http://blog.mondediplo.net/2007-03-12-La-pierre-de-Fakhri-Abou-Diab
Le Monde diplomatique | Accueil des blogs
Lettre de Silwan
La pierre de Fakhri Abou Diab
lundi 12 mars 2007, par Meïr Margalit
Silwan est un des villages arabes de Jérusalem-Est où la colonisation se développe le plus rapidement. De surcroît, 88 maisons du quartier de Boustan, au sud, sont menacées de destruction. M. Fakhri Abou Diab fait figure de leader de la résistance palestinienne locale. La cinquantaine, nationaliste et pacifiste convaincu, il a toujours privilégié la lutte politique. Or, nous apprend Meïr Margalit, secrétaire général du Comité israélien contre la démolition de maisons (ICAHD), ce non-violent a été arrêté lors des récentes émeutes de Jérusalem. Un événement symbolique.
Si Fakhri Abou Diab a jeté une pierre, cela veut dire que la situation est devenue désespérée. Il est un de ceux qui ont mené la lutte, dans le quartier de Boustan à Silwan, contre la municipalité de Jérusalem qui prévoyait d’y démolir 88 maisons. Il a été arrêté pour avoir pris part aux manifestations qui ont eu lieu il y a quelques semaines autour de l’Esplanade des Mosquées (Mont du Temple), et accusé d’avoir jeté une pierre sur la police. Si Fakhri doit être arrêté, comme l’a dit le juge lors de l’audition pour le prolongement de sa garde à vue, c’est parce qu’il représente un « danger pour l’ordre public ». La vérité, c’est que le juge a raison.
Fakhri menace en effet l’ordre public israélien, mais pas pour les raisons avancées par la police. Fakhri est dangereux car il connaît le droit, et parce qu’il se bat pacifiquement. Il a toujours mené dans la légalité son combat pour la défense des droits élémentaires des résidents palestiniens de Jérusalem. S’il recourt avec modération à la presse internationale, il a incité de nombreuses organisations de paix israéliennes et internationales à travailler avec lui pour aller à la rencontre des diplomates aussi bien que du grand public, et ainsi mieux faire connaître le drame qui est en train de se jouer à Boustan et dans de nombreux autres villages voisins de Jérusalem.
Pour cette raison, et non pas parce qu’il a jeté des pierres, Fakhri est un danger. Paradoxalement, les Israéliens craignent plus des gens comme lui que les terroristes. Il s’exprime dans un langage que tout le monde comprend, et dénonce des injustices dont les Israéliens préfèrent ne pas entendre parler.
Si Fakhri a jeté une pierre, la menace n’est pas la pierre elle-même, mais le fait qu’une telle personnalité ait pu en jeter une. Israël a dépassé toutes les limites en s’attaquant à un site aussi important et sensible. Si quelqu’un comme Fakhri n’a pu se retenir de jeter une pierre, cela veut dire que la cité est au bord du gouffre. Fakhri est un responsable municipal, un messager de la co-existence et de la paix ; s’il a ressenti le besoin de jeter une pierre, il faut voir cet acte comme un symbole très inquiétant. La pierre n’a guère pu blesser la police, mais heurte violemment la société israélienne. Si Fakhri a jeté une pierre, c’est le signe que les dernières fondations sur lesquelles reposent les espoirs de la co-existence sont en train de s’effondrer. Il ne resterait alors qu’un vide abyssal dans lequel nous tomberions tous — Juifs et palestiniens — si nous ne répondions pas très vite au message de Fakhri.
Notes
* Meïr Margalit est secrétaire général du Comité israélien contre la démolition de maisons (ICAHD) — www.icahd.org.
Tuesday, March 13, 2007
Monday, January 29, 2007
what to do for peace in the land...
MEIR MARGALIT
I believe in the concept of a "critical mass." Every person actively participating will at some point become part of a critical mass, which will then take hold. I can't claim that by saving any one house I've greatly contributed to advancing peace. I do believe that our work, if joined by scores of people and other organizations, can achieve a critical mass, and that will lead to favorable political change.
(Mario Vargas Lloza and Meir Margalit)The focus of Meir Margalit's work is fighting the Israeli government policy and practice of demolishing Palestinian-owned homes. His goal is to increase prospects for peace by working cooperatively with Israelis and Palestinians for social justice and an end to Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory. Meir immigrated to Israel with a right-wing Zionist youth group, and founded a Jewish settlement in Gaza during his army service in the 1970s. He fought and was wounded in the Yom Kippur War of 1973. He remembers his recovery period as a turning point, during which he began to feel that his ideology valued land over people's lives. He subsequently became active in Israeli left-wing politics. Meir served as council member in the Jerusalem Municipality for twenty years before devoting himself to non-profit, peace-oriented organizations.
Place of Birth Buenos Aires, Argentina
Residence Jerusalem
Year of Birth 1952
Profession Clerk and administrator
Organization Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions
Identity A person who is Israeli
Languages Spanish, Hebrew, English
Web site Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions
Date of Interview June 3, 2005
© JustVision 2006
A Conversation With Meir Margalit
(The Judge Juan Guzman with Dr. Meir Margalit)Meir Margalit is one of the most interesting Israeli intellectuals if one seeks to understand the reality in the Middle East from the perspective of the Israeli peace movement. Born in Argentina, he has lived in Israel since 1972.
Until February of 2003, he was a member of the Jerusalem city council for the Meretz party.
He is a champion — one of the few remaining — of the peaceful coexistence between Israelis and Palestinians. On account of his habit of donning a construction worker’s outfit and, alongside Palestinians, rebuilding houses bulldozed by the Tsahal — the Israeli army — he was recently dubbed “the Israeli Nelson Mandela” by the Catalan daily La Vanguardia. He is a founder of the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions, an NGO fighting punitive demolitions of Palestinian homes, disseminates information about the plight of the occupied territories, and provides strategic support to Palestinian families and communities with a view toward a just and sustainable peace.
Margalit has been accused by his detractors on the right of connivance with the terrorists. In an interview for La Vanguardia on July 7, he stated, “That is a paranoiac absurdity. The ruling Zionism by holding on to its expansionist designs degrades democracy not only for Arabs, but also for all Israelis. We lived through the farce of apartheid in South Africa. With a view toward combating the Israeli apartheid, we founded Meretz, a left-wing alternative for peace and integration.”
We found him very busy, but as always, a gracious host in his Jerusalem office.
Carotenuto: Non-Israelis who see the withdrawal from the Gaza Strip with a mixture of surprise and skepticism and, for want of sufficient background to understand these events, are unsure whether this marks a new era in the life of the Jewish state, or a subterfuge through which the colonial policy might be deepened from a position of greater strength.
Margalit: There’s no doubt that the Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip is an event of capital importance in the history of Israel. But the greater question is what will happen in the aftermath of the pullout.
The feeling is that it may be more a matter of a tactical retreat.
It is not possible to predict what future course the Israeli government will take. If [Prime Minister] Ariel Sharon continues with the process of withdrawal, we may be witnessing the end of more than 100 years of conflict. If he instead decides to freeze the process, or even further reinforce the settlements on the West Bank (Cisjordan), this may give rise to a third Intifada more violent and bloody than the previous ones.
