of either party, to the International Court Of Justice, unless the parties agree to another mode of settlement.

    E. ASSETS

    The movable assets of the Administration of Palestine shall be allocated to the Arab and Jewish States and the City of Jerusalem on an equitable basis. Allocations should be made by the United Nations Commission referred to iii section B, paragraph 1, above. Immovable assets shall become the property of the government of the territory in which they are situated.

    During the period between the appointment of the United Nations Commission and the termination of the Mandate, the mandatory Power shall, except in respect of ordinary operations, consult with the Commission on any measure which it may contemplate involving the liquidation, disposal or encumbering of the assets of the Palestine Government, such as the accumulated treasury surplus, the proceeds of Government bond issues, State lands or any other asset.

    F. ADMISSION TO MEMBERSHIP IN THE UNITED NATIONS

    When the independence of either the Arab or the Jewish State as envisaged in this plan has become effective and the declaration and undertaking, as envisaged in this plan, have been signed by either of them, sympathetic consideration should be given to its application for admission to membership in the United Nations in accordance with article 4 of the Charter of the United Nations.

    Part II. – Boundaries

    A. THE ARAB STATE

    The area of the Arab State in Western Galilee is bounded on the west by the Mediterranean and on the north by the frontier of the Lebanon from Ras en Naqura to a point north of Saliha. From there the boundary proceeds southwards, leaving the built-up area of Saliha in the Arab State, to join the southernmost point of this village. There it follows the western boundary line of the villages of ‘Alma, Rihaniya and Teitaba, thence following the northern boundary line of Meirun village to join the Acre-Safad Sub-District boundary line. It follows this line to a point west of Es Sammu’i village and joins it again at the northernmost point of Farradiya. Thence it follows the sub-district boundary line to the Acre-Safad main road. From here it follows the western boundary of Kafr-I’nan village until it reaches the Tiberias-Acre Sub-District boundary line, passing to the west of the junction of the Acre-Safad and Lubiya-Kafr-I’nan roads. From the south-west corner of Kafr-I’nan village the boundary line follows the western boundary of the Tiberias Sub-District to a point close to the boundary line between the villages of Maghar and ‘Eilabun, thence bulging out to the west to include as much of the eastern part of the plain of Battuf as is necessary for the reservoir proposed by the Jewish Agency for the irrigation of lands to the south and east.

    The boundary rejoins the Tiberias Sub-District boundary at a point on the Nazareth-Tiberias road south-east of the built-up area of Tur’an; thence it runs southwards, at first following the sub-district boundary and then passing between the Kadoorie Agricultural School and Mount Tabor, to a point due south at the base of Mount Tabor. From here it runs due west, parallel to the horizontal grid line 230, to the north-east corner of the village lands of Tel Adashim. It then runs to the northwest corner of these lands, whence it turns south and west so as to include in the Arab State the sources of the Nazareth water supply in Yafa village. On reaching Ginneiger it follows the eastern, northern and western boundaries of the lands of this village to their south-west comer, whence it proceeds in a straight line to a point on the Haifa-Afula railway on the boundary between the villages of Sarid and El-Mujeidil. This is the point of intersection. The south-western boundary of the area of the Arab State in Galilee takes a line from this point, passing northwards along the eastern boundaries of Sarid and Gevat to the north-eastern corner of Nahalal, proceeding thence across the land of Kefar ha Horesh to a central point on the southern boundary of the village of ‘Ilut, thence westwards along that village boundary to the eastern boundary of Beit Lahm, thence northwards and north-eastwards along its western boundary to the north-eastern corner of Waldheim and thence north-westwards across the village lands of Shafa ‘Amr to the southeastern corner of Ramat Yohanan. From here it runs due north-north-east to a point on the Shafa ‘Amr-Haifa road, west of its junction with the road of I’billin. From there it proceeds north-east to a point on the southern boundary of I’billin situated to the west of the I’billin-Birwa road. Thence along that boundary to its westernmost point, whence it turns to the north, follows across the village land of Tamra to the north-westernmost corner and along the western boundary of Julis until it reaches the Acre-Safad road. It then runs westwards along the southern side of the Safad-Acre road to the Galilee-Haifa District boundary, from which point it follows that boundary to the sea.

