These two VERY SHORT videos tell a very long story.
From "Gisha" - Legal Center for Freedom of Movement...
and the animator from "Waltz with Bashir"
"Closed Zone": 90 animated seconds on the closure of Gaza
http://www.closedzone.com/
*********
AFSC
"Israel-Palestine: A Land in Fragments"
2-minute video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ewF7AXn3dg
*********
A March 7, 2009, New York Times article, linked on www.ePalestine.com, the news web site of Sam Bahour a Palestinian American/American Palestinian living in Ramallah.
BEITAR ILIT, West Bank — Boulders the size of compact cars are carved out here at a vast quarry near Bethlehem and pushed noisily through grinders, producing gravel and sand that go into apartment buildings in this rapidly growing Israeli settlement and all across Israel itself.
The land of the West Bank is, of course, disputed. Israel occupies it, and the Palestinians want it for a future state. But more and more of it is gone — quarried by Israeli companies and sold for building materials, a practice that is the focus of a new legal challenge.
“Israel is transferring natural resources from the West Bank for Israeli benefit, and this is absolutely prohibited not only under international law but according to Israeli Supreme Court rulings,” said Michael Sfard, lawyer for the Israeli rights group Yesh Din, which is bringing the case to the high court next week. “This is an illegal transfer of land in the most literal of senses.”
Sand and rocks might seem like trivial resources in a country that is half desert. But with strict environmental restrictions on quarrying because of the noise and dust produced, they turn out to be surprisingly valuable. Building contractors are often caught in the Negev Desert stealing them by the truckload in the dead of night. A 2008 government study predicted a serious shortage of raw building materials within a decade. Read more....
Showing posts with label Israel. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Israel. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Israel Targets Civilian Resistance to the Separation Wall
Jayyous is one of the villages I visited in June. Sam Bahour in Ramallah forwards this disturbing news story from the Guardian about Israeli attack on West Bank towns and escalating settlement-building, even as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visits the region today.
The real Israel-Palestine story is in the West Bank
Israel's targeting of civilian resistance to the separation wall proves the two-state solution is now just a meaningless slogan
Ben White
Friday 20 February 2009 14.00 GMT
It is quite likely that you have not heard of the most important developments this week in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In the West Bank, while it has been "occupation as normal", there have been some events that together should be overshadowing Gaza, Gilad Shalit and Avigdor Lieberman.
First, there have been a large number of Israeli raids on Palestinian villages, with dozens of Palestinians abducted. These kinds of raids are, of course, commonplace for the occupied West Bank, but in recent days it appears the Israeli military has targeted sites of particularly strong Palestinian civil resistance to the separation wall.
For three consecutive days this week, Israeli forces invaded Jayyous, a village battling for survival as their agricultural land is lost to the wall and neighbouring Jewish colony. The soldiers occupied homes, detained residents, blocked off access roads, vandalised property, beat protestors, and raised the Israeli flag at the top of several buildings.
Jayyous is one of the Palestinian villages in the West Bank that has been non-violently resisting the separation wall for several years now. It was clear to the villagers that this latest assault was an attempt to intimidate the protest movement.
Also earlier this week, Israel tightened still further the restrictions on Palestinian movement and residency rights in East Jerusalem, closing the remaining passage in the wall in the Ar- Ram neighbourhood of the city. This means that tens of thousands of Palestinians are now cut off from the city and those with the right permit will now have to enter the city by first heading north and using the Qalandiya checkpoint.
Finally – and this time, there was some modest media coverage – it was revealed that the Efrat settlement near Bethlehem would be expanded by the appropriation of around 420 acres land as "state land". According to Efrat's mayor, the plan is to triple the number of residents in the colony.
Looked at together, these events in the West Bank are of far more significance than issues being afforded a lot of attention currently, such as the truce talks with Hamas, or the discussions about a possible prisoner-exchange deal. Hamas itself has become such a focus, whether by those who urge talks and cooption or those who advocate the group's total destruction, that the wider context is forgotten.
