There is a rich tradition in these parts of clandestine documents written by British officials that have eventually determined, in some way or the other, the course of history in the Middle East. It is not yet obvious if the latest such “highly confidential” document, penned by unnamed British Foreign Office officials and presented last week to the EU Council of Ministers (currently presided over by British foreign secretary Jack Straw), will one day enjoy the sort of prominence accorded in the annals to the various White Papers, the Balfour Declaration and the Sykes-Picot Agreement, but it would be an eminently good thing if it did. For such inclusion would imply that the document, which contains surprisingly sternly-worded censure of Israeli policies in Jerusalem, will have had some effect on the history of the ancient city which stands today in imminent danger of being cleansed by the government of Israel of all traces of the Palestinians who have inhabited it for centuries. This bleak eventuality is clearly emphasized in the document, which was leaked yesterday by unknown sources to various newspapers (among them, the Guardian, The Independent, and the New York Times). Apart from employing urgent language to inform the EU ministers that the Government of Israel has “a clear intention to turn the annexation of east Jerusalem into a concrete fact,” the document also suggests that the ultimate goal of Israel is to “reduce the possibility of reaching a final status agreement on Jerusalem that any Palestinian could accept.” More impressively, the document undertakes a grimly factual accounting of the various policies used by Israel to achieve this goal: “the near-completion of the barrier around east Jerusalem, far from the Green Line;” “the construction and expansion of illegal settlements” (most prominently, the E1 plan, which aims to expand the settlement of Ma’aleh Adumim into the so-called E1 area east of Jerusalem); “the demolition of Palestinian homes built without permits (which are all but unobtainable);” stricter enforcement of rules separating Palestinians resident in East Jerusalem from those resident in the West Bank, including a reduction of working permits;” and “discriminatory taxation, expenditure and building permit policy by the Jerusalem municipality.” (All quotes from a copy of the document obtained by MIFTAH sources; while it is impossible to verify the authenticity of this version, it appears to be identical to the one quoted extensively in various newspapers around the world today). While there is no clear indication as to how the EU might go about achieving the ultimate goal of preventing Israel from what it quaintly summarizes as “getting away with it,” the document contains a good many recommendations, some practical and specific – provide aid and support to the beleaguered institutions of Palestinian civil society in east Jerusalem; hold more meetings with PNA officials in east Jerusalem (rather than Ramallah, which is the usual destination); some vague – “pressure Israel to desist from all measures designed to pre-empt (bilateral negotiations on Jerusalem);” and some hopelessly idealistic – pressure Israel to “re-open Palestinian institutions in East Jerusalem, in particular the Chamber of Commerce” and to “halt discriminatory treatment of Palestinians in East Jerusalem, especially concerning working permits, building permits, house demolitions, taxation and expenditure.” While this is all quite remarkable and even courageous, it is unclear what will be achieved by the document in even the best of cases. European foreign ministers have already begun to distance themselves from it, and, reportedly vetoed an open publication last week, fearing a likely Israeli backlash and jeopardizing of Europe’s new role – beginning yesterday – as international monitor of the Rafah crossing between Gaza and Egypt. Moreover, the document provides no timetable for implementation, and the EU has publicly stalled for time by announcing the publication of a (presumably more) “detailed EU analysis on East Jerusalem” in December. Marc Otte, the EU’s Special Representative to the Middle East peace process, has himself played down the report, and remarked disparagingly to an American journalist yesterday that “there is nothing exceptional or extraordinary about it.” Indeed, Mr. Otte is right: there is nothing exceptional about the report; it merely records in plain English certain facts that appear salient to even the least observant of visitors to the city: Palestinian Jerusalem is dying by the day; its people squeezed out, its houses demolished, its once-vibrant institutions crippled. It is that which is extraordinary, and Mr. Otte’s statement notwithstanding, it is hoped that the report produced by his anonymous colleagues will lead Europe to do something about it. If it does, the report will be examined closely by students years later alongside the various other seminal documents that are required reading for anyone interested in the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. If it does not, it will be consigned to the special sorry irrelevance that is reserved for all such documents that aim to do much but achieve nothing. Related Articles
By: Anonymous (European Union)
Date: 28/11/2005
×
Confidential EU Report on East Jerusalem (24 November 2005)