To date all indications do not encourage optimism and the Israeli political environment, especially on account of the prominence of religious fundamentalists that identify with the defense of the territories, veers toward the right, and today Sharon is not a likely favorite in the next elections.
On the one hand, there are those declarations made by Sharon himself and his allies [such as Dov Waisglas’s famous statements to the daily Ha’aretz —Editors’ note] in which Sharon himself states that with Gaza the withdrawals come to an end, and that now is the time to reinforce the settlements on the West Bank. On the other hand, the pullout sparks a dynamic that may be stronger than political statements. And I believe that the withdrawal from the Gaza Strip may give rise to a dynamic that leads us to return more territories and reinforces the current process. We historians and sociologists know this, but so do the settlers themselves who today are already fighting tomorrow’s battle, while other elements of Israeli society continue to fight yesterday’s battle today.
You’re saying that with the pullout from the Gaza Strip we are already witnessing in miniature the conflicts that will come about in the event of further returns of land? For the ultra-orthodox, the heart of Jewish identity lies not in Gaza but in Judea and Samaria, as Israel calls the West Bank.
Israeli Occupation
Four wars have been fought between Israel and the Arab states, in 1948, 1956, 1967 and 1973. In the war of 1967, Israel captured East Jerusalem, the West Bank, Golan Heights and Sinai from Jordan, Syria and Egypt. Since the Arab states refused to negotiate peace, Israel continued to occupy the territories.
Sinai, except for the Gaza Strip, was returned to Egypt in 1979, following a peace agreement.
The Gaza Strip, where at least 5,000 Israeli settlers in 21 settlements lived among more than 1 million Palestinians, was evacuated in August 2005.
Israel has at least 244 settlements in the West Bank, and 29 in East Jerusalem. More than 187,000 Israeli settlers live in the West Bank, and fewer than 177,000 in East Jerusalem. Total population in the West Bank exceeds 2 million.
Since 1967, Israel has demolished 12,000 Palestinian homes in the occupied territories, including East Jerusalem — 5,000 of them from the start of the second Intifada (October 2000) through 2004.
Under the Fourth Geneva Convention, an occupying power is prohibited from moving its own civilians into an occupied territory, forcibly transferring the local population, destroying real or personal property, or meting out collective punishment, among other things.
Israel signed the Geneva Conventions in 1949 and ratified them in 1951, but has since stated that they don’t apply to the Gaza Strip or the West Bank.
Sources: Encyclopædia Britannica, C.I.A. World Fact Book, International Committee of the Red Cross, Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions.
The battle raging today does not have as its aim the halting of the withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, but to prevent Sharon or any other government from pulling out of the West Bank in the future. That is what is at stake these days. The right knows full well that we do not have historical roots in Gaza, and that the preservation of those territories is absolutely indefensible. But the settlers want to make a show of how far they are willing to go in the event of a pullout from the West Bank: to the point of giving fierce battle and the shedding of blood.
The feeling is that the peace movement is isolated from the real dynamic of the events.
For the peace movement, Gaza beggars a rethinking of the situation. In the first place, we are asking ourselves if the old idea of dismantling of the occupied territories continues to be practicable. My feeling is that no politician of this generation will be able to dismantle the settlements on the West Bank. If I am right, the idea of two states for two people is not feasible, and we now need to begin talking seriously about the alternative project of a binational state. In the second place, even if I understand that it seems altogether contorted, many people on the left are contemplating whether it might not be worthwhile, in the immediate future, to vote for the right.
There are many historical instances that incline one toward that view, many peace agreements that were believed impossible, were signed by those who, from the outset, were ferociously pro war, while the world has witnessed many of the worst liberal “reforms” brought about by governments nominally on the left. Often under right-wing administrations, certain left-wing causes are possible that are not feasible under left-wing administrations, on account of the intractable opposition on the right, and vice versa.
In our specific case , the only leaders who have given land back have been those on the right: Begin, Sharon, Bibi [Netanyahu] has even returned part of Hebron. Since the Labor party today lacks politicians of stature, and only the right has the power to return land, many of us on the left are thinking of supporting Sharon in the next elections.
Hence the return of territories as the only plank in the platform conducive to peace, and the conflict with the Palestinians as the only factor that swallows and overshadows all other social conflicts. The years under Sharon and Netanyahu as minister of Finance have also been years of fierce market liberalization and deregulation, and of neoliberalism, all of which have made it so that today one Israeli child in four is poor. Henceforward, only the settlers seem to benefit from the Israeli welfare state, and 97 percent of these will continue to benefit, seeing that the number of settlers in Gaza surpasses 3 percent of the Israeli population and their withdrawal seems like a huge media operation. Even the labor party — like many center-left reform parties all over the world — doesn’t appear to offer any hope on that score in comparison to the parties on the right. In your view as Jerusalem alderman for many years for the Meretz party [the most important of Labor’s factions on the left], isn’t this paradoxical?
The fact is we are living through a paradoxical process. On the one hand, the left is going through one of the worst moments in its history. No one listens to us, no one sees us, it’s as though we had vanished into thin air. But on the other hand, the Israeli right is implementing political agendas the left has been advocating for the past 30 years. We want to withdraw from the occupied territories and it is the right-wing that has always opposed this that is de facto carrying out our political agenda. That is why for us things have never been worse, but never have they been better at the same time. These days our people are very satisfied and are not willing to criticize Sharon, in spite of the fact his statements do not encourage optimism with respect to an eventual withdrawal from the West Bank.
Gennaro Carotenuto is a contributor to the Uruguayan weekly Brecha and a visiting professor at the University of the Republic in Uruguay. He is a member of the Italian Order of Journalists, and a professor of history at the University of Macerata in Italy.
Originally published Aug. 18. Translated from the Italian by Flávio Américo dos Reis.
Saturday, May 14, 2005
The truth behind official statistics: house demolitions in the West Bank 2004. By: Meir Margalit
By: Meir Margalit [ ::: Politics ::: ]
Monday, March 05, 2007
The number of houses in the territories demolished by the state rose to record numbers after the start of the second intifada at the end of 2000. The number of houses demolished in the Gaza Strip, especially in Rafah, is unprecedented: 2,897 houses, as professionally and accurately documented by UNRWA (UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees).Data concerning house demolitions in the West Bank is more problematic because there are no international agencies working systematically in the field and because accessibility for Israeli organizations has become more difficult. Although statistics published by the IDF are of dubious credibility, a fairly accurate picture can be constructed by combining evidence from a number of sources.
In the West Bank , house demolitions fall into three categories: the punitive demolition of houses belonging to families of people involved in suicide attacks, operational demolitions carried out during military operations, and the administrative demolition of houses constructed without a permit.
The issue of punitive demolitions has been researched in depth by Btselem, the Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories . The organization found that since the beginning of the second intifada, about 675 houses have been demolished. Punitive demolitions were abolished in February 2005 following the recommendations of a special committee that was established by the Chief of Staff. The committee found that not only do these demolitions fail to deter potential suicide bombers, on the contrary, they only serve to increase feelings of hate and the desire for revenge.
