DOCSLIB.ORG

Israeli Settlement in the Occupied Territories

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

REPORT ON ISRAELI SETTLEMENT IN THE OCCUPIED TERRITORIES A Bimonthly Publication of the Foundation for Middle East Peac e Volum e 20 N umber 3 May-June 2010 WILL PROXIMITY TALKS END THE OCCUPATION? By Geoffrey Aronson And the truth is, in some of these conflicts the United States can’t impose solutions The formal inauguration of proximi - unless the participants in these conflicts are willing to break out of old patterns of ty talks between Israel and the PLO antagonism. I think it was former secretary of state Jim Baker who said, in the con - signifies the high-water mark of 17 text of Middle East peace, “we can’t want it more than they do.” months of diplomacy conducted by the But what we can make sure of is, is that we are constantly present, constantly Obama administration. After a ran - engaged, and setting out very clearly to both sides our belief that not only is it in the corous false start in March precipitated interests of each party to resolve these conflicts but it’s also in the interest of the by an ill-timed announcement of settle - United States. It is a vital national security interest of the United States to reduce ment plans in East Jerusalem on the eve these conflicts because whether we like it or not, we remain a dominant military of a visit by Vice President Joe Biden, superpower, and when conflicts break out, one way or another we get pulled into formal proximity talks finally com - them. And that ends up costing us significantly in terms of both blood and treasure. menced on May 8. So I’m going to keep on at it. But I think on all these issues—nuclear disarma - Hanan Ashrawi, the veteran Pale- ment, nuclear proliferation, Middle East peace—progress is going to be measured not stinian negotiator, on May 3 said of in days, not in weeks. It’s going to take time. And progress will be halting. And the limited process sponsored by the sometimes we’ll take one step forward and two steps back, and there will be frustra - Obama administration. “I would not call tions. And so it’s not going to run on the typical cable news 24/7 news cycle. But if them negotiations but rather diplomatic we’re persistent, and we’ve got the right approach, then over time, I think that we shuttle tours undertaken by the Ameri- can make progress. can envoy.” President Barack Obama. Press Conference by the Some terms governing the talks were President at the Nuclear Security Summit, April 13, 2010 modified in the wake of the March debacle. The United States appears to have reached agreement on two issues recent dispute between Jerusalem and Bank and Gaza Strip with Israeli prime minister Benjamin Washington over East Jerusalem settle - Notwithstanding suggestions to the Netanyahu. Although the immediate ment expansion may be a broad re- contrary, the consistent and impassioned aim of diplomacy is to move to a direct examination of U.S. policy. Two impor - articulation by top U.S. officials, includ - Israeli-Palestinian dialogue, the proxim - tant principles guiding U.S. policy ing the president, of a “vital U.S. nation - ity talks would indeed offer a forum to towards the Israel-Palestine conflict can al interest” in ending Israel’s occupation discuss, if not negotiate, “core issues”— be discerned from these recent state - and creating a Palestinian state at peace settlements, borders, refugees, security, ments by President Obama and two with Israel is unprecedented. It also sug - Jerusalem, and water; and notwithstand - senior aides: gests a new determination to solve ing insistent Israeli declarations about a I The definition of the resolution of rather than manage the problem, not as continuing commitment to settlement the conflict as “a vital national security a favor to the parties but first and fore - expansion in East Jerusalem, Israel interest of the United States” most as a consequence of a hard-headed would refrain from unspecified “provoc- I The framing of the challenge fac - determination to safeguard U.S. inter - ative” settlement activities. ing U.S. policymakers as one requiring ests. reconciling Israel’s legitimate security This central strategic conclusion is, A Policy Rethink requirements with the demands of The most important result of the Palestinian sovereignty in the West PROXIMITY TALKS , continued on page 6 TO OUR READERS FOUNDATION FOR MIDDLE EAST PEACE Skeptics of all U.S. efforts to help democracy and civil society. “Shared val - Israelis and Palestinians make peace over ues,” proclaimed as the cement of the U.S.