JERUSALEM AND RAMALLAH HEADS OF MISSION REPORT ON EAST JERUSALEM SUMMARY 1. East Jerusalem is of central importance to the Palestinians in political, economic, social and religious terms. Several inter-linked Israeli policies are reducing the possibility of reaching a final status agreement on Jerusalem, and demonstrate a clear Israeli intention to turn the annexation of East Jerusalem into a concrete fact: the near-completion of the barrier around east Jerusalem, far from the Green Line; the construction and expansion of illegal settlements, by private entities and the Israeli government, in and around East Jerusalem; the demolition of Palestinian homes built without permits (which are all but unobtainable); stricter enforcement of rules separating Palestinians resident in East Jerusalem from those resident in the West Bank, including a reduction of working permits; and discriminatory taxation, expenditure and building permit policy by the Jerusalem municipality. 2. The plan to expand the settlement of Ma'aleh Adumim into the so-called "E1" area, east of Jerusalem, threatens to complete the encircling of the city by Jewish settlements, dividing the West Bank into two separate geographical areas. The proposed extension of the barrier from East Jerusalem to form a bubble around the settlement of Ma'aleh Adumim would have the same effect. 2004 saw a near tripling of the number of Palestinian buildings demolished in East Jerusalem. We expect a similar number of demolitions in 2005. 88 homes in the Silwan neighbourhood with demolition orders outstanding against them attracted much attention in June. 3. When the barrier has been completed, Israel will control access to and from East Jerusalem, cutting off its Palestinian satellite cities of Bethlehem and Ramallah, and the rest of the West Bank beyond. This will have serious economic, social and humanitarian consequences for the Palestinians. By vigorously applying policies on residency and ID status, Israel will be able finally to complete the isolation of East Jerusalem - the political, social, commercial and infrastructural centre of Palestinian life. 4. Israel's activities in Jerusalem are in violation of both its Roadmap obligations and international law. We and others in the international community have made our concerns clear on numerous occasions, to varying effect. Palestinians are, without exception, deeply alarmed about East Jerusalem. They fear that Israel will "get away with it", under the cover of disengagement. Israeli actions also risk radicalising the hitherto relatively quiescent Palestinian population in East Jerusalem. Clear statements by the European Union and the Quartet that Jerusalem remains an issue for negotiation by the two sides, and that Israel should desist from all measures designed to pre-empt such negotiations, would be timely. We should also support Palestinian cultural, political and economic activities in East Jerusalem. RECOMMENDATIONS On the political level Clear statements by the European Union and the Quartet that Jerusalem remains an issue for negotiation by the two sides, and that Israel should desist from all measures designed to pre-empt such negotiations. We might consider issuing a statement focused on the issue of Jerusalem at the GAERC in November. We could also press for a similar statement to issue from the Quartet. Phase One of the Roadmap calls for the re-opening of Palestinian institutions in East Jerusalem, and in particular the Chamber of Commerce. The re-opening of these institutions would send a signal to the Palestinians that the international community takes their concerns seriously, and is taking action. We might include a call for their re-opening in the statements referred to above, and explore with the two parties how and when their re-opening might be accomplished. Request the Israeli Government to halt discriminatory treatment of Palestinians in East Jerusalem, especially concerning working permits, building permits, house demolitions, taxation and expenditure. The EU might consider and assess the implications and feasibility of excluding East Jerusalem from certain EU/Israel co-operation activities. On an operational level Organise political meetings with the PA in East Jerusalem, including meetings at ministerial level. Initiatives (statement letters, contacts, meetings etc.) focused on issues like access, building permits, the consequences of the barrier etc. In view of the Palestinian legislative elections scheduled for 25 January 2006, encourage the parties to agree on the terms and substance of their co-ordination to allow for satisfactory elections to take place in East Jerusalem, referring to the parties' obligations under the interim agreements and the Roadmap (PA to hold elections and Israel to facilitate them) and taking into account the recommendations formulated in the Rocard EUEOM report. Offer 3rd party technical assistance and monitoring capacity if required and adequate. The Jerusalem Masterplan that is currently in the approval process should undergo a technical assessment followed by a decision as to how to evaluate the plan in terms of legal implications, public awareness etc. The plan currently exists only in Hebrew (the plan should be translated into Arabic and English). All MS and EC to increase project activity in East Jerusalem with a balance between service provision, relief, development and political projects (taking into consideration the Multi Sector Review). Support for civil society is important. An inventory of current EC and MS activity in East Jerusalem would be a useful first step. Regarding house demolitions for lack of building permits in East Jerusalem, the