Concerning operational demolitions, the available data is only partial. The biggest wave of house demolitions during a military operation was in Jenin during Operation Defensive Shield in April 2002. According to Palestinian sources, 530 structures were demolished, while according to Israeli sources there were 420 demolitions. In addition, the Palestinian Human Rights Committee (PHRC) recorded another 15 structures demolished during the same period in the areas of Qalqiliya, Nablus , Salvit, al-Bira and Beituniya. It also documented 357 other structures that were damaged to various degrees, some to the point of endangering their residents. Over the past year operational demolitions have all but disappeared as well.
In contrast, administrative house demolitions have continued relentlessly, even increasing. According to official data published by the Civil Administration, about 1,000 houses were demolished in the West Bank between September 2000 and the end of 2004. The division is as follows:
2000 Since Sep: 21
2001: 186
2002: 276
2003: 306
2004: 211
An in-depth examination reveals that the number of structures demolished in reality is much higher, and that the true figure is concealed by means of manipulative accounting.
An in-depth examination of the 2004 report on the demolition of illegal houses, submitted to MK Zahava Gal-On (Yachad) by the Civil Administration, reveals a Machiavellian computation tactic. The Civil Administration calculates the number of reports filed against illegal structures and ignores the fact that one report often includes more than a single structure. The practice of including more than one structure per demolition report in the West Bank is of questionable legitimacy, especially since the practice does not exist in Israel . Thus, the demolition of a block of several buildings appears as a single demolition in the Civil Administration's final report. For example, a demolition in the village of Samoua on January 28, 2004, file number 118/97, was listed as a single demolition although it included three inhabited structures of about 20 sq. meters each, in addition to an animal pen and building foundations. A demolition carried out in the village of Azoun on April 22, 2004 , was listed as being a single demolition although it was “a camp including seven tents.” This is true in many other cases. A demolition on November 4, 2004 , near Ramallah, file number 143/95, was listed as a single demolition despite the fact there were “four residential structures of about 25 sq. meters each.” Thus the number of structures actually demolished is greater than the figures in the official report.
A close reading of that same report finds that in total, at least 357 structures were demolished in the West Bank according to the following division:
Residences and populated structures 88
Goat and sheep pens, chicken coops, agricultural structures 65
Wells 11
Shanties, shacks, tents, containers 112
Commercial structures, industrial, workshops, offices 28
Foundations, fences 51
Caves 2
There are instances in which the report does not specify the number of structures demolished during one operation and merely uses the inclusive term “buildings” or “stores.” Such was the case in a demolition in Bartaa on July 20, 2004 , in which the term “stores” and “structures used as stores” appeared in the report without specifying the total number of structures.
It can be concluded that the number of structures demolished is about 70% higher than the official figures.
If the findings from the 2004 report are applied to reports from earlier years, the number of demolished structures reaches 1,700.
In addition, there is evidence of demolitions that are not mentioned in the aforementioned report, nor in any other report. These demolitions are probably the outcome of local power struggles or committed by groups of lawbreakers. For example, a resident of Walaja reported that Border Patrol forces demolished a structure he owned, which functioned as a storehouse for grain and farming equipment. They claimed that the structure “overlooked their checkpoint and put the soldiers there at risk.” Another instance is the home of the Shrabati family in Hebron , demolished by settlers from Kiryat Arba in the presence of soldiers. The soldiers did not intervene, claiming, “They were children.” There are instances in which houses sustained heavy damages during a punitive demolition and were not included in the statistics—neither as a punitive demolition nor as an administrative demolition.
For example, a building of 14 apartments belonging to the Suleiman-Qawasma family in Hebron was badly damaged on May 26, 2003 , during the ‘controlled detonation' of the house of a suicide bomber. The surrounding houses suffered enough damaged to be deemed hazardous to their residents. Of course, these apartments become “uninhabitable,” but were not recorded in the statistics for punitive or administrative demolitions.
The number of houses demolished by the Civil Administration or local forces, directly or indirectly, exceeds the official figure presented by the state and exceeds even the informal figure calculated based on the in-depth analysis of the 2004 report.
To conclude, the number of structures demolished in the West Bank since September 2000 for punitive, operational, and administrative purposes is somewhere between 2,110 (according to Israeli sources) and 2,920 (according to our estimates).
The planning situation
Throughout the years of the occupation in the West Bank Israel has followed a policy of planning, development, and construction which limits construction by Palestinian residents as much as possible. Construction is prohibited to more than two thirds of Palestinian residents in the West Bank .
Israel froze the planning situation in cities and Palestinian villages. The current structural plans for these cities and villages are more than 50 years old. In fact, the structural plans in use are the Mandate plan S-15, approved in March 1948. Since the Israeli occupation in 1967, the state has taken no initiative to improve or develop these structural plans to meet the legitimate needs of the area's residents. It is based on these plans that the majority of requests for building permits were rejected. Land registration has also been frozen since 1967; without land registration, requests for building permits cannot be filed, since there is no proof of ownership of the land. The Israeli Civil Administration controls the administration of construction authorities. Aside from the fact that the local population has no representation on these authorities, most of the workers are settlers who have a strong motive to prevent Palestinians from exercising their rights over the land. It is practically impossible for residents to obtain documentation or maps for their land. Secrecy surrounds the Civil Administration's planning considerations, and basic information vital to construction planning is not available to those who request it.
Any Palestinian who wants to obtain permission to build on land in Area C must go through drawn-out, complicated, and costly proceedings which will most likely end in the rejection of his request. The truth is regulations established by the military administration in the West Bank allows for administrative demolitions without legal restrictions. Appeals and hearings take place before the authority that issued the order, i.e., the Civil Administration, not an independent legal institution. Nor are they conducted on the basis of evidence as is the practice in the judiciary.
International law
House demolitions violate international law. The authority to demolish is limited, and demolitions for civil reasons are completely prohibited. Article 46 of the 1907 Hague Conventions, which addresses occupied territory, requires any occupying country to maintain the private property of those under occupation.
In Article 53 Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, it was decided that no occupying power can damage or destroy the property and personal effects of the local population (unless it is a military necessity). In addition, according to West Bank ordinance 974 of 1981, the Civil Administration must act in the interest and welfare of the population.
In addition, administrative house demolitions are illegal, whether under the administrative law enforced in the territories, international law, or administrative laws imposed on the occupying nation.
According to international law, construction and planning are wholly civil matters. The military authority does not have the right to interfere in planning and construction, except when it has clear ramifications for security.
Unacceptable considerations in the “administrative” demolition of Palestinian houses
House demolitions in the West Bank are not just an administrative procedure carried out based on planning considerations. In the context of the current conflict, it is a political act aimed at serving the policy of land annexation and has nothing to do with planning considerations.
In most cases, Palestinian homes are demolished for the following objectives:
Distancing Palestinians from areas close to settlements: Israeli authorities regularly demolish Palestinian buildings that represent an obstacle to the development and expansion of settlements. Of course, the proximity of these houses to settlements is not offered as an official reason for the demolition.
Creating ring roads: These roads are meant to facilitate the movement of settlers and the military forces that protect the settlements. Houses in the paths of these ring roads—whether they are already there or are planned—are candidates for demolition.