    The boundary of the hill country of Samaria and Judea starts on the Jordan River at the Wadi Malih south-east of Beisan and runs due west to meet the Beisan-Jericho road and then follows the western side of that road in a north-westerly direction to the junction of the boundaries of the Sub-Districts of Beisan, Nablus, and Jenin. From that point it follows the Nablus-Jenin sub-District boundary westwards for a distance of about three kilometres and then turns north-westwards, passing to the east of the built-up areas of the villages of Jalbun and Faqqu’a, to the boundary of the Sub-Districts of Jenin and Beisan at a point northeast of Nuris. Thence it proceeds first northwestwards to a point due north of the built-up area of Zie’in and then westwards to the Afula-Jenin railway, thence north-westwards along the District boundary line to the point of intersection on the Hejaz railway. From here the boundary runs southwestwards, including the built-up area and some of the land of the village of Kh. Lid in the Arab State to cross the Haifa-Jenin road at a point on the district boundary between Haifa and Samaria west of El- Mansi. It follows this boundary to the southernmost point of the village of El-Buteimat. From here it follows the northern and eastern boundaries of the village of Ar’ara rejoining the Haifa-Samaria district boundary at Wadi ‘Ara, and thence proceeding south-south-westwards in an approximately straight line joining up with the western boundary of Qaqun to a point east of the railway line on the eastern boundary of Qaqun village. From here it runs along the railway line some distance to the east of it to a point just east of the Tulkarm railway station. Thence the boundary follows a line half-way between the railway and the Tulkarm-Qalqiliya-Jaljuliya and Ras El-Ein road to a point just east of Ras El-Ein station, whence it proceeds along the railway some distance to the east of it to the point on the railway line south of the junction of the Haifa-Lydda and Beit Nabala lines, whence it proceeds along the southern border of Lydda airport to its south-west corner, thence in a south-westerly direction to a point just west of the built-up area of Sarafand El ‘Amar, whence it turns south, passing just to the west of the built-up area of Abu El-Fadil to the north-east corner of the lands of Beer Ya’aqov. (The boundary line should be so demarcated as to allow direct access from the Arab State to the airport.) Thence the boundary line follows the western and southern boundaries of Ramle village, to the north-east corner of El Na’ana village, thence in a straight line to the southernmost point of El Barriya, along the eastern boundary of that village and the southern boundary of ‘Innaba village. Thence it turns north to follow the southern side of the Jaffa-Jerusalem road until El-Qubab, whence it follows the road to the boundary of Abu-Shusha. It runs along the eastern boundaries of Abu Shusha, Seidun, Hulda to the southernmost point of Hulda, thence westwards in a straight line to the north-eastern corner of Umm Kalkha, thence following the northern boundaries of Umm Kalkha, Qazaza and the northern and western boundaries of Mukhezin to the Gaza District boundary and thence runs across the village lands of El-Mismiya El-Kabira, and Yasur to the southern point of intersection, which is midway between the built-up areas of Yasur and Batani Sharqi.

    From the southern point of intersection the boundary lines run north-westwards between the villages of Gan Yavne and Barqa to the sea at a point half way between Nabi Yunis and Minat El-Qila, and south-eastwards to a point west of Qastina, whence it turns in a south-westerly direction, passing to the east of the built-up areas of Es Sawafir Esh Sharqiya and ‘Ibdis. From the south-east corner of ‘Ibdis village it runs to a point southwest of the built-up area of Beit ‘Affa, crossing the Hebron-El-Majdal road just to the west of the built-up area of ‘Iraq Suweidan. Thence it proceeds southward along the western village boundary of El-Faluja to the Beersheba Sub-District boundary. It then runs across the tribal lands of ‘Arab El-Jubarat to a point on the boundary between the Sub-Districts of Beersheba and Hebron north of Kh. Khuweilifa, whence it proceeds in a south-westerly direction to a point on the Beersheba-Gaza main road two kilometres to the north-west of the town. It then turns south-eastwards to reach Wadi Sab’ at a point situated one kilometer to the west of it. From here it turns north-eastwards and proceeds along Wadi Sab’ and along the Beersheba-Hebron road for a distance of one kilometer, whence it turns eastwards and runs in a straight line to Kh. Kuseifa to join the Beersheba-Hebron Sub-District boundary. It then follows the Beersheba-Hebron boundary eastwards to a point north of Ras Ez-Zuweira, only departing from it so as to cut across the base of the indentation between vertical grid lines 150 and 160.

