The NY Times reports a blockbuster story that drives a nail through the heart of the legitimacy of the settler enterprise and Israel’s claim to much of the land on which those settlements sit. Nearly 40% of such land is actually privately owned by Palestinians. This is not a claim made merely by Peace Now or Palestinian human rights activists. What makes this charge especially powerful is that it is based on official Israeli government documents:
The new claims regarding Palestinian property are said to come from the 2004 database of the Civil Administration, which controls the civilian aspects of Israel’s presence in the West Bank. Peace Now, an Israeli group that advocates Palestinian self-determination in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, plans to publish the information on Tuesday. An advance copy was made available to The New York Times.
The data — maps that show the government’s registry of the land by category — was given to Peace Now by someone who obtained it from an official inside the Civil Administration. The Times spoke to the person who received it from the Civil Administration official and agreed not to identify him because of the delicate nature of the material.
That person, who has frequent contact with the Civil Administration, said he and the official wanted to expose what they consider to be wide-scale violations of private Palestinian property rights by the government and settlers. The government has refused to give the material directly to Peace Now, which requested it under Israel’s freedom of information law.
The official government response? Lame:
Shlomo Dror, a spokesman for the Civil Administration, said he could not comment on the data without studying it.
He said there was a committee, called the blue line committee, that had been investigating these issues of land ownership for three years. “We haven’t finished checking everything,” he said.
Mr. Dror also said that sometimes Palestinians would sell land to Israelis but be unwilling to admit to the sale publicly because they feared retribution as collaborators.
Which of course is irrelevant to this situation because the very Civil Administration which this fellow represents has hard evidence documenting that Palestinians STILL OWN the land.
Even Ehud Olmert admits, in his own hypocritical way, the Palestinians have a case:
Asked about Israeli seizure of private Palestinian land in an interview with The Times last summer, before these figures were available, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said: “Now I don’t deny anything, I don’t ignore anything. I’m just ready to sit down and talk. And resolve it. And resolve it in a generous manner for all sides.”
He said the 1967 war was a one of self-defense. Later, he said: “Many things happened. Life is not frozen. Things occur. So many things happened, and as a result of this many innocent individuals on both sides suffered, were killed, lost their lives, became crippled for life, lost their family members, their loved ones, thousands of them. And also private property suffered. By the way, on all sides.”
There is no doubt that Arabs dispossessed select Jewish communities like Hebron during times of war and upheaval. But does Olmert mean to say that the uprooting of a few such communities equals the wholesale expropriation of massive tracts of Palestinian land continuing over a 40 year period? That’s what he appears to want you to believe. His basic response is to shrug: “hey, shit happens.”
The article is full of blockbusters like this:
Within prominent settlements that Israel has said it plans to keep in any final border agreement, the data show, for example, that some 86.4 percent of Maale Adumim, a large Jerusalem suburb, is private; and 35.1 percent of Ariel is.
These are not outposts sitting beyond yenem velt. These are communities already fully absorbed into the Israeli infrastructure grid. They are considered almost as integral to Israel as Tel Aviv or Jerusalem. For the ownership of the land on which they sit to be proven Palestinian will deal a huge blow to Israeli claims to the West Bank. The blow will certainly not be felt by supporters of the settlers. Perhaps most Israelis themselves will not even register the significance of this. But a significant minority will and the rest of the world will certainly take notice.
The Times article provides several specific examples of Israeli settlements, some or all of whose land is owned by Arabs:
One case of a settlement Israel intends to keep is in Givat Zeev, barely five miles north of Jerusalem. At the southern edge is the Ayelet Hashachar synagogue. Rabah Abdellatif, a Palestinian who lives in the nearby village of Al Jib, says the land belongs to him.
Papers he has filed with the Israeli military court, which runs the West Bank, seem to favor Mr. Abdellatif. In 1999, Israeli officials confirmed, he was even granted a judgment ordering the demolition of the synagogue because it had been built without permits. But for the last seven years, the Israeli system has done little to enforce its legal judgments. The synagogue stands, and Mr. Abdellatif has no access to his land.
…Israeli officials confirm that the land is privately owned, though they refuse to say by whom.