Preventing the handover of land to Palestinians: Israel demolishes houses in areas in Israel to maintain them as part of a final settlement, in an attempt to prevent the Palestinian Authority from demanding the land by claiming that Palestinians live on it. House demolitions are an easy, convenient means to expel the population of these areas.
Restrictions on residential construction in the West Bank (August 1990, summary)
The official data reveals that the authorities demolished more houses than they allowed to be constructed in 1987 and 1988. In a cautionary report, it seems that if construction followed the dictates of the permit-granting authorities, 150 additional houses would have been built every year in the three years from 1988 to 1990. During this period, the population increase alone created a need for more than 2,000 additional homes annually.
We can thus say that the planning and construction authorities betrayed the trust of its mission and duties. It exploited the excessive authority granted to it by military orders to prevent the local population from being represented in planning and construction institutions and abolished the possibility of judicial appeal that existed under Jordanian law, without any justification based on international law.
The State Comptroller's 2003 report and in Talia Sasson's report in March 2005 on illegal settlement outposts revealed the transfer of state money to settlement councils in the West Bank and Gaza to finance illegal construction throughout the West Bank . According to the State Comptroller's report, which covered the period from the beginning of 2000 until June 2003, the Ministry of Construction and Housing financed construction and development projects worth NIS29.7 million in violation of the planning and construction law and in areas where construction was absolutely prohibited, whether due to lack of agreement on the part of the government, the lack of any structural plans, or for reasons related to the ownership of the land. In addition, in certain cases, the Ministry of Construction and Housing undertook to establish infrastructure at points where the Civil Administration had issued demolitions orders. The report also noted that none of the competent authorities—whether the Ministry of Construction and Housing, the Interior Minister, or the Interior Minister's aide on settlement issues—ascertained whether construction permits had been issued by the local authorities in the West Bank before approving the transfer of money. The State Comptroller summarized the findings of the report in plain language: “A study of the financing offered by the Ministry of Construction and Housing for construction and development projects for local authorities in parts of the West Bank reveal that the Ministry is expending the country's resources on illegal construction, on projects for which there is no construction permit, in areas where structural plans have not been approved, and in areas where the political leadership has not approved settlement. These are extremely grave findings.” (State Comptroller's report on financing construction and development in the West Bank, p. 369)
The gravity of the situation only increases considering that during the same period the government demolished 628 Arab houses in the same area because they did not have building permits (Civil Administration report for 2000-June 2003). This means that the state allows Jews to commit building violations while prohibiting Arabs from building in the same area. For those who still do not grasp the significance of this situation, we say that unfortunately the seriousness of this phenomenon stems from the fact that government policy in this area is racist and discriminatory. When an action is prohibited to Arabs but permissible for Jews, and when they demolish Arab homes because they do not have permits while at the same time helping Jews to build without permits, there is no way to avoid calling things by their real name. There is no choice but to call these things racial discrimination, even if these two words will shock any Jew.
In addition, it cannot be said here that this is just an “isolated mistake” or “the actions of an individual that do not represent the whole,” because the State Comptroller revealed a phenomenon involving not only several government ministries, but also the army itself via the Civil Administration and the operations coordinator in the territories. That is, this is a truly racist policy.
* Source: www.hagada.org.il ,May 14, 2005.
* http://www.hagada.org.il/eng/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=89
Monday, March 05, 2007
The number of houses in the territories demolished by the state rose to record numbers after the start of the second intifada at the end of 2000. The number of houses demolished in the Gaza Strip, especially in Rafah, is unprecedented: 2,897 houses, as professionally and accurately documented by UNRWA (UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees).Data concerning house demolitions in the West Bank is more problematic because there are no international agencies working systematically in the field and because accessibility for Israeli organizations has become more difficult. Although statistics published by the IDF are of dubious credibility, a fairly accurate picture can be constructed by combining evidence from a number of sources.
In the West Bank , house demolitions fall into three categories: the punitive demolition of houses belonging to families of people involved in suicide attacks, operational demolitions carried out during military operations, and the administrative demolition of houses constructed without a permit.
The issue of punitive demolitions has been researched in depth by Btselem, the Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories . The organization found that since the beginning of the second intifada, about 675 houses have been demolished. Punitive demolitions were abolished in February 2005 following the recommendations of a special committee that was established by the Chief of Staff. The committee found that not only do these demolitions fail to deter potential suicide bombers, on the contrary, they only serve to increase feelings of hate and the desire for revenge.
Concerning operational demolitions, the available data is only partial. The biggest wave of house demolitions during a military operation was in Jenin during Operation Defensive Shield in April 2002. According to Palestinian sources, 530 structures were demolished, while according to Israeli sources there were 420 demolitions. In addition, the Palestinian Human Rights Committee (PHRC) recorded another 15 structures demolished during the same period in the areas of Qalqiliya, Nablus , Salvit, al-Bira and Beituniya. It also documented 357 other structures that were damaged to various degrees, some to the point of endangering their residents. Over the past year operational demolitions have all but disappeared as well.
In contrast, administrative house demolitions have continued relentlessly, even increasing. According to official data published by the Civil Administration, about 1,000 houses were demolished in the West Bank between September 2000 and the end of 2004. The division is as follows:
2000 Since Sep: 21
2001: 186
2002: 276
2003: 306
2004: 211
An in-depth examination reveals that the number of structures demolished in reality is much higher, and that the true figure is concealed by means of manipulative accounting.
An in-depth examination of the 2004 report on the demolition of illegal houses, submitted to MK Zahava Gal-On (Yachad) by the Civil Administration, reveals a Machiavellian computation tactic. The Civil Administration calculates the number of reports filed against illegal structures and ignores the fact that one report often includes more than a single structure. The practice of including more than one structure per demolition report in the West Bank is of questionable legitimacy, especially since the practice does not exist in Israel . Thus, the demolition of a block of several buildings appears as a single demolition in the Civil Administration's final report. For example, a demolition in the village of Samoua on January 28, 2004, file number 118/97, was listed as a single demolition although it included three inhabited structures of about 20 sq. meters each, in addition to an animal pen and building foundations. A demolition carried out in the village of Azoun on April 22, 2004 , was listed as being a single demolition although it was “a camp including seven tents.” This is true in many other cases. A demolition on November 4, 2004 , near Ramallah, file number 143/95, was listed as a single demolition despite the fact there were “four residential structures of about 25 sq. meters each.” Thus the number of structures actually demolished is greater than the figures in the official report.
A close reading of that same report finds that in total, at least 357 structures were demolished in the West Bank according to the following division:
Residences and populated structures 88
Goat and sheep pens, chicken coops, agricultural structures 65
Wells 11
Shanties, shacks, tents, containers 112
Commercial structures, industrial, workshops, offices 28
Foundations, fences 51
Caves 2
There are instances in which the report does not specify the number of structures demolished during one operation and merely uses the inclusive term “buildings” or “stores.” Such was the case in a demolition in Bartaa on July 20, 2004 , in which the term “stores” and “structures used as stores” appeared in the report without specifying the total number of structures.
It can be concluded that the number of structures demolished is about 70% higher than the official figures.
If the findings from the 2004 report are applied to reports from earlier years, the number of demolished structures reaches 1,700.