EU could pursue various options: - support legal projects designed to support Palestinians threatened by house demolitions and those who have been victims thereof - promote initiatives to legalise "illegal" houses (e.g. through introducing retroactively alternative town planning schemes) - facilitate a solution for obtaining building permits - EU projects with a Palestinian NGO on legal counselling concerning building permits and house demolitions - EU project on the development of a master plan for urban planning and legal housing for Palestinian neighbourhoods in East Jerusalem. Facilitate a solution of the access issue. This would comprise a range of political and operational measures, both short and long term. Support local and international organisations in their information efforts on East Jerusalem. Enhance EU assistance to Palestinian institutions in East Jerusalem, including cultural activities and community empowerment. DETAIL 1. Jerusalem is already one of the trickiest issues on the road to reaching a final status agreement between Israel and the Palestinians. But several inter-linked Israeli policies are reducing the possibility of reaching a final status agreement on Jerusalem that any Palestinian could accept. We judge that this is a deliberate Israeli policy - the completion of the annexation of East Jerusalem. Israeli measures also risk radicalising the hitherto relatively quiescent Palestinian population of East Jerusalem. EU POLICY ON EAST JERUSALEM 2. The EU policy on Jerusalem is based on the principles set out in UN Security Council Resolution 242, notably the impossibility of acquisition of territory by force. In consequence the EU has never recognised the annexation of East Jerusalem under the Israeli 1980 Basic Law (Basic Law Jerusalem Capital of Israel) which made Jerusalem the "complete and united" capital of Israel. EU Member States have therefore placed their accredited missions in Tel Aviv. The EU opposes measures that would prejudge the outcome of Permanent Status Negotiations, consigned to the third phase of the Road Map, such as actions aimed at changing the status of East Jerusalem. 3. In conferences held in 1999 and 2001, the High Contracting Parties reaffirmed the applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention to the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and reiterated the need for full respect for the provisions of the said Convention in that territory. 4. In July 2004 the EU acknowledged the Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice on the "legal consequences of the construction of a Wall in the occupied Palestinian territories including in and around East Jerusalem" and voted in favour of the General Assembly Resolution that recognised it. While the EU recognises Israel's security concerns and its right to act in self-defence, the EU position on the legality of the separation barrier largely coincides with the ICJ Advisory Opinion. SETTLEMENTS 5. Israel is increasing settlement activity in three east-facing horseshoe shaped bands in and around East Jerusalem, linked by new roads: first through new settlements in the old city itself and in the Palestinian neighbourhoods immediately surrounding the old city (Silwan, Ras al Amud, At Tur, Wadi al Joz, Sheikh Jarrah); then in the existing major East Jerusalem settlement blocs (running clockwise from Ramot, Rekhes Shu'afat, French Hill, through the new settlements in the first band, above, to East Talpiot, Har Homa and Gilo); and finally in "Greater Jerusalem" - linking the city of Jerusalem to the settlement blocs of Givat Ze'ev to the north, Ma'aleh Adumim to the east (including the E1 area, see below), and the Etzion bloc to the south. Settlement activity and construction is ongoing in each of these three bands, contrary to Israel's obligations under international law and the Roadmap. "E1" and Ma'aleh Adumim 6. E1 (derived from 'East 1') is the term applied by the Israeli Ministry of Housing to a planned new neighbourhood within the municipal borders of the large Israeli settlement of Ma'aleh Adumim (30,000+ residents), linking it to the municipal boundary of Jerusalem (a unilateral Israeli line well east of the Green Line). E1, along with a maximalist barrier around Ma'ale Adumim, would complete the encircling of East Jerusalem and cut the West Bank into two parts, and further restrict access into and out of Jerusalem. The economic prospects of the Wset Bank (where GDP is under $1000 a year) are highly dependent on access to East Jerusalem (where GDP is around $3500 a year). Estimates of the contribution made by East Jerusalem to the Palestinian economy as a whole vary between a quarter and a third. From an economic perspective, the viability of a Palestinian state depends to a great extent on the preservation of organic links between East Jerusalem, Ramallah and Bethlehem. 7. E1 is an old plan which was drawn up by Rabin's government in 1994 but never implemented. The plan was revived by the housing Ministry in 2003, and preliminary construction in the E1 area began in 2004. Since his resignation from the Cabinet Netanyahu has tried to make E1 a campaign issue. The development plans for E1 include: the erection of at least 3,500 housing units (for approx. 