Hamas is not the beginning or the end of this conflict, a movement that has been around for just the last third of Israel's 60 years. The Hamas Charter is not a Palestinian national manifesto, and nor is it even particularly central to today's organisation. Before Hamas existed, Israel was colonising the occupied territories, and maintaining an ethnic exclusivist regime; if Hamas disappeared tomorrow, Israeli colonisation certainly would not. Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/feb/20/israelandthepalestinians-israeli-elections-2009
The real Israel-Palestine story is in the West Bank
Israel's targeting of civilian resistance to the separation wall proves the two-state solution is now just a meaningless slogan
Ben White
Friday 20 February 2009 14.00 GMT
It is quite likely that you have not heard of the most important developments this week in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In the West Bank, while it has been "occupation as normal", there have been some events that together should be overshadowing Gaza, Gilad Shalit and Avigdor Lieberman.
First, there have been a large number of Israeli raids on Palestinian villages, with dozens of Palestinians abducted. These kinds of raids are, of course, commonplace for the occupied West Bank, but in recent days it appears the Israeli military has targeted sites of particularly strong Palestinian civil resistance to the separation wall.
For three consecutive days this week, Israeli forces invaded Jayyous, a village battling for survival as their agricultural land is lost to the wall and neighbouring Jewish colony. The soldiers occupied homes, detained residents, blocked off access roads, vandalised property, beat protestors, and raised the Israeli flag at the top of several buildings.
Jayyous is one of the Palestinian villages in the West Bank that has been non-violently resisting the separation wall for several years now. It was clear to the villagers that this latest assault was an attempt to intimidate the protest movement.
Also earlier this week, Israel tightened still further the restrictions on Palestinian movement and residency rights in East Jerusalem, closing the remaining passage in the wall in the Ar- Ram neighbourhood of the city. This means that tens of thousands of Palestinians are now cut off from the city and those with the right permit will now have to enter the city by first heading north and using the Qalandiya checkpoint.
Finally – and this time, there was some modest media coverage – it was revealed that the Efrat settlement near Bethlehem would be expanded by the appropriation of around 420 acres land as "state land". According to Efrat's mayor, the plan is to triple the number of residents in the colony.
Looked at together, these events in the West Bank are of far more significance than issues being afforded a lot of attention currently, such as the truce talks with Hamas, or the discussions about a possible prisoner-exchange deal. Hamas itself has become such a focus, whether by those who urge talks and cooption or those who advocate the group's total destruction, that the wider context is forgotten.
Hamas is not the beginning or the end of this conflict, a movement that has been around for just the last third of Israel's 60 years. The Hamas Charter is not a Palestinian national manifesto, and nor is it even particularly central to today's organisation. Before Hamas existed, Israel was colonising the occupied territories, and maintaining an ethnic exclusivist regime; if Hamas disappeared tomorrow, Israeli colonisation certainly would not. Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/feb/20/israelandthepalestinians-israeli-elections-2009
Friday, October 3, 2008
Israel's settlement-building frenzy
This is an excellent piece from Tuesday's Washington Post that explains how Israel has managed to continue building settlements, in spite of international pressure and countless agreements to stop.
www.washingtonpost.com
Failure Written in West Bank Stone
By Gershom Gorenberg
Tuesday, September 30, 2008; A19
JERUSALEM -- The latest phone call came from a journalist in Denmark. Why, he asked, has Israeli settlement in the West Bank continued despite peace negotiations with the Palestinians?
As a historian of settlements, I'm used to this question. Outgoing Prime Minister Ehud Olmert insists that Israel's future depends on a two-state solution. Building new homes in settlements only makes it more difficult to withdraw. When President Bush convened the Annapolis conference last November, there was media buzz about a settlement freeze. Olmert said that every request to build from within the government required his approval. Yet in the past year, construction has increased -- despite Olmert's talk, despite Bush's supposed commitment to his 2003 "road map" plan with its freeze on settlement.
Nearly a thousand housing units are being built in Maale Adumim, according to Peace Now's Settlement Watch project. At Givat Zeev, another of the settlements ringing Jerusalem, a 750-unit project was approved this year. The government has asked for bids on building nearly 350 homes in Beitar Illit, also near Jerusalem. Meanwhile, hundreds of homes have been added at settlements deep in the West Bank, with the government's acquiescence if not approval.