In addition, there is evidence of demolitions that are not mentioned in the aforementioned report, nor in any other report. These demolitions are probably the outcome of local power struggles or committed by groups of lawbreakers. For example, a resident of Walaja reported that Border Patrol forces demolished a structure he owned, which functioned as a storehouse for grain and farming equipment. They claimed that the structure “overlooked their checkpoint and put the soldiers there at risk.” Another instance is the home of the Shrabati family in Hebron , demolished by settlers from Kiryat Arba in the presence of soldiers. The soldiers did not intervene, claiming, “They were children.” There are instances in which houses sustained heavy damages during a punitive demolition and were not included in the statistics—neither as a punitive demolition nor as an administrative demolition.
For example, a building of 14 apartments belonging to the Suleiman-Qawasma family in Hebron was badly damaged on May 26, 2003 , during the ‘controlled detonation' of the house of a suicide bomber. The surrounding houses suffered enough damaged to be deemed hazardous to their residents. Of course, these apartments become “uninhabitable,” but were not recorded in the statistics for punitive or administrative demolitions.
The number of houses demolished by the Civil Administration or local forces, directly or indirectly, exceeds the official figure presented by the state and exceeds even the informal figure calculated based on the in-depth analysis of the 2004 report.
To conclude, the number of structures demolished in the West Bank since September 2000 for punitive, operational, and administrative purposes is somewhere between 2,110 (according to Israeli sources) and 2,920 (according to our estimates).
The planning situation
Throughout the years of the occupation in the West Bank Israel has followed a policy of planning, development, and construction which limits construction by Palestinian residents as much as possible. Construction is prohibited to more than two thirds of Palestinian residents in the West Bank .
Israel froze the planning situation in cities and Palestinian villages. The current structural plans for these cities and villages are more than 50 years old. In fact, the structural plans in use are the Mandate plan S-15, approved in March 1948. Since the Israeli occupation in 1967, the state has taken no initiative to improve or develop these structural plans to meet the legitimate needs of the area's residents. It is based on these plans that the majority of requests for building permits were rejected. Land registration has also been frozen since 1967; without land registration, requests for building permits cannot be filed, since there is no proof of ownership of the land. The Israeli Civil Administration controls the administration of construction authorities. Aside from the fact that the local population has no representation on these authorities, most of the workers are settlers who have a strong motive to prevent Palestinians from exercising their rights over the land. It is practically impossible for residents to obtain documentation or maps for their land. Secrecy surrounds the Civil Administration's planning considerations, and basic information vital to construction planning is not available to those who request it.
Any Palestinian who wants to obtain permission to build on land in Area C must go through drawn-out, complicated, and costly proceedings which will most likely end in the rejection of his request. The truth is regulations established by the military administration in the West Bank allows for administrative demolitions without legal restrictions. Appeals and hearings take place before the authority that issued the order, i.e., the Civil Administration, not an independent legal institution. Nor are they conducted on the basis of evidence as is the practice in the judiciary.
International law
House demolitions violate international law. The authority to demolish is limited, and demolitions for civil reasons are completely prohibited. Article 46 of the 1907 Hague Conventions, which addresses occupied territory, requires any occupying country to maintain the private property of those under occupation.
In Article 53 Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, it was decided that no occupying power can damage or destroy the property and personal effects of the local population (unless it is a military necessity). In addition, according to West Bank ordinance 974 of 1981, the Civil Administration must act in the interest and welfare of the population.
In addition, administrative house demolitions are illegal, whether under the administrative law enforced in the territories, international law, or administrative laws imposed on the occupying nation.
According to international law, construction and planning are wholly civil matters. The military authority does not have the right to interfere in planning and construction, except when it has clear ramifications for security.
Unacceptable considerations in the “administrative” demolition of Palestinian houses
House demolitions in the West Bank are not just an administrative procedure carried out based on planning considerations. In the context of the current conflict, it is a political act aimed at serving the policy of land annexation and has nothing to do with planning considerations.
In most cases, Palestinian homes are demolished for the following objectives:
Distancing Palestinians from areas close to settlements: Israeli authorities regularly demolish Palestinian buildings that represent an obstacle to the development and expansion of settlements. Of course, the proximity of these houses to settlements is not offered as an official reason for the demolition.
Creating ring roads: These roads are meant to facilitate the movement of settlers and the military forces that protect the settlements. Houses in the paths of these ring roads—whether they are already there or are planned—are candidates for demolition.
Preventing the handover of land to Palestinians: Israel demolishes houses in areas in Israel to maintain them as part of a final settlement, in an attempt to prevent the Palestinian Authority from demanding the land by claiming that Palestinians live on it. House demolitions are an easy, convenient means to expel the population of these areas.
Restrictions on residential construction in the West Bank (August 1990, summary)
The official data reveals that the authorities demolished more houses than they allowed to be constructed in 1987 and 1988. In a cautionary report, it seems that if construction followed the dictates of the permit-granting authorities, 150 additional houses would have been built every year in the three years from 1988 to 1990. During this period, the population increase alone created a need for more than 2,000 additional homes annually.
We can thus say that the planning and construction authorities betrayed the trust of its mission and duties. It exploited the excessive authority granted to it by military orders to prevent the local population from being represented in planning and construction institutions and abolished the possibility of judicial appeal that existed under Jordanian law, without any justification based on international law.
The State Comptroller's 2003 report and in Talia Sasson's report in March 2005 on illegal settlement outposts revealed the transfer of state money to settlement councils in the West Bank and Gaza to finance illegal construction throughout the West Bank . According to the State Comptroller's report, which covered the period from the beginning of 2000 until June 2003, the Ministry of Construction and Housing financed construction and development projects worth NIS29.7 million in violation of the planning and construction law and in areas where construction was absolutely prohibited, whether due to lack of agreement on the part of the government, the lack of any structural plans, or for reasons related to the ownership of the land. In addition, in certain cases, the Ministry of Construction and Housing undertook to establish infrastructure at points where the Civil Administration had issued demolitions orders. The report also noted that none of the competent authorities—whether the Ministry of Construction and Housing, the Interior Minister, or the Interior Minister's aide on settlement issues—ascertained whether construction permits had been issued by the local authorities in the West Bank before approving the transfer of money. The State Comptroller summarized the findings of the report in plain language: “A study of the financing offered by the Ministry of Construction and Housing for construction and development projects for local authorities in parts of the West Bank reveal that the Ministry is expending the country's resources on illegal construction, on projects for which there is no construction permit, in areas where structural plans have not been approved, and in areas where the political leadership has not approved settlement. These are extremely grave findings.” (State Comptroller's report on financing construction and development in the West Bank, p. 369)
The gravity of the situation only increases considering that during the same period the government demolished 628 Arab houses in the same area because they did not have building permits (Civil Administration report for 2000-June 2003). This means that the state allows Jews to commit building violations while prohibiting Arabs from building in the same area. For those who still do not grasp the significance of this situation, we say that unfortunately the seriousness of this phenomenon stems from the fact that government policy in this area is racist and discriminatory. When an action is prohibited to Arabs but permissible for Jews, and when they demolish Arab homes because they do not have permits while at the same time helping Jews to build without permits, there is no way to avoid calling things by their real name. There is no choice but to call these things racial discrimination, even if these two words will shock any Jew.