Mr. Abdellatif, 65, said: “I feel stuck, angry. Why would they do that? I don’t know who to go to anymore.”
He pointed to his corduroy trousers and said, in the English he learned in Paterson, N.J., where his son is a police detective: “These are my pants. And those are your pants. And you should not take my pants. This is mine, and that is yours! I never took anyone’s land.”
A member of Migron settlement council (the settlement sits on Arab land) had this interesting analogy to describe his community:
Mr. Teksler added: “This is how the state of Israel was created. And this is all the land of Israel. We’re like the kibbutzim. The only real difference is that we’re after 1967, not before.”
There is of course much unintended irony in Teksler’s comments. Does he mean to say that just as Migron’s land was “appropriated” by settlers that the kibbutzim themselves were similarly founded? Ouch! That would hurt. We don’t like to admit there were any Arabs on the land before we settled it (“a people without a land for a land with people”). Of course, what Teksler really means to say is that his settlement is just as much part of the fabric of Israeli society as the kibbutzim. Both were founded (in his view) with the same pioneering spirit of guts, enterprise and Jewish sweat. There are of course two major differences. Migron is outside Israel’s internationally recognized border AND it sits on land for which real Palestinians hold real deeds.
Peace Now has done a great service by pointing out not only that the West Bank settlements are bad for Israel in moral, political and demographic terms; they are bad for Israel in strictly legal terms. Israel has no more right to these settlements than I would to move into your home and call it mine.
The Times rightly points out that this complicates a possible future peace negotiation because not only will the Right of Return have to be resolved; but now either this land will need to be returned or compensation must be provided to its rightful owners by someone. What a mess those giddy 1967 Israeli leaders got their descendants into by deciding to hold onto and build on this land.
Read more about the Peace Now report.
They don’t own anything after making war against Israel.
1) There has never been an Arab Palestinian State.
2) The land was used as a platform to launch a genocide military attack against Israel which failed.
3) Back in 19677 Israel made military history as the first country attacked by an aggressor nation and successfully defending it to offer to return strategic lands captured in the war in exchange for nothing but a promise of peace.
4) The Arabs refused peace.
5) Land captured in defensive war is the legitimate asset of the country defending itself.
6) Israel did not want to drive the Arab’s out of Judea / Samara and Gush Katif and so she did not annex the land.
6) The PLO still defined “Palestine” without including Judea / Samara and Gush Katif until 1968.
7) Palestinians support the destruction of Israel.
No, it does not matter who is on the papers. According to international law, due to the fact the lands were captured in self-defence against sovereign nations it is Israel’s choice if they claim this land or not. It is 100% up to Israel. For this same reason; Syria has no legitimate claim to the Golan.
Who is “they”? Are you saying every owner of every parcel of land in this report were active members of armed wings of the PLO, Hamas, etc? Do you have documentation to prove this?
Or are you implying that simply being born Palestinian is guilt by association? So then is every Orthodox Jew equally culpable in the assasination of Yitzhak Rabin? Is every German responsible for the horros of the Nazi’s? Is every American responsible for the genocide of the Native Americans, and so on?
And if Golon, why not the Sinai? Israel must have been foolish to return territory to Egypt that it had no legitimate claim to.
International law is clear – if Israel wants to make a claim to annex those territories – why hasn’t it done so? And if so – those “Palestinians” therefor should be consideried “Israeli Arabs” with full citizenship rights. “According to international law” you can’t have your cake and eait it too..
Peace Now: ‘Settlements Illegal’
Pope: ‘I’m Catholic’
Bears: ‘We toilet in woods’
Dan, the land was Jordanian territory before the war. Since Jordan lost (and I doubt they want it back) the land now belongs to Israel. The reason Israel doesn’t annex it is because they are scared of world opinion which employs a double standard to Israel in all the wars against her. I’m still not sure why peaceniks like Richard here believe that if we go back to the pre-67 borders there will be peace. There was no peace pre-67 either when the West Bank belonged to Jordan and Gaza belonged to Egypt.
War is hell, isn’t it? Guess what, you start a war and lose, you lose land. Simple as that.