    About five kilometres north-east of Ras Ez-Zuweira it turns north, excluding from the Arab State a strip along the coast of the Dead Sea not more than seven kilometres in depth, as far as ‘Ein Geddi, whence it turns due east to join the Transjordan frontier in the Dead Sea.

    The northern boundary of the Arab section of the coastal plain runs from a point between Minat El-Qila and Nabi Yunis, passing between the built-up areas of Gan Yavne and Barqa to the point of intersection. From here it turns south-westwards, running across the lands of Batani Sharqi, along the eastern boundary of the lands of Beit Daras and across the lands of Julis, leaving the built-up areas of Batani Sharqi and Julis to the westwards, as far as the north-west corner of the lands of Beit-Tima. Thence it runs east of El-Jiya across the village lands of El-Barbara along the eastern boundaries of the villages of Beit Jirja, Deir Suneid and Dimra. From the south-east corner of Dimra the boundary passes across the lands of Beit Hanun, leaving the Jewish lands of Nir-Am to the eastwards. From the south-east corner of Beit Hanun the line runs south-west to a point south of the parallel grid line 100, then turns north-west for two kilometres, turning again in a southwesterly direction and continuing in an almost straight line to the north-west corner of the village lands of Kirbet Ikhza’a. From there it follows the boundary line of this village to its southernmost point. It then runs in a southerly direction along the vertical grid line 90 to its junction with the horizontal grid line 70. It then turns south-eastwards to Kh. El-Ruheiba and then proceeds in a southerly direction to a point known as El-Baha, beyond which it crosses the Beersheba-EI ‘Auja main road to the west of Kh. El-Mushrifa. From there it joins Wadi El-Zaiyatin just to the west of El-Subeita. From there it turns to the north-east and then to the south-east following this Wadi and passes to the east of ‘Abda to join Wadi Nafkh. It then bulges to the south-west along Wadi Nafkh, Wadi ‘Ajrim and Wadi Lassan to the point where Wadi Lassan crosses the Egyptian frontier.

    The area of the Arab enclave of Jaffa consists of that part of the town-planning area of Jaffa which lies to the west of the Jewish quarters lying south of Tel-Aviv, to the west of the continuation of Herzl street up to its junction with the Jaffa-Jerusalem road, to the south-west of the section of the Jaffa-Jerusalem road lying south-east of that junction, to the west of Miqve Yisrael lands, to the northwest of Holon local council area, to the north of the line linking up the north-west corner of Holon with the northeast corner of Bat Yam local council area and to the north of Bat Yam local council area. The question of Karton quarter will be decided by the Boundary Commission, bearing in mind among other considerations the desirability of including the smallest possible number of its Arab inhabitants and the largest possible number of its Jewish inhabitants in the Jewish State.

    B. THE JEWISH STATE

    The north-eastern sector of the Jewish State (Eastern Galilee) is bounded on the north and west by the Lebanese frontier and on the east by the frontiers of Syria and Trans-jordan. It includes the whole of the Huleh Basin, Lake Tiberias, the whole of the Beisan Sub-District, the boundary line being extended to the crest of the Gilboa mountains and the Wadi Malih. From there the Jewish State extends north-west, following the boundary described in respect of the Arab State. The Jewish section of the coastal plain extends from a point between Minat El-Qila and Nabi Yunis in the Gaza Sub-District and includes the towns of Haifa and Tel-Aviv, leaving Jaffa as an enclave of the Arab State. The eastern frontier of the Jewish State follows the boundary described in respect of the Arab State.