In addition, it cannot be said here that this is just an “isolated mistake” or “the actions of an individual that do not represent the whole,” because the State Comptroller revealed a phenomenon involving not only several government ministries, but also the army itself via the Civil Administration and the operations coordinator in the territories. That is, this is a truly racist policy.
* Source: www.hagada.org.il ,May 14, 2005.
* http://www.hagada.org.il/eng/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=89
Wednesday, March 16, 2005
To Call a Spade
By: Meir Margalit
Friday, March 02, 2007
The report submitted by Attorney Talia Sasson regarding illegal outposts is a brave and useful document. In order to grasp its larger meaning it is necessary to refer to other data that is not included in the report and which has not been commented upon. According to Israel`s Civil Administration in the West Bank, since the year 2000 some 800 structures belonging to Palestinians have been demolished. The explanation given is that these were illegal structures.
The real scope of the disgrace and the extent of deterioration becomes evident when comparing this data with the report regarding the house demolitions of Palestinians. The report raises the concern that the defective norms prevalent in the West Bank could permeate the State of Israel and affect the rule of the law. This, however, is not the gravest threat Israel faces. The most awful aspect of the entire affair is that the report reveals not only the large-scale network of legalizing illegal outposts but worse, it exposes the ethics we have sunk to. A state that distinguishes between citizens on the basis of ethnicity, enforces double standards based on religion, and determines criteria according to nationality is clearly a racist state. We are currently are shamelessly reproducing the Apartheid regime`s racism towards black people, as well as what was inflicted upon the Jews throughout history. Our actions in the territories from checkpoint to separation wall, from expropriating lands to uprooting trees, from closures to sieges - it all cries racism, adorned with the seal of racist discrimination. There is racist ideology behind every outpost and it crushes our ethical character; each illegal caravan is a marker of fascist ideology which is taking over our existence.
Attorney Sasson`s report depicts the systematic manner in which right-wing ideology associated with the Yesha Council`s beit midrash has taken over the main edifices of the state, including the Civil Administration, drowning it in a bog of racism. The Civil Administration, which assists settlers in contravening the law, simultaneously issued thousands of demolition orders for Arab residents` dwellings and did not hesitate to demolish them in the name of the rule of the law. More than 800 homes of innocent families were completely demolished, not families of terrorists, but people whose only sin was to build a house without a permit. This is called racism, even if we find it hard to utter the word.
There is no thought quite as unpleasant as attributing racist behavior to Jews. We are overwhelmed by the world of associations, which leads us into dark places in which we were the ultimate victims of racist ideology. Despite this, we are unable to look this report in the eye and read it intently. To do so is to comprehend the situation and question ourselves as to how we descended to this pit, where we too have joined the most racist countries in the world.
Sasson`s report reflects the true distorted face unmasked, yet refuses to refer to the reflection by its true name. It refrains from delving into the ideological motives behind those outposts, thus refraining from calling a spade a spade and focusing on procedure rather than the fundamentals. Attorney Talia Sasson missed the point. It isn`t a question of sound administration; it is a matter of Jewish racism which draws on religious fundamentalism and right-wing nationalism, the two basic elements in any fascist regime. The settlers bear the flag of nationalist ideology that include typical fascist content; the governmental mechanisms that support the settlers, the military, the government and the agencies, have become the servants of that ideology. As long as the state does not shake off the grip of the extreme right-wing, the process of becoming fascist is unavoidable. The state of Israel is afflicted with cancerous racism; this must be spelled out incessantly as part of the healing process. If we don`t call a spade a spade, if we do not cry out our pain publicly, the public will fail to open its eyes to the extent of the deterioration, and it will not be resisted.
* Hagada HaSmalit, March 16th, 2005. Translation to English - Leora Gal.
* http://www.hagada.org.il/eng/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=31
Friday, March 02, 2007
The report submitted by Attorney Talia Sasson regarding illegal outposts is a brave and useful document. In order to grasp its larger meaning it is necessary to refer to other data that is not included in the report and which has not been commented upon. According to Israel`s Civil Administration in the West Bank, since the year 2000 some 800 structures belonging to Palestinians have been demolished. The explanation given is that these were illegal structures.
The real scope of the disgrace and the extent of deterioration becomes evident when comparing this data with the report regarding the house demolitions of Palestinians. The report raises the concern that the defective norms prevalent in the West Bank could permeate the State of Israel and affect the rule of the law. This, however, is not the gravest threat Israel faces. The most awful aspect of the entire affair is that the report reveals not only the large-scale network of legalizing illegal outposts but worse, it exposes the ethics we have sunk to. A state that distinguishes between citizens on the basis of ethnicity, enforces double standards based on religion, and determines criteria according to nationality is clearly a racist state. We are currently are shamelessly reproducing the Apartheid regime`s racism towards black people, as well as what was inflicted upon the Jews throughout history. Our actions in the territories from checkpoint to separation wall, from expropriating lands to uprooting trees, from closures to sieges - it all cries racism, adorned with the seal of racist discrimination. There is racist ideology behind every outpost and it crushes our ethical character; each illegal caravan is a marker of fascist ideology which is taking over our existence.
Attorney Sasson`s report depicts the systematic manner in which right-wing ideology associated with the Yesha Council`s beit midrash has taken over the main edifices of the state, including the Civil Administration, drowning it in a bog of racism. The Civil Administration, which assists settlers in contravening the law, simultaneously issued thousands of demolition orders for Arab residents` dwellings and did not hesitate to demolish them in the name of the rule of the law. More than 800 homes of innocent families were completely demolished, not families of terrorists, but people whose only sin was to build a house without a permit. This is called racism, even if we find it hard to utter the word.
There is no thought quite as unpleasant as attributing racist behavior to Jews. We are overwhelmed by the world of associations, which leads us into dark places in which we were the ultimate victims of racist ideology. Despite this, we are unable to look this report in the eye and read it intently. To do so is to comprehend the situation and question ourselves as to how we descended to this pit, where we too have joined the most racist countries in the world.
Sasson`s report reflects the true distorted face unmasked, yet refuses to refer to the reflection by its true name. It refrains from delving into the ideological motives behind those outposts, thus refraining from calling a spade a spade and focusing on procedure rather than the fundamentals. Attorney Talia Sasson missed the point. It isn`t a question of sound administration; it is a matter of Jewish racism which draws on religious fundamentalism and right-wing nationalism, the two basic elements in any fascist regime. The settlers bear the flag of nationalist ideology that include typical fascist content; the governmental mechanisms that support the settlers, the military, the government and the agencies, have become the servants of that ideology. As long as the state does not shake off the grip of the extreme right-wing, the process of becoming fascist is unavoidable. The state of Israel is afflicted with cancerous racism; this must be spelled out incessantly as part of the healing process. If we don`t call a spade a spade, if we do not cry out our pain publicly, the public will fail to open its eyes to the extent of the deterioration, and it will not be resisted.
* Hagada HaSmalit, March 16th, 2005. Translation to English - Leora Gal.