You are at best an ideologue & at worst an outright liar:
Bullshit. But dream on bird brain. If you really work hard you might persuade 3 or 4 other people in the world that this is a “true” statement.
Oh, I see. And which “genocidal military attack” would that be? The term “genocide” is factually inaccurate & part & parcel of the pro-Israel demagogue’s lurid, histrionic vocabulary which prevents serious dialogue by making the enemy into homicidal anti-Semites. An entirely bogus term in this case.
More bullshit. Egypt closed the Strait of Tiran & Israel responded by unleashing the full power of all its military forces in an all out assault on multiple Arab nations. So who shot the first bullet?? The alleged “aggressor” or Israel?
In 1967 yes they did. But as early as 1972 Sadat made written overtures to Israel that he was willing to sue for peace. His overture was ignored by ISRAEL. It was not till 1979 that his offer was realized. So that would make this another lie.
First, not a defensive war. Second, provide a source that this patently bogus claim is true.
Israel has driven hundreds of thousands of Palestinians off their legally established land. It has not yet annexed those lands because no other nation except Israel would recognize the annexation & the world would scorn this further power/land grab.
I don’t trust anything you say till you authenticate a source. And even if you provided one, which would be doubtful that you could, it makes not a whit of difference what anyone believed in 1968. What matters is here & now.
60% of Palestinians in legitimate opinion surveys are in favor of negotiations with Israel and recognizing it if it returns to pre-67 borders. So that would make this even more bullshit.
Joe: Thanks for the comment. It was a bit obscure. But I think I agree w. you. If you change that last line to: “Do bears shit in the woods,” it makes sense more readily.
“Bullshit. But dream on bird brain.”
I have seen time and again how you complain about a lack of civility by commenters, but you show you are the worst culprit.
By the way, you never disproved the statement “There has never been an Arab Palestinian State.” I am all ears.
GO BEARS (sorry couldn’t resist!)
Polly: When people publish hate here whether it’s directed against me, Israelis or Palestinians, then the gloves are off. If you or whoever publishes such crap doesn’t like it you can go elsewhere.
Regarding the canard that there is no Arab Palestinian state: I don’t need to prove the obvious. There is no credible proof for this contention & the only individuals who maintain this are living in cloud cuckoo land somewhere above the oxygen line. Those of us living here on earth with sufficient oxygen getting to our brains, know better.
Polly said,
By the way, you never disproved the statement “There has never been an Arab Palestinian State.” I am all ears.
I have never seen anyone who uses the above, as some sort of devastating fact, explain why it makes any difference? whether people choose to align themselves with a local nationalism, pan-Arab nationalism, Islamism, even Zionism or communism, natives irrespective of their faith or even no faith, do not lose their rights, individual or collective as a people, to continue to live and prosper in their own land and country.It is a claim that is thrown around along with the thoroughly debunked disingenuous drivel about the land being empty and baron. It is nothing more than a sad attempt to make a people become invisible and part of a greater dehumanising mantra that is abhorrent and immoral in its aims, to depreciate the value of a particular collection of people to excuse what is being done to them.
Yes, for the ultra-uber-Israel crowd so many things are “as simple as that.” That’s why Israel is so woefully out of touch with reality and continually butts its head up against that grim reality called Lebanon or Gaza. Neither you nor the Israeli government ever learn fr. experience & continue making the same mistakes over & over which of course lead to tremendous loss of life for both Israelis & Palestinians.
No, it is NOT as simple as that. It’s not simple at all. If it were that simple then Israel’s occupation of this “lost land” would be recognized by the world & it isn’t. The Palestinians living in the Occupied Territories did not start a war. The Jordanian king started this war which they had nothing to do with. Jordan has now renounced its claim to this land anyway. So blaming Palestinians for attacking Israel in 1967 is ridiculous.
And let’s just throw out a hypothetical. Let’s say the Egyptians in 67 had not lost their air force and had actually vanquished the IDF in the Sinai. Let’s say they conquered a broad swath of the Negev. Would loss of such vital Israel land be “as simple as that?” After all, regardless of what precipitated the war (& there was some Arab provocation), Israel actually started the 67 war by destroying the Egyptian air force. By losing, would it have forfeited its right to get the territory back? Of course not.