- Merle Thorpe, Jr. the years have argued that conditions have Israel alliance, is becoming a threadbare Founder not been “ripe” for a solution and that slogan, and this unique relationship is at (1917–1994) peace-making should await more favorable risk. A similar extremist trend is infecting circumstances. Yet there is overwhelming the politics of Palestinians and their sup - Philip C. Wilcox, Jr. evidence that this conflict has grown ever port for a two-state peace. President more intractable with the passage of time. A lasting two-state peace agreement will Geoffrey Aronson Advice that efforts to make peace should therefore require transforming Israel’s dete - Director, Research and wait, or even pause, underestimates the riorating political culture and institutions Publications, Editor, Report on threat that the situation may be moving and mobilizing a pragmatic, democratic lib - Israeli Settlement in the Occupied toward irreversibility. The danger is not eral, pro-peace majority. Israeli politics are Territories only that a massive, growing settlement still divided and volatile. It is not too late Nitzan Goldberger effort is physically transforming the West to achieve such change through unprece - Waseem Mardini Bank. Even more important, forty years of dented strong, sustained U.S. diplomacy, Editorial Assistants military occupation, settlement and conflict private and public, and wise use of the have changed Israel’s political culture for American-Israeli relationship. The risks to Mohammed Abdalhadi the worse. American national security of anything less Monica Kamen Interns Israeli policies today, foreign and domes - are unacceptable. There is another reason tic, are increasingly shaped by hard-line why waiting is not an option. The U.S., as TRUSTEES religious, ideological, and security leaders, Israel’s best friend, protector, and often whose devotion to land, messianic religion, enabler, is just too deeply involved to step Landrum R. Bolling and power is at odds with liberal, Enligh- back. Calvin H. Cobb, Jr. tenment values. Their right-wing ethos is James J. Cromwell penetrating Israel’s institutions, including Peter Gubser schools and the military, and threatening its Stephen Hartwell Richard S.T. Marsh —————— N —————— Richard W. Murphy Jean C. Newsom Gail Pressberg William B. Quandt Anyone who observes the Arab or Palestinian official stand in run - Nicholas A. Veliotes ning negotiations with the Zionist enemy, will unfortunately notice confusion, turmoil, persistence and even a move away from past posi - The Foundation, a non- tions. Indeed, one month ago, before the Sert [Arab] Summit, the profit I.R.C. 501(c)(3) organization, supports peace [Arab League] made a connection between returning to negotiations and security for Israelis and and freezing the settlements. The summit of Sert also stressed this Palestinians through mutual through an Arab resolution. Today, during its last meeting in Cairo recognition and a negotiated division of historic Pales- the Arab Initiative Committee backed away from this and thus the tine. It publishes the bi- condition of freezing settlements. This weakens the Arab and monthly Report on Israeli Palestinian position and entices Israel to increase its militancy and Settlement in the Occupied Territories . settlements in addition to ignoring Palestinian and Arab demands. Copyright © 2010 As to the issue of guarantees, there are no American guarantees, and Sign up to receive the no written guarantees. Any verbal guarantees, if present, are worth - Report by e-mail, to be less. Therefore we are against the return to negotiations with the notified of events in Zionists. Washington, D.C., and Khalid Meshal, Hamas leader, interview, al-Masri al-Yawm , May 12, 2010 more. Visit us at www.fmep.org. 2 O Report on Israeli Settlement May-June 2010 What Freeze? Construction Summary of 2009 reports by Amihai Attali of Ma’ariv , the day after the tree planting, Kfar Etzion settlement received a verbal message There were 1,703 housing starts in West Bank settlements from the Prime Minister’s bureau that the settlement would in 2009 according to data released by Israel’s Central Bureau not be included in the freeze, and twenty houses were of Statistics (CBS) in February 2010. This number compares removed from the list. to 1,518 starts in 2006, 1,471 starts during 2007, and 2,107 Amihai Attali, Ma’ariv , March 21, 2010 starts in 2008, during which construction was expedited in the wake of the November 2007 Annapolis conference. Construc- ————————————— tion on 2,077 housing units was completed in 2009. CBS also reported that as of December 2009, soon after the construc - Israeli Construction Company tion moratorium went into effect, a total of 2,778 housing Demands Compensation for Freeze units were in various stages of construction in West Bank Construction companies affected by the settlement freeze settlements. initiated by the Israeli government have started suing the ————————————— State of Israel for financial compensation. A construction company in Modi’in Ilit, Neot Hapisga, has filed a claim is Construction Freeze Compensation demanding $4.8 million in compensation from the govern - ment for damages. The [Israeli] cabinet will soon be asked to approve $27,000 . Neot Hapisga said it had been in the midst of con - in compensation to 3,000 settler families that were harmed as structing hundreds of housing units in the settlement of a result of the construction freeze.
Recommended publications
  • Israeli Arms Transfers to Sub-Saharan Africa 3