* http://www.hagada.org.il/eng/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=31
Saturday, February 5, 2005
Walaja: An encapsulation of the history of Zionist settlement
By: Meir Margalit
Friday, March 02, 2007
Security forces and inspectors with the Interior Ministry and the Jerusalem municipality raided the village of Walaja at dawn on Tuesday, January 18, declaring it a closed military zone. The forces embarked a campaign of demolition and intimidation. After four hours of mayhem, the forces left behind them five buildings, and seven livestock and chicken pens destroyed. It was nothing new or surprising for the residents of Walaja. The military preparations that preceded the raid left no doubt that the day was nearing when the bulldozers would come and another round of demolitions would begin in the village.
The residents of the rural village of Walaja, located between Jerusalem and Beit Jala, have been exposed to extreme suffering. They were expelled from their lands in 1948, after which they moved to a hilltop overlooking the ruins of their village. The relative calm that characterized life in the village was lost when the authorities discovered in the early 1980s that half of the village is located within Jerusalem's municipal borders. Until that time, Walaja was considered a part of Bethlehem. Zariz, an attorney, discovered this fact when he filed a petition to prevent the Civil Administration from demolishing a house in the village. After investigating Zariz's claim that the Civil Administration did not have the authority to demolish the home because it was inside Israel , it turned out that after the battles of 1967 calmed, when surveyors had begun drawing the boundaries of Jerusalem , they had accidentally split the village in half, incorporating the western half into the city of Jerusalem . The municipality of Jerusalem—which knew nothing of this until the early 1980s—then went about making the western half of the village “an inseparable part of the city of Jerusalem.” Nevertheless, the city did not extend municipal services to the village, claiming there was no way to link the village with the city of Jerusalem. Moreover, although the area was proven to be part of state territory, the Ministry of Interior refused to give village residents an Israeli identity card, which produced an odd, humiliating situation: While they incorporated the village lands, they refused to incorporate its residents. Thus, although the village is inside Israel, its residents are not registered with the Population Registry, and to this day, they bear Palestinian identity cards.
As noted above, it is difficult to surprise the residents of the village, although they admit that they have never been subjected to the sort of boorish behavior they experienced recently. In the last few years, more than 20 buildings have been demolished, and demolition orders have been issued for 30 more buildings. For now, the orders have been frozen thanks to a legal measure that would require a structural plan for the village. In this downtrodden village, home to about 2,000 souls, one in every two homes is in danger of being demolished, since they were built without a permit. That is, the houses were built illegally. In fact, Walaja residents live an unbearable life. They cannot obtain building permits in the village because there is no municipal structural plan. They have thus grown accustomed to building without permits. Or, as they say, they build because the “law of life” is much more important than planning and construction laws. The law of life requires everyone to build a home for their children. Over the years, new construction has spread west of the village to the part that is inside the Jerusalem municipality, but is still part of the village.
It is not simply a matter of house demolitions. The state of Israel has targeted the village. For a year, security forces have been tightening the noose around the residents night and day, the pretext being that they carry Palestinian identity cards. Officers with the Border Guard habitually raid homes in the village, filing ridiculous charges against them, such as illegal residence in Israel. The village men are taken to jail, then to court, where they are fined and thrown on the other side of the checkpoint. Of course, they return once more to their homes, and the scene is repeated endlessly.
Recently, Walaja residents have filed a petition with the courts, which banned the state from harassing them because they do not have blue Israeli identity cards. But the security forces are clever: Since the order was issued, they have begun confiscating the residents' cars, including the one bus in the village, claiming they are driving in Israel without a permit. Many village residents say that following every raid or demolition, they receive a phone call from someone with an Arabic accent offering to buy their land. The residents have no doubts that the anonymous caller is a real estate broker working for the government or one of the settlers' groups trying to gain control of the village's land.
The secret of the abuse of the villagers is the plan, whose existence was revealed about a year ago, to build a new Jewish settlement. The settlement is set to cover 3,000 dunams and contain 13,500 housing units. The new settlement—naively named Givat Yael, after the spring at the foot of the hill—is set to be the link between Jerusalem and Gush Etzion, which would allow geographic continuity between them. An examination of the plan shows that the land deals to build the town began ten years ago. The Jewish National Fund's Himnuta Company bought the lands, in a deal that was almost completed until recently. At that time, vague news reached the residents of Walaja about the sale of village lands through forged documents, which created a wave of disputes, during with one family was expelled from the village and one villager was killed.
At that point, the state realized that given the legal complications, it would not be able to implement the larger part of the plan. Thus, from the caverns of memory, it dug up the long-forgotten Absentee Property Law, the last attempt to gain control of the village lands. This is why the state is methodically demolishing any building in the Israeli part of the village. This is why it refuses to grant the villagers residency permits and arrests them for illegally residing in Israel. Their existence on Israeli land has frustrated the possibility of declaring the lands absentee; as long as the land owners stay in the Jerusalem part of the village, they cannot be considered absentee. In turn, their land cannot be taken, except through a very long, expensive process, one the High Court of Justice does not always approve. This is why the Interior Ministry is lying in wait in the village. The harassment began last year when the planning stages of the project were completed and the state wanted to implement it. But the existence of the villagers on Israeli territory is holding up the entire project. Thus, the state is doing its best to clear the area of its residents, to declare them absentee and take over its lands.
What is happening in the village of Walaja encapsulates the entire story of Zionist settlement. That story includes land confiscation, dubious real estate deals using forged documents, the violation of villagers' basic rights, the harassment of villagers, and attacks on their property without the slightest concern for court orders. To all this, we can now add the construction of the separation wall, which threatens to turn the village into a ghetto and separate villagers from their land. Life in Walaja was relatively peaceful until the new neighbor moved in—that is, until the state decided to build a Jewish neighborhood nearby. Once more, as has always been the case throughout Zionist history, settlement comes with the abuse and expulsion of residents, house demolitions, and humiliation. There is now a battle on this land involving land confiscation and the violation of basic human rights. Since its beginnings, Zionist settlement has adopted a hostile method of destruction and separation. It has left no room to live; it is either them or us. Villagers in Walaja—most of them second-generation refugees—have become a target for abuse simply because the state decided to build a Jewish neighborhood in their village. Walaja symbolizes the Zionist history, in which “redeeming the land” has always involved expelling the local population. Those who do not yet understand how successful this method has been since the 1920s can look to Walaja as an example of the course followed by the entire Zionist project. What the sons are doing today, they learned from their fathers. This is how our nation was built. This is the genetic imprint of the Zionist project.
At present the government is pursuing the same course. Even more, it continues to look for a “legal” way to gain control of the maximum amount of land at the minimum cost. It believes that the ends justify the means. It possesses powerful institutions that are keen to grab land using any possible means. At the top of the list is the State Prosecutor's Office, which works to discover any loophole in Ottoman, British, Jordanian, or Israeli law that would allow it to steal land “legally.” In addition to the prosecutor, there are the security agencies, which have become the executive branch of an extreme nationalist ideology. One hundred years of settlement is a sordid story of land theft, which has only brought them and us one calamity after another. The Prophet Habakkuk spoke the truth when he said, “Woe to him that buildeth a town with blood, and establisheth a city by iniquity! [Habakkuk 2:12]”
* Source: www.hagada.org.il, February 5, 2005.