All this fits a historical pattern: Diplomatic initiatives accelerate settlement building in occupied territory. When the peace effort fades away, the red-roofed houses remain as a monument.
Maale Adumim, a hive of apartment buildings on the parched slope between Jerusalem and Jericho, is the most imposing example. Secret discussions about settling at the site began within the Israeli government in August 1974. At just that time, Secretary of State Henry Kissinger was mediating between Israel and Jordan on an interim peace agreement. Israeli Foreign Minister Yigal Allon proposed that Israel would withdraw from Jericho as a first step toward realizing his larger plan: Israel would also give up major Palestinian towns deeper in the West Bank.
But Allon wanted to keep much of the West Bank under Israeli rule -- including a ring of land surrounding Jerusalem and separating it from Jericho. By the fall of 1974, the Israeli- Jordanian contacts had failed. But Allon's political ally, settlement czar Yisrael Galili, pushed on with Maale Adumim. Building is easier than negotiating, and it is harder to stop.
The government's method of acquiring land for the settlement was audacious -- and, until now, well hidden. After a tenacious freedom-of-information legal battle, Israeli human rights activist Dror Etkes of the organization Yesh Din recently received data from the Israeli army's Civil Administration on West Bank land expropriations. In April 1975, Israel expropriated 11 square miles east of Jerusalem "for public use." In 1977, another square mile was taken.
On his laptop, Etkes showed me an aerial photo of the settlement today, superimposed on a map of the expropriation. Most of the built-up area of Maale Adumim lies inside the land that was confiscated.
This is a prima facie violation of international law. Under the 1907 Hague Convention, an occupying power may expropriate land only for the public use of the occupied population. Taking private West Bank land for Israeli use is therefore barred.
That's just one example of the historical pattern. In 1970, Israel and Egypt ended their "War of Attrition" under a cease-fire proposed by Secretary of State William Rogers. The next stage of the Rogers initiative was supposed to be peace talks. Fearing pressure to withdraw, the Israeli cabinet approved the first settlement in the Gaza Strip to stake Israel's claim to the territory. Diplomacy stalled, but settlement continued in Gaza.
The pattern repeated itself in 1998, when President Bill Clinton convened the Wye River summit to revive the Oslo process. The summit ended with an Israeli commitment to resume West Bank withdrawals and a Palestinian pledge to suppress terrorism. Neither promise was kept. But Ariel Sharon, then foreign minister, returned home and publicly advised settlers to "grab more hills, expand the territory. Everything that's grabbed will be in our hands. Everything we don't grab will be in their hands." That spurred establishment of the tiny settlements known as outposts that dot the West Bank.
Since Annapolis, hard-line settlers have continued building, hoping to block any pullback. The government, meanwhile, is building in the so-called settlement blocs -- settlements that it insists Israel must keep under any agreement. As in the past, it is writing its negotiating position in concrete on the hills. That includes more construction on the expropriated land at Maale Adumim.
As shortsighted as Olmert has been to allow this, the same is true of Bush. The president began a negotiating process but has invested little effort in pursuing it. The administration's objections to settlement expansion have been too faint. The new buildings are a monument to Bush's failure as well as Olmert's. They will make Israeli-Palestinian peace a more difficult challenge for the next president -- assuming the next president cares about pursuing peace.
Gershom Gorenberg is the author of "The Accidental Empire: Israel and the Birth of the Settlements, 1967-1977." He blogs at http://SouthJerusalem.com .
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/29/AR2008092902665.html
www.washingtonpost.com
Failure Written in West Bank Stone
By Gershom Gorenberg
Tuesday, September 30, 2008; A19
JERUSALEM -- The latest phone call came from a journalist in Denmark. Why, he asked, has Israeli settlement in the West Bank continued despite peace negotiations with the Palestinians?
As a historian of settlements, I'm used to this question. Outgoing Prime Minister Ehud Olmert insists that Israel's future depends on a two-state solution. Building new homes in settlements only makes it more difficult to withdraw. When President Bush convened the Annapolis conference last November, there was media buzz about a settlement freeze. Olmert said that every request to build from within the government required his approval. Yet in the past year, construction has increased -- despite Olmert's talk, despite Bush's supposed commitment to his 2003 "road map" plan with its freeze on settlement.
Nearly a thousand housing units are being built in Maale Adumim, according to Peace Now's Settlement Watch project. At Givat Zeev, another of the settlements ringing Jerusalem, a 750-unit project was approved this year. The government has asked for bids on building nearly 350 homes in Beitar Illit, also near Jerusalem. Meanwhile, hundreds of homes have been added at settlements deep in the West Bank, with the government's acquiescence if not approval.
All this fits a historical pattern: Diplomatic initiatives accelerate settlement building in occupied territory. When the peace effort fades away, the red-roofed houses remain as a monument.
Maale Adumim, a hive of apartment buildings on the parched slope between Jerusalem and Jericho, is the most imposing example. Secret discussions about settling at the site began within the Israeli government in August 1974. At just that time, Secretary of State Henry Kissinger was mediating between Israel and Jordan on an interim peace agreement. Israeli Foreign Minister Yigal Allon proposed that Israel would withdraw from Jericho as a first step toward realizing his larger plan: Israel would also give up major Palestinian towns deeper in the West Bank.
But Allon wanted to keep much of the West Bank under Israeli rule -- including a ring of land surrounding Jerusalem and separating it from Jericho. By the fall of 1974, the Israeli- Jordanian contacts had failed. But Allon's political ally, settlement czar Yisrael Galili, pushed on with Maale Adumim. Building is easier than negotiating, and it is harder to stop.
The government's method of acquiring land for the settlement was audacious -- and, until now, well hidden. After a tenacious freedom-of-information legal battle, Israeli human rights activist Dror Etkes of the organization Yesh Din recently received data from the Israeli army's Civil Administration on West Bank land expropriations. In April 1975, Israel expropriated 11 square miles east of Jerusalem "for public use." In 1977, another square mile was taken.
On his laptop, Etkes showed me an aerial photo of the settlement today, superimposed on a map of the expropriation. Most of the built-up area of Maale Adumim lies inside the land that was confiscated.
This is a prima facie violation of international law. Under the 1907 Hague Convention, an occupying power may expropriate land only for the public use of the occupied population. Taking private West Bank land for Israeli use is therefore barred.
That's just one example of the historical pattern. In 1970, Israel and Egypt ended their "War of Attrition" under a cease-fire proposed by Secretary of State William Rogers. The next stage of the Rogers initiative was supposed to be peace talks. Fearing pressure to withdraw, the Israeli cabinet approved the first settlement in the Gaza Strip to stake Israel's claim to the territory. Diplomacy stalled, but settlement continued in Gaza.
The pattern repeated itself in 1998, when President Bill Clinton convened the Wye River summit to revive the Oslo process. The summit ended with an Israeli commitment to resume West Bank withdrawals and a Palestinian pledge to suppress terrorism. Neither promise was kept. But Ariel Sharon, then foreign minister, returned home and publicly advised settlers to "grab more hills, expand the territory. Everything that's grabbed will be in our hands. Everything we don't grab will be in their hands." That spurred establishment of the tiny settlements known as outposts that dot the West Bank.
Since Annapolis, hard-line settlers have continued building, hoping to block any pullback. The government, meanwhile, is building in the so-called settlement blocs -- settlements that it insists Israel must keep under any agreement. As in the past, it is writing its negotiating position in concrete on the hills. That includes more construction on the expropriated land at Maale Adumim.
As shortsighted as Olmert has been to allow this, the same is true of Bush. The president began a negotiating process but has invested little effort in pursuing it. The administration's objections to settlement expansion have been too faint. The new buildings are a monument to Bush's failure as well as Olmert's. They will make Israeli-Palestinian peace a more difficult challenge for the next president -- assuming the next president cares about pursuing peace.
Gershom Gorenberg is the author of "The Accidental Empire: Israel and the Birth of the Settlements, 1967-1977." He blogs at http://SouthJerusalem.com .
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/29/AR2008092902665.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