15,000 residents); an economic development zone; construction of the police headquarters for the West Bank that shall be relocated from Raz el-Amud; commercial areas, hotels and "special housing", universities and "special projects", a cemetery and a waste disposal site. * About 75% of the plan's total area is earmarked for a park that will surround all these components. So far only the plans for the economic development zone have received the necessary authorisations for building to commence. The plans related to residential areas and the building of the Police Headquarters have been approved by the Ma'aleh Adumim Municipality but not yet by the Civil Administration's Planning Council. 8. The current built-up area of Ma'aleh Adumim covers only 15% of the planned area. The overall plan for Ma'aleh Adumim, including E1, covers an area of at least 53 square kilometres (larger than Tel Aviv) stretching from Jerusalem to Jericho (comment: Israel's defence of settlement expansion "within existing settlement boundaries" therefore covers a potentially huge area). In August 2005 Israel published land requisition orders for construction of the barrier around the southern edge of the Adumim bloc, following the route approved by the Israeli cabinet on 20 February 2005 (including most of the municipal area of Ma'aleh Adumim). 9. The E1 project would cut across the main central traffic route for Palestinians travelling from Bethlehem to Ramallah. This route is actually an alternative to route 60, which until 2001 was the main north-south highway connecting the major Palestinian cities (Jenin, Nablus, Ramallah, Jerusalem, Bethlehem and Hebron) on the ridge of mountains in the West Bank. And Palestinians currently have only restricted access to route 60 (either permits are required for certain segments or roads are blocked), especially from/to the Jerusalem area. 10. Since 2003, some preparatory work has taken place. In the northern sector of E-1, where residential housing is planned, the top of a hill has been levelled in order to allow construction. In the southern section, where a police station and hotels are planned, an unpaved road has been constructed. But no further work has been carried out for over a year. On 25 August 2005 Israel announced plans to build the new police headquarters for the West Bank in E1, transferring it from its present location in East Jerusalem. Many previous settlements have started with a police station, and we are aware from Israeli NGOs that Israel has plans to convert the existing West Bank police headquarters, in Ras Al-Amud, into further settlement housing. Settlement building inside East Jerusalem 11. Settlement building inside East Jerusalem continues at a rapid pace. There are currently around 190,000 Israeli settlers in East Jerusalem, the majority in large settlement blocks such as Pisgat Ze'ev. The mainstream Israeli view is that the so-called Israeli "neighbourhoods" of East Jerusalem are not settlements because they are within the borders of the Jerusalem Municipality. The EU, along with the most of the rest of the international community, does not recognise Israel's unilateral annexation of East Jerusalem and regards the East Jerusalem "neighbourhoods" as illegal settlements like any others - but this does not deter Israel from expanding them. Some of these settlements are now expanding beyond even the Israeli-defined municipal boundary of Jerusalem, further into the West Bank. The Jerusalem municipality has also been active around Rachel's Tomb, outside the municipal boundaries. 12. Smaller in number but of equal concern are settlements being implanted in the heart of existing Palestinian neighbourhoods, with covert and overt government assistance. Extremist Jewish settler groups, often with foreign funding, use a variety of means to take over Palestinian properties and land. They either prey on Palestinians suffering financial hardship or simply occupy properties by force and rely on the occasional tardiness and/or connivance of the Israeli courts. Such groups have told us that they also press the Israeli authorities to demolish Palestinian homes built without permits. Israel has previously used the "Absentee Property Law"1 (generally applied only inside Green Line Israel) to seize property and land. The Attorney General declared that this was "legally indefensible" in the Bethlehem area earlier this year and the practise has stopped, but the law remains applicable to East Jerusalem and can be resurrected any time the Israeli Government sees fit. 13. Some of the Jewish settlements lack building permits, but not one has been demolished - in marked contrast to the situation for Palestinians. There are also plans to build a large new Jewish settlement within the Muslim Quarter of the Old City, a step that would be particularly inflammatory and could lead to the further "Hebronisation" of Jerusalem. The aim of these settlers, and settlements, is to extent the Jewish Israeli presence into new areas. As a result, President Clinton's formula for Jerusalem ("what's Jewish becomes Israel and what's Palestinian becomes Palestine") either cannot be applied - or Israel gets more. SEPARATION BARRIER/WALL 14. Israel has largely ignored the Advisory Opinion of 9 July 2004 of the International Court of Justice regarding the barrier. On 20 February 2005, the Israeli Government approved the revised route of the separation barrier2. This route seals off most of East Jerusalem, with its 230,000 Palestinian residents, from the West Bank (i.e. it divides Palestinians from Palestinians, rather than Palestinians from Israelis). The Barrier is not only motivated by security considerations. On 21 June 2005, the Israeli High Court ruled that it was legal to take