* http://www.hagada.org.il/eng/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=44
Friday, March 02, 2007
Security forces and inspectors with the Interior Ministry and the Jerusalem municipality raided the village of Walaja at dawn on Tuesday, January 18, declaring it a closed military zone. The forces embarked a campaign of demolition and intimidation. After four hours of mayhem, the forces left behind them five buildings, and seven livestock and chicken pens destroyed. It was nothing new or surprising for the residents of Walaja. The military preparations that preceded the raid left no doubt that the day was nearing when the bulldozers would come and another round of demolitions would begin in the village.
The residents of the rural village of Walaja, located between Jerusalem and Beit Jala, have been exposed to extreme suffering. They were expelled from their lands in 1948, after which they moved to a hilltop overlooking the ruins of their village. The relative calm that characterized life in the village was lost when the authorities discovered in the early 1980s that half of the village is located within Jerusalem's municipal borders. Until that time, Walaja was considered a part of Bethlehem. Zariz, an attorney, discovered this fact when he filed a petition to prevent the Civil Administration from demolishing a house in the village. After investigating Zariz's claim that the Civil Administration did not have the authority to demolish the home because it was inside Israel , it turned out that after the battles of 1967 calmed, when surveyors had begun drawing the boundaries of Jerusalem , they had accidentally split the village in half, incorporating the western half into the city of Jerusalem . The municipality of Jerusalem—which knew nothing of this until the early 1980s—then went about making the western half of the village “an inseparable part of the city of Jerusalem.” Nevertheless, the city did not extend municipal services to the village, claiming there was no way to link the village with the city of Jerusalem. Moreover, although the area was proven to be part of state territory, the Ministry of Interior refused to give village residents an Israeli identity card, which produced an odd, humiliating situation: While they incorporated the village lands, they refused to incorporate its residents. Thus, although the village is inside Israel, its residents are not registered with the Population Registry, and to this day, they bear Palestinian identity cards.
As noted above, it is difficult to surprise the residents of the village, although they admit that they have never been subjected to the sort of boorish behavior they experienced recently. In the last few years, more than 20 buildings have been demolished, and demolition orders have been issued for 30 more buildings. For now, the orders have been frozen thanks to a legal measure that would require a structural plan for the village. In this downtrodden village, home to about 2,000 souls, one in every two homes is in danger of being demolished, since they were built without a permit. That is, the houses were built illegally. In fact, Walaja residents live an unbearable life. They cannot obtain building permits in the village because there is no municipal structural plan. They have thus grown accustomed to building without permits. Or, as they say, they build because the “law of life” is much more important than planning and construction laws. The law of life requires everyone to build a home for their children. Over the years, new construction has spread west of the village to the part that is inside the Jerusalem municipality, but is still part of the village.
It is not simply a matter of house demolitions. The state of Israel has targeted the village. For a year, security forces have been tightening the noose around the residents night and day, the pretext being that they carry Palestinian identity cards. Officers with the Border Guard habitually raid homes in the village, filing ridiculous charges against them, such as illegal residence in Israel. The village men are taken to jail, then to court, where they are fined and thrown on the other side of the checkpoint. Of course, they return once more to their homes, and the scene is repeated endlessly.
Recently, Walaja residents have filed a petition with the courts, which banned the state from harassing them because they do not have blue Israeli identity cards. But the security forces are clever: Since the order was issued, they have begun confiscating the residents' cars, including the one bus in the village, claiming they are driving in Israel without a permit. Many village residents say that following every raid or demolition, they receive a phone call from someone with an Arabic accent offering to buy their land. The residents have no doubts that the anonymous caller is a real estate broker working for the government or one of the settlers' groups trying to gain control of the village's land.
The secret of the abuse of the villagers is the plan, whose existence was revealed about a year ago, to build a new Jewish settlement. The settlement is set to cover 3,000 dunams and contain 13,500 housing units. The new settlement—naively named Givat Yael, after the spring at the foot of the hill—is set to be the link between Jerusalem and Gush Etzion, which would allow geographic continuity between them. An examination of the plan shows that the land deals to build the town began ten years ago. The Jewish National Fund's Himnuta Company bought the lands, in a deal that was almost completed until recently. At that time, vague news reached the residents of Walaja about the sale of village lands through forged documents, which created a wave of disputes, during with one family was expelled from the village and one villager was killed.
At that point, the state realized that given the legal complications, it would not be able to implement the larger part of the plan. Thus, from the caverns of memory, it dug up the long-forgotten Absentee Property Law, the last attempt to gain control of the village lands. This is why the state is methodically demolishing any building in the Israeli part of the village. This is why it refuses to grant the villagers residency permits and arrests them for illegally residing in Israel. Their existence on Israeli land has frustrated the possibility of declaring the lands absentee; as long as the land owners stay in the Jerusalem part of the village, they cannot be considered absentee. In turn, their land cannot be taken, except through a very long, expensive process, one the High Court of Justice does not always approve. This is why the Interior Ministry is lying in wait in the village. The harassment began last year when the planning stages of the project were completed and the state wanted to implement it. But the existence of the villagers on Israeli territory is holding up the entire project. Thus, the state is doing its best to clear the area of its residents, to declare them absentee and take over its lands.
What is happening in the village of Walaja encapsulates the entire story of Zionist settlement. That story includes land confiscation, dubious real estate deals using forged documents, the violation of villagers' basic rights, the harassment of villagers, and attacks on their property without the slightest concern for court orders. To all this, we can now add the construction of the separation wall, which threatens to turn the village into a ghetto and separate villagers from their land. Life in Walaja was relatively peaceful until the new neighbor moved in—that is, until the state decided to build a Jewish neighborhood nearby. Once more, as has always been the case throughout Zionist history, settlement comes with the abuse and expulsion of residents, house demolitions, and humiliation. There is now a battle on this land involving land confiscation and the violation of basic human rights. Since its beginnings, Zionist settlement has adopted a hostile method of destruction and separation. It has left no room to live; it is either them or us. Villagers in Walaja—most of them second-generation refugees—have become a target for abuse simply because the state decided to build a Jewish neighborhood in their village. Walaja symbolizes the Zionist history, in which “redeeming the land” has always involved expelling the local population. Those who do not yet understand how successful this method has been since the 1920s can look to Walaja as an example of the course followed by the entire Zionist project. What the sons are doing today, they learned from their fathers. This is how our nation was built. This is the genetic imprint of the Zionist project.
At present the government is pursuing the same course. Even more, it continues to look for a “legal” way to gain control of the maximum amount of land at the minimum cost. It believes that the ends justify the means. It possesses powerful institutions that are keen to grab land using any possible means. At the top of the list is the State Prosecutor's Office, which works to discover any loophole in Ottoman, British, Jordanian, or Israeli law that would allow it to steal land “legally.” In addition to the prosecutor, there are the security agencies, which have become the executive branch of an extreme nationalist ideology. One hundred years of settlement is a sordid story of land theft, which has only brought them and us one calamity after another. The Prophet Habakkuk spoke the truth when he said, “Woe to him that buildeth a town with blood, and establisheth a city by iniquity! [Habakkuk 2:12]”
* Source: www.hagada.org.il, February 5, 2005.
* http://www.hagada.org.il/eng/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=44
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)