    The Beersheba area comprises the whole of the Beersheba Sub-District, including the Negeb and the eastern part of the Gaza Sub-District, but excluding the town of Beersheba and those areas described in respect of the Arab State. It includes also a strip of land along the Dead Sea stretching from the Beersheba-Hebron Sub-District boundary line to ‘Ein Geddi, as described in respect of the Arab State.

    C. THE CITY OF JERUSALEM

    The boundaries of the City of Jerusalem are as defined in the recommendations on the City of Jerusalem. (See Part III, section B, below).

    Part III. – City of Jerusalem(5)

    A. SPECIAL REGIME

    The City of Jerusalem shall be established as a corpus separatum under a special international regime and shall be administered by the United Nations. The Trusteeship Council shall be designated to discharge the responsibilities of the Administering Authority on behalf of the United Nations.

    B. BOUNDARIES OF THE CITY

    The City of Jerusalem shall include the present municipality of Jerusalem plus the surrounding villages and towns, the most eastern of which shall be Abu Dis; the most southern, Bethlehem; the most western, ‘Ein Karim (including also the built-up area of Motsa); and the most northern Shu’fat, as indicated on the attached sketch-map (annex B).

    C. STATUTE OF THE CITY

    The Trusteeship Council shall, within five months of the approval of the present plan, elaborate and approve a detailed statute of the City which shall contain, inter alia, the substance of the following provisions:

    Government machinery; special objectives. The Administering Authority in discharging its administrative obligations shall pursue the following special objectives:

    To protect and to preserve the unique spiritual and religious interests located in the city of the three great monotheistic faiths throughout the world, Christian, Jewish and Moslem; to this end to ensure that order and peace, and especially religious peace, reign in Jerusalem;

    To foster cooperation among all the inhabitants of the city in their own interests as well as in order to encourage and support the peaceful development of the mutual relations between the two Palestinian peoples throughout the Holy Land; to promote the security, well-being and any constructive measures of development of the residents having regard to the special circumstances and customs of the various peoples and communities.

    Governor and Administrative staff. A Governor of the City of Jerusalem shall be appointed by the Trusteeship Council and shall be responsible to it. He shall be selected on the basis of special qualifications and without regard to nationality. He shall not, however, be a citizen of either State in Palestine.

    The Governor shall represent the United Nations in the City and shall exercise on their behalf all powers of administration, including the conduct of external affairs. He shall be assisted by an administrative staff classed as international officers in the meaning of Article 100 of the Charter and chosen whenever practicable from the residents of the city and of the rest of Palestine on a non-discriminatory basis. A detailed plan for the organization of the administration of the city shall be submitted by the Governor to the Trusteeship Council and duly approved by it.

    3. Local autonomy

    The existing local autonomous units in the territory of the city (villages, townships and municipalities) shall enjoy wide powers of local government and administration.

    The Governor shall study and submit for the consideration and decision of the Trusteeship Council a plan for the establishment of special town units consisting, respectively, of the Jewish and Arab sections of new Jerusalem. The new town units shall continue to form part the present municipality of Jerusalem.

    Security measures

    The City of Jerusalem shall be demilitarized; neutrality shall be declared and preserved, and no para-military formations, exercises or activities shall be permitted within its borders.

    Should the administration of the City of Jerusalem be seriously obstructed or prevented by the non-cooperation or interference of one or more sections of the population the Governor shall have authority to take such measures as may be necessary to restore the effective functioning of administration.

    To assist in the maintenance of internal law and order, especially for the protection of the Holy Places and religious buildings and sites in the city, the Governor shall organize a special police force of adequate strength, the members of which shall be recruited outside of Palestine. The Governor shall be empowered to direct such budgetary provision as may be necessary for the maintenance of this force.