into account political considerations, in addition to security considerations, for the routing of the barrier in East Jerusalem because East Jerusalem had been Israeli territory since its annexation in 1967 (i.e. political considerations are not legal in the West Bank, which has not been annexed to Israel). On 10 July the Israeli Cabinet decided to route the Jerusalem barrier so as to keep around 55,000 East Jerusalemite Palestinians, mainly in the Shu'afat refugee camp, outside the barrier. The fact that the Cabinet decision not only included short-term but also long-term measures designed to accommodate the new situation created by the Barrier - e.g. constructing new educational institutions and encouraging hospitals to open branches "beyond the fence" - appears to contradict the notion of the Barrier being a temporary rather than a permanent structure. And if Israel were to provide adequate municipal services to the areas excluded (as it is promising to do) this would be in contrast to hitherto poor service provision in the rest of East Jerusalem. Israeli NGOs working on the Jerusalem issue have looked at Israeli proposals to ensure that the people affected are not "cut off" from the city, and judged them deficient. 15. The barrier extends like a cloverleaf to the northwest, southwest and east, beyond even the (Israeli defined) municipal boundary of Jerusalem, leaving 164 square kilometres of West Bank land on the "Israeli" (western) side. Combined with settlement activity in these areas this de-facto annexation of Palestinian land will be irreversible without very large scale forced evacuations of settlers and the re-routing of the barrier - which reportedly cost 800,000 euros per kilometre. It will also block the alternative Bethlehem-Ramallah route for Palestinians, forcing them to travel via tunnels or Jericho. 16. We should ensure that any support we provide to East Jerusalem is not simply an attempt to reduce the negative consequences of the construction of the separation barrier. The ICJ ruling on the barrier, accepted by the EU with limited reservations, states: "all States are under an obligation not to recognise the illegal situation resulting from the construction of the wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around East Jerusalem. They are also under an obligation not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by such construction". RESTRICTIONS ON/DEMOLITIONS OF PALESTINIAN HOUSING 17. The Israeli authorities place severe restrictions on the building of Palestinian housing in East Jerusalem. The Israeli authorities will only issue building permits for areas that have zoned "master plans". The municipality produces such plans for areas marked for settlement development, but not for Palestinian areas - only Palsetinians are expected to draw up their own plans, at great (generally unaffordable) expense. So each year Palestinians receive less than 100 building permits, and even these require a wait of several years. At the same time, rules requiring Palestinians with Jerusalem residency status either to reside in the city or risk forfeiting that status have forced thousands of Palestinians in this situation to move from other areas of the West Bank back to Jerusalem, adding to the severe pressure on housing. As a result, most new Palestinian housing is built without permits and is therefore considered "illegal" by the Israeli authorities (although under the 4th Geneva Convention occupying powers may not extend their jurisdiction to occupied territory). The restrictions and demolitions also leave undeveloped (but Palestinian-owned) land available for new settlements or the expansion of existing settlements. 18. In 2004, at least 152 buildings (most of them residential) were demolished in East Jerusalem, a sharp increase over previous years (66 in 2003, 36 in 2002, 32 in 2001 and 9 in 2000). In May 2005 the Jerusalem municipality's intention to destroy 88 houses in the Silwan neighbourhood became public. Following media scrutiny and international pressure, they have put these demolitions on hold, but the future of Silwan remains uncertain, with demolition orders remaining in place. In the meantime, elsewhere in Palestinian neighbourhoods, homes continue to be demolished on a regular basis. According to the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions 52 buildings (including a seven-storey building and eight petrol stations) have been demolished in East Jerusalem so far this year. The municipality's budget for house demolitions (approved late, in March) stands at NIS 4m (approximately 800k euros), a figure slightly higher than last year. Our contacts estimate that this will allow the municipality to demolish 150-170 buildings. In cases where the municipality is deemed not to be carrying out its duty to demolish illegal buildings (whether through lack of will or budget constraints), the Ministry of Interior can and does demolish buildings (fourteen in 2004, six so far in 2005). House demolitions are illegal under international law (see above), serve no obvious security purpose (but rather relate to settlement expansion), have a catastrophic humanitarian effect, and fuel bitterness and extremism. Palestinians continue to build illegally because they have no alternative, and because the municipality and Interior Ministry together can only demolish a fraction of the approximately 12,000 "illegal" homes in existence. Palestinians describe it to us as "a lottery". ID CARDS AND RESIDENCY STATUS 19