David is a little history-challenged it appears. Jordan formally renounced its claim to the Territories and signed it over to the PLO when Arafat ran the show. So all nations in the world minus Israel now view the Territories as occupied land that is the Palestinians’ by right.
Dan is of course precisely right in asking–if Israel’s claim to the land is as ironclad as you claim then why has it not annexed it? If possession or conquest are the sole determinant of ownership then it should be a no-brainer to declare the land Israel’s by law and by right. There is an excellent reason why it has not done so. What would it do with the millions of Palestinians living there? Deport them? Absorb them into Israel & make them citizens? Continue to subjugate them as they have done under Occupation, while no longer having any justification for doing so? Besides, unless you expelled these Palestinians they would come very close to making Israel a majority Arab country which would be anathema to almost every Israeli Jew.
It’s not quite as simple as you zealots make it out to be.
“When people publish hate here whether it’s directed against me, Israelis or Palestinians, then the gloves are off. If you or whoever publishes such crap doesn’t like it you can go elsewhere.”
And you define hate as something that doesn’t conform to your (misguided) world view? Steven did not post one hateful comment. He merely presented what he (and I and many others) considers the facts. Did he say he hates Arabs? Of course not. And by not responding to his contention that “there is no Arab Palestinian state,” you show that you are really not interested in civil discourse, as you claim.
There is no credible proof that a palestinian state ever existed. But feel free to continue your existence in “cloud cuckoo land.”
Saying there is no such thing as a Palestinian nation is offensive beside being patently false. Besides, it is racist in precisely the same way as anti-Zionists who attempt to argue that the Jews have no right to a homeland in Israel.
I don’t stand down when racism rears its ugly head here. I’ve given hell to Arab haters here AND Jewish haters. That’s what they deserve. You can be critical of Hamas and the Palestinians in ways that show them respect as well. Many people who comment here do.
Regarding my choice of language. All I can say is that I react to comments according to the way I read their content and tone. If someone disagrees with me but asks me without vitriol to explain myself I reply in kind. If someone shows harsh disdain for the Israeli or Palestinian side or for me–well, then that person doesn’t deserve much consideration. ‘Bullshit’ was a strong term to use in that context. I could’ve used a less vivid term. But that’s how the comment made me feel. Angry. And that’s how I replied. You show disdain for my views but seem to express yourself without dripping in sarcasm as some here do. That’s why I’ve tired to reply to you in the same manner as you’ve written to me.
People who have an ideological ax to grind on both the far left and far right forget that real people are dying here. Their deaths cause me great pain. I don’t suffer fools gladly under these conditions. And yes, I sometimes raise my voice. It is the fools who perpetuate the suffering on both sides who make my blood boil. They urge the extremists & rejectionists to fight valiantly on despite the fact that the ordinary people on both sides are sick & tired to the fighting & want to be left alone and in peace. We need peace a lot more than we need clever “arguments” like “there never was a Palestinian nation.”
Pls. do not make me laugh. He doesn’t hate Arabs? You’ve got to be joking. No, I’m sure he loves Arabs. They’re some of his best friends. He even dated an Arab girl once probably. But wouldn’t take her home to meet Mom no doubt. Sorry for the sarcasm, but so many commenters here hate Arabs that I know an Arab hater when I see one. He is one. You can dress up his views however you want. But you can’t turn a sow’s ear into a silk purse.
As Big Brother Soul pointed out, even if this were true (which it is not), it doesn’t matter a whit to the current political situation.
And riddle me this: if there was no Palestinian nation why couldn’t an anti-Zionist argue that there was no Israeli nation until modern Zionism came along. You can argue that there is a historic millennial bond between the Jewish people and Israel (& I do). But there was no tradition aspiring to creating a political state for Jews till Herzl came along.
If an anti-Zionist argued this I’d say–so what? What does it matter? There IS an Israeli nation now so deal with it. And I say the same to you & the other commenter you so devoutly defend. Just deal with it. If you don’t you’ll be consigned to the dustbin of intellectual/political history where you belong.
[comment deleted for violating comment rules]