    Legislative Organization.

    A Legislative Council, elected by adult residents of the city irrespective of nationality on the basis of universal and secret suffrage and proportional representation, shall have powers of legislation and taxation. No legislative measures shall, however, conflict or interfere with the provisions which will be set forth in the Statute of the City, nor shall any law, regulation, or official action prevail over them. The Statute shall grant to the Governor a right of vetoing bills inconsistent with the provisions referred to in the preceding sentence. It shall also empower him to promulgate temporary ordinances in case the Council fails to adopt in time a bill deemed essential to the normal functioning of the administration.

    Administration of Justice.

    The Statute shall provide for the establishment of an independent judiciary system, including a court of appeal. All the inhabitants of the city shall be subject to it.

    Economic Union and Economic Regime.

    The City of Jerusalem shall be included in the Economic Union of Palestine and be bound by all stipulations of the undertaking and of any treaties issued therefrom, as well as by the decisions of the Joint Economic Board. The headquarters of the Economic Board shall be established in the territory City. The Statute shall provide for the regulation of economic matters not falling within the regime of the Economic Union, on the basis of equal treatment and non-discrimination for all members of thc United Nations and their nationals.

    Freedom of Transit and Visit: Control of residents.

    Subject to considerations of security, and of economic welfare as determined by the Governor under the directions of the Trusteeship Council, freedom of entry into, and residence within the borders of the City shall be guaranteed for the residents or citizens of the Arab and Jewish States. Immigration into, and residence within, the borders of the city for nationals of other States shall be controlled by the Governor under the directions of the Trusteeship Council.

    Relations with Arab and Jewish States. Representatives of the Arab and Jewish States shall be accredited to the Governor of the City and charged with the protection of the interests of their States and nationals in connection with the international administration of thc City.

    Official languages.

    Arabic and Hebrew shall be the official languages of the city. This will not preclude the adoption of one or more additional working languages, as may be required.

    Citizenship.

    All the residents shall become ipso facto citizens of the City of Jerusalem unless they opt for citizenship of the State of which they have been citizens or, if Arabs or Jews, have filed notice of intention to become citizens of the Arab or Jewish State respectively, according to Part 1, section B, paragraph 9, of this Plan.

    The Trusteeship Council shall make arrangements for consular protection of the citizens of the City outside its territory.

    Freedoms of citizens

    Subject only to the requirements of public order and morals, the inhabitants of the City shall be ensured the enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms, including freedom of conscience, religion and worship, language, education, speech and press, assembly and association, and petition.

    No discrimination of any kind shall be made between the inhabitants on the grounds of race, religion, language or sex.

    All persons within the City shall be entitled to equal protection of the laws.

    The family law and personal status of the various persons and communities and their religious interests, including endowments, shall be respected.

    Except as may be required for the maintenance of public order and good government, no measure shall be taken to obstruct or interfere with the enterprise of religious or charitable bodies of all faiths or to discriminate against any representative or member of these bodies on the ground of his religion or nationality.

    The City shall ensure adequate primary and secondary education for the Arab and Jewish communities respectively, in their own languages and in accordance with their cultural traditions.

    The right of each community to maintain its own schools for the education of its own members in its own language, while conforming to such educational requirements of a general nature as the City may impose, shall not be denied or impaired. Foreign educational establishments shall continue their activity on the basis of their existing rights.

    No restriction shall be imposed on the free use by any inhabitant of the City of any language in private intercourse, in commerce, in religion, in the Press or in publications of any kind, or at public meetings.

    Holy Places Existing rights in respect of Holy Places and religious buildings or sites shall not be denied or impaired.

    Free access to the Holy Places and religious buildings or sites and the free exercise of worship shall be secured in conformity with existing rights and subject to the requirements of public order and decorum.

    Holy Places and religious buildings or sites shall be preserved. No act shall be permitted which may in any way impair their sacred character. If at any time it appears to the Governor that any particular Holy Place, religious building or site is in need of urgent repair, the Governor may call upon the community or communities concerned to carry out such repair. The Governor may carry it out himself at the expense of the community or communities concerned if no action is taken within a reasonable time.

    No taxation shall be levied in respect of any Holy Place, religious building or site which was exempt from taxation on the date of the creation of the City. No change in the incidence of such taxation shall be made which would either discriminate between the owners or occupiers of Holy Places, religious buildings or sites or would place such owners or occupiers in a position less favourable in relation to the general incidence of taxation than existed at the time of the adoption of the Assembly’s recommendations.

    Special powers of the Governor in respect of the Holy Places, religious buildings and sites in the City and in any part of Palestine.

    The protection of the Holy Places, religious buildings and sites located in the City of Jerusalem shall be a special concern of the Governor. With relation to such places, buildings and sites in Palestine outside the city, the Governor shall determine, on the ground of powers granted to him by the Constitution of both States, whether the provisions of the Constitution of the Arab and Jewish States in Palestine dealing therewith and the religious rights appertaining thereto are being properly applied and respected.

    The Governor shall also be empowered to make decisions on the basis of existing rights in cases of disputes which may arise between the different religious communities or the rites of a religious community in respect of the Holy Places, religious buildings and sites in any part of Palestine.

    In this task he may be assisted by a consultative council of representatives of different denominations acting in an advisory capacity.

    D. DURATION OF THE SPECIAL REGIME

    The Statute elaborated by the Trusteeship Council the aforementioned principles shall come into force not later than 1 October 1948. It shall remain in force in the first instance for a period of ten years, unless the Trusteeship Council finds it necessary to undertake a re-examination of these provisions at an earlier date. After the expiration of this period the whole scheme shall be subject to examination by the Trusteeship Council in the light of experience acquired with its functioning. The residents the City shall be then free to express by means of a referendum their wishes as to possible modifications of regime of the City.

    Part IV. Capitulations

    States whose nationals have in the past enjoyed in Palestine the privileges and immunities of foreigners, including the benefits of consular jurisdiction and protection, as formerly enjoyed by capitulation or usage in the Ottoman Empire, are invited to renounce any right pertaining to them to the re-establishment of such privileges and immunities in the proposed Arab and Jewish States and the City of Jerusalem.

    Adopted at the 128th plenary meeting:

    In favour: 33

    Australia, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Byelorussian S.S.R., Canada, Costa Rica, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, France, Guatemala, Haiti, Iceland, Liberia, Luxemburg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Sweden, Ukrainian S.S.R., Union of South Africa, U.S.A., U.S.S.R., Uruguay, Venezuela.

    Against: 13

    Afghanistan, Cuba, Egypt, Greece, India, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey, Yemen.

    Abstained: 10

    Argentina, Chile, China, Colombia, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Honduras, Mexico, United Kingdom, Yugoslavia.

     


    (1) See Official Records of the General Assembly, Second Session Supplement No. 11,Volumes l-lV. Return to Text

    * At its hundred and twenty-eighth plenary meeting on 29 November 1947 the General Assembly, in accordance with the terms of the above resolution, elected the following members of the United Nations Commission on Palestine: Bolivia, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Panama, and Philippines. Return to Text

    (2) This resolution was adopted without reference to a Committee. Return to Text

    (3) The following stipulation shall be added to the declaration concerning the Jewish State: “In the Jewish State adequate facilities shall be given to Arabic-speaking citizens for the use of their language, either orally or in writing, in the legislature, before the Courts and in the administration.” Return to Text

    (4) In the declaration concerning the Arab State, the words “by an Arab in the Jewish State” should be replaced by the words “by a Jew in the Arab State.” Return to Text

    (5) On the question of the internationalization of Jerusalem, see also General Assembly resolutions 185 (S-2) of 26 April 1948; 187 (S-2) of 6 May 1948, 303 (lV) of 9 December 1949, and resolutions of the Trusteeship Council (Section IV). Return to Text

Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Noot 76/Israel raast en tiert!

Opgeslagen onder Divers