    Israeli Arms Transfers to Sub-Saharan Africa 3

    SIPRI Background Paper October 2011 ISRAELI ARMS TRANSFERS SUMMARY w Israel accounted for less than TO SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA 1 per cent of transfers of major weapons to sub-Saharan Africa for the period 2006–10. siemon t. wezeman* Deliveries consisted mainly of small numbers of artillery, unmanned aerial vehicles, armoured vehicles and patrol craft. However, in addition to I. Introduction major weapons, Israel also supplied small arms and light Israel is one of a range of smaller suppliers of major weapons and other mili- weapons, military electronics tary equipment to sub-Saharan Africa. It has long sold or given weapons to and training to several a host of developing countries, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa, and the countries in the region. Israeli deals are often accompanied by serving or retired Israeli military person- weapons, trainers and brokers nel and Israeli civilian contractors as instructors.1 Although Israeli arms have been observed in exports, especially of major weapons, to sub-Saharan Africa are limited, numerous African trouble spots Israeli weapons, brokers and instructors are likely to sometimes have a more and may play a bigger role than significant impact than mere numbers of supplied weapons imply. their numbers imply. While exports of major weapons from Israel are well documented, infor- The Israeli arms export decision-making process mation on other weapons and equipment, on training and on motivations for remains unclear. Issues like and restraints on exports is very much based on occasional statements from human rights and potential officials or companies and on media reports. Since the United Nations Reg- diversion or misuse of delivered ister of Conventional Arms (UNROCA) became operational in 1993, Israel weapons seem to have gained has submitted data on exports of major arms every year.
  • Israeli Arms Transfers to Sub-Saharan Africa 3

    Israeli Arms Transfers to Sub-Saharan Africa 3

    SIPRI Background Paper October 2011 ISRAELI ARMS TRANSFERS SUMMARY w Israel accounted for less than TO SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA 1 per cent of transfers of major weapons to sub-Saharan Africa for the period 2006–10. siemon t. wezeman* Deliveries consisted mainly of small numbers of artillery, unmanned aerial vehicles, armoured vehicles and patrol craft. However, in addition to I. Introduction major weapons, Israel also supplied small arms and light Israel is one of a range of smaller suppliers of major weapons and other mili- weapons, military electronics tary equipment to sub-Saharan Africa. It has long sold or given weapons to and training to several a host of developing countries, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa, and the countries in the region. Israeli deals are often accompanied by serving or retired Israeli military person- weapons, trainers and brokers nel and Israeli civilian contractors as instructors.1 Although Israeli arms have been observed in exports, especially of major weapons, to sub-Saharan Africa are limited, numerous African trouble spots Israeli weapons, brokers and instructors are likely to sometimes have a more and may play a bigger role than significant impact than mere numbers of supplied weapons imply. their numbers imply. While exports of major weapons from Israel are well documented, infor- The Israeli arms export decision-making process mation on other weapons and equipment, on training and on motivations for remains unclear. Issues like and restraints on exports is very much based on occasional statements from human rights and potential officials or companies and on media reports. Since the United Nations Reg- diversion or misuse of delivered ister of Conventional Arms (UNROCA) became operational in 1993, Israel weapons seem to have gained has submitted data on exports of major arms every year.
  • Israeli Arms Transfers to Sub-Saharan Africa

    Israeli Arms Transfers to Sub-Saharan Africa

    SIPRI Background Paper October 2011 ISRAELI ARMS TRANSFERS SUMMARY w Israel accounted for less than TO SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA 1 per cent of transfers of major weapons to sub-Saharan Africa for the period 2006–10. !"#$%& '. (#)#$*&* Deliveries consisted mainly of small numbers of artillery, unmanned aerial vehicles, armoured vehicles and patrol craft. However, in addition to I. Introduction major weapons, Israel also supplied small arms and light Israel is one of a range of smaller suppliers of major weapons and other mili- weapons, military electronics tary equipment to sub-Saharan Africa. It has long sold or given weapons to and training to several a host of developing countries, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa, and the countries in the region. Israeli deals are often accompanied by serving or retired Israeli military person- weapons, trainers and brokers nel and Israeli civilian contractors as instructors.1 Although Israeli arms have been observed in exports, especially of major weapons, to sub-Saharan Africa are limited, numerous African trouble spots Israeli weapons, brokers and instructors are likely to sometimes have a more and may play a bigger role than significant impact than mere numbers of supplied weapons imply. their numbers imply. While exports of major weapons from Israel are well documented, infor- The Israeli arms export decision-making process mation on other weapons and equipment, on training and on motivations for remains unclear. Issues like and restraints on exports is very much based on occasional statements from human rights and potential o+cials or companies and on media reports. Since the United Nations Reg- diversion or misuse of delivered ister of Conventional Arms (UNROCA) became operational in 1993, Israel weapons seem to have gained has submitted data on exports of major arms every year.
  • Israel: Background and U.S

    Israel: Background and U.S

    Israel: Background and U.S. Relations Jim Zanotti Specialist in Middle Eastern Affairs November 1, 2013 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov RL33476 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress Israel: Background and U.S. Relations Summary Since Israel’s founding in 1948, successive U.S. Presidents and many Members of Congress have demonstrated a commitment to Israel’s security and to maintaining close U.S.-Israel defense, diplomatic, and economic cooperation. U.S. and Israeli leaders have developed close relations based on common perceptions of shared democratic values and religious affinities. U.S. policymakers often seek to determine how regional events and U.S. policy choices may affect Israel’s security, and Congress provides active oversight of executive branch dealings with Israel and the broader Middle East. Some Members of Congress and some analysts criticize what they perceive as U.S. support for Israel without sufficient scrutiny of its actions. Israel is a leading recipient of U.S. foreign aid and is a frequent purchaser of major U.S. weapons systems. The United States and Israel maintain close security cooperation—predicated on a U.S. commitment to maintain Israel’s “qualitative military edge” over other countries in its region. The two countries signed a free trade agreement in 1985, and the United States is Israel’s largest trading partner. For more information, see CRS Report RL33222, U.S. Foreign Aid to Israel, by Jeremy M. Sharp. Israel has many regional security concerns. Israeli leaders calling for urgent international action against Iran’s nuclear program hint at the possibility of a unilateral military strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities.
  • Issue No.107/4 December 2014 ,Cfrv

    Issue No.107/4 December 2014 ,Cfrv

    HaRakevet ISSN 0964-8763 Series 28 Issue No.107/4 December 2014 ,cfrv A Quarterly Journal on the Railways of the Middle East Edited and Published by Rabbi Dr. Walter Rothschild PhD Passauer Strasse 4, D-10789 Berlin, Germany e.mail:[email protected] A steam railtour in Tur- key in 2014. The former Kriegslok hauls two TCDD coaches which had been restored and repainted single-handedly by Ali Aksin. (Photo Ali Aksin). Yes, it does rain in Israel, sometimes with a vengeance! Left - Jerusalem, right Ayalon High- way Tel Aviv 107:0 concluded Tuesday morning with the ar- rests of over 5 managers and supervi- sors. According to police, the investiga- EDITORIAL tion – conducted with the full cooperation A bizarre change of emphasis in this issue. After moaning recently about the of Israel Railways CEO, Boaz Zafrir – de- lack of any positive news from most countries in the Middle East, the Editor found lots termined that the sanitation employees of information at Innotrans in Berlin and yet more in relation to proposed conferences colluded for months to commit bribery, (to which he could NOT go) in Dubai and Riyadh, discussing all sorts of fancy, expen- money laundering, fraud, and tax offenses sive and hi-tech projects throughout the region! Of course there is a major disconnect totaling “tens of millions” of shekels. between what one reads in the newspapers and what one sees as a serious discussion In a statement, police said the investi- about building tramways in Kurdistan. So a lot of this is presented here, in this issue, at gation was launched after suspicions were the expense of several historical items which have had to be held over to the next edi- raised that a number of sanitary inspectors tion.
  • Israel: Background and U.S. Relations

    Israel: Background and U.S. Relations

    Israel: Background and U.S. Relations Jim Zanotti Specialist in Middle Eastern Affairs June 12, 2013 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov RL33476 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress Israel: Background and U.S. Relations Summary Since Israel’s founding in 1948, successive U.S. Presidents and many Members of Congress have demonstrated a commitment to Israel’s security and to maintaining close U.S.-Israel defense, diplomatic, and economic cooperation. U.S. and Israeli leaders have developed close relations based on common perceptions of shared democratic values and religious affinities. U.S. policymakers often seek to determine how regional events and U.S. policy choices may affect Israel’s security, and Congress provides active oversight of executive branch dealings with Israel and the broader Middle East. Some Members of Congress and some analysts criticize what they perceive as U.S. support for Israel without sufficient scrutiny of its actions. Israel is a leading recipient of U.S. foreign aid and is a frequent purchaser of major U.S. weapons systems. The United States and Israel maintain close security cooperation—predicated on a U.S. commitment to maintain Israel’s “qualitative military edge” over other countries in its region. The two countries signed a free trade agreement in 1985, and the United States is Israel’s largest trading partner. For more information, see CRS Report RL33222, U.S. Foreign Aid to Israel, by Jeremy M. Sharp. Israel has many regional security concerns. Israeli leaders calling for urgent international action against Iran’s nuclear program hint at the possibility of a unilateral military strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities.
  • The “Status Quo” on the Temple Mount

    The “Status Quo” on the Temple Mount

    No. 604 November-December, 2014 http://jcpa.org/article/status-quo-on-temple-mount/ The “Status Quo” on the Temple Mount Nadav Shragai . Since July 2, 2014, an upsurge in Palestinian violence has been occurring in Jerusalem, and the number of attacks on Israelis has escalated. The Temple Mount is one of the focal points of this renewed conflict. The Temple Mount, site of the ancient First and Second Temples, is the holiest place in the world for the Jewish people. Two Muslim shrines – the Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock – stand on it today, and it is the third holiest place for Muslims. The recent events on the Temple Mount are instigated by operatives of Hamas and the Northern Branch of the Islamic Movement in Israel (both of which are part of the Muslim Brotherhood network) and Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah movement. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other government officials have repeatedly stated that there will be no change in the status quo on the Temple Mount, and Jewish prayer will not be permitted there. In July 1967, Israel extended Israeli law to east Jerusalem, including the Old City and the Temple Mount, which came under Israeli sovereignty. In granting Jews the right to visit the Temple Mount, Moshe Dayan sought to mitigate the power of Jewish demands for organized worship and religious control at the site. In granting administrative control to Muslims on the Temple Mount, he believed he was mitigating the power of the site as a center for Palestinian nationalism. 1 . However, the old status quo has been greatly degraded, increasing Muslim control and status on the Mount and greatly undermining the status of Jews and the State of Israel on the Mount.
  • „Engagement Zwischen Entwicklungshilfe Und Rüstungsexporten –

    „Engagement Zwischen Entwicklungshilfe Und Rüstungsexporten –

    „Engagement zwischen Entwicklungshilfe und Rüstungsexporten – die außenpolitische Strategie Israels in Subsahara-Afrika“ Inauguraldissertation zur Erlangung des Doktorgrades der Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftlichen Fakultät der Universität zu Köln November 2016 vorgelegt von Master of Science Maike Hoffmann aus Höxter Referent: Prof. Dr. Thomas Jäger Korreferent: Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Leidhold Tag der Promotion: 17.01.2017 Verfasser M.Sc. Maike Hoffmann Rathausstr. 21 82024 Taufkirchen Inhaltsverzeichnis Abbildungsverzeichnis ............................................................................................................. i Teil I: Einleitung ..................................................................................................................... 1 1. Thema ........................................................................................................................... 1 2. Fragestellung ................................................................................................................. 3 3. Relevanz des Themas und Stand der Forschung........................................................... 4 4. Methodik ........................................................................................................................ 6 5. Aufbau der Arbeit ........................................................................................................... 9 Teil II: Hauptteil ....................................................................................................................12
  • The Israeli Colonization Activities in the Palestinian Territories During the 2Nd Quarter of 2014, (September - November) / 2014

    The Israeli Colonization Activities in the Palestinian Territories During the 2Nd Quarter of 2014, (September - November) / 2014

    Applied Research Institute - Jerusalem (ARIJ) & Land Research Center – Jerusalem (LRC) [email protected] | http://www.arij.org [email protected] | http://www.lrcj.org The Israeli Colonization Activities in the Palestinian Territories during the 2nd Quarter of 2014, (September - November) / 2014 September to November 2014 The Quarterly report highlights the This report is prepared as part chronology of events concerning the of the project entitled Israeli Violations in the West Bank and the “Addressing Israeli Actions Gaza Strip, the confiscation and razing of and its Land Policies in the lands, the uprooting and destruction of fruit oPT”, which is financially trees, the expansion of settlements and supported by the EU and SDC. erection of outposts, the brutality of the However, the content of this Israeli Occupation Army, the Israeli settlers report is the sole responsibility violence against Palestinian civilians and of ARIJ & LRC and does not properties, the erection of checkpoints, the necessarily reflect those of the construction of the Israeli segregation wall donors and the issuance of military orders for the various Israeli purposes. 1 Applied Research Institute - Jerusalem (ARIJ) & Land Research Center – Jerusalem (LRC) [email protected] | http://www.arij.org [email protected] | http://www.lrcj.org Map 1: The Israeli Segregation Plan in the occupied Palestinian Territory 2 Applied Research Institute - Jerusalem (ARIJ) & Land Research Center – Jerusalem (LRC) [email protected] | http://www.arij.org [email protected] | http://www.lrcj.org Bethlehem Governorate (September 2014 - November 2014) Israeli Violations in Bethlehem Governorate during the Month of September 2014 Israeli Occupation Army (IOA) invaded Ad-Dhuheisheh refugee camp, south of Bethlehem city.
  • Demolishing PEACE HOUSES DEMOLITIONS in East Jerusalem 2000 - 2010

    Demolishing PEACE HOUSES DEMOLITIONS in East Jerusalem 2000 - 2010

    Dr. Meir Margalit DEMOLISHING PEACE HOUSES DEMOLITIONS IN EAST JERUSALEM 2000 - 2010 International Peace and Cooperation Center 2014 This publication has been produced with the support of Friedrich Ebert Stiftung. The views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the view of Friedrich Ebert Stiftung A publication by the International Peace nternational and Cooperation Center 2014 eace ooperation PO Box 24162, Jerusalem 91240 enter T +972 2 5811992 F +972 2 5400522 [email protected], www.ipcc-jerusalem.org CONTENTS Introduction...............................................................................9 Chapter 1 Demolition Data: Orders and Executions . 23 Chapter 2 Discrimination in the execution of demolition orders . 55 Chapter 3 The rational for illegal construction . 69 Chapter 4 The motives underlying municipality demolition policies . 103 Chapter 5 Legal tools for executing the demolitions . 119 Chapter 6 The apparatus for executing demolitions . 137 Chapter 7 The system that enables demolitions . 151 Chapter 8 The non-formal apparatus .............................................167 Chapter 9 The approach of the legal system to building violations in East Jerusalem ......................................................181 Chapter 10 Final remarks ...........................................................193 Selected References .................................................................195 TABLES Table 1.1 House demolitions in East Jerusalem since 1992 .....................24 Table 1.2 Data for administrative
  • Israel's Discrimination Against Its Arab Citizens

    Israel's Discrimination Against Its Arab Citizens

    BRIEFING PAPER June 2010 Israel’s discrimination against its Arab citizens Racism was, and still is, an inherent feature of Zionism and the state established on its back, Israel. From its declaration of independence up to this day, the 20% of Israel’s citizens who are Arabs have suffered from the state’s racist policies and have been subjected to a fierce campaign of repression. Through racist laws and the demolition of their homes, the confiscation of their land and looting, the Arabs of Israel have seen their overwhelming majority ownership of the land pre-1948 reduced to just 2.5%, even though they make up more than 20% of Israel’s population. This is not an accident, but a planned programme by successive Israeli governments, with several goals: Forcing Arab citizens who hold Israeli citizenship to migrate and leave and, in the process, stirring up Jewish Israeli public opinion against their Arab compatriots by calling them “enemies” and “traitors” who are “working to undermine the Zionist project”. A survey by Prof. Sami Smooha of the University of Haifa of Israeli looking at relations and coexistence between Jews and Arabs was published by Ha'aretz newspaper in May 2010 and presented to the Knesset within the context of the deterioration of such relations over the past decade. The poll revealed that 48% of Israel’s Arab citizens are dissatisfied with their lives in the Jewish state, compared to 35% in 2003; the number of Arabs who are not willing to befriend Jews has doubled and, perhaps most seriously, 62% of Israeli Arabs fear "transfer" (forced migration or, as it has been called, “ethnic cleansing”), compared to just 6% who expressed that fear in 2003.
  • Chronology of Events in Israel and Palestine

    Chronology of Events in Israel and Palestine

    Chronologies Chronology of Events Appendices in Israel and Palestine Chronologies March sees a resurgence of violence end of August, when Egyptian media- conflict with the US, is announced by between Israel and the Islamic Jihad tion achieves a ceasefire declaration the Construction Minister Uri Ariel, from endangering the fragile truce agreement after 50 days of conflict which leaves the far right party Jewish Home (Habay- reached in November 2012 between more than 2,100 Palestinians and al- it Hayehudi) and is met with criticism Israel and Hamas, the ruling group in most a hundred Israelis dead. The final from the moderate members of the the Gaza Strip. Notwithstanding, in the quarter of the year is marked by new coalition government. first half of 2014, the US Secretary of recognitions by Western parliaments • On 11 January Ariel Sharon, Prime State John Kerry’s initiative to relaunch and governments of Palestine as a Minister of Israel between 2001 and the peace talks continues to advance. state, an increase in violence in the 2006, passes away. Part of this process of rapprochement, West Bank and East Jerusalem and the also supported by Jordan, includes the PNA’s announcement in December of Palestine release of thousands of Palestinian pris- Palestine’s formal request for full mem- oners held in Israel since late 2013, a bership of the International Court of • On 8 January the media reports new decision that is put on hold in April fol- Justice. In Israel, the unstable coalition negotiations between Fatah and Hamas lowing the PNA President Mahmoud government breaks apart in December which have been in process since the Abbas’ decision to apply to join 15 in- and early elections are called for March end of 2013 to achieve a Palestinian 383 ternational UN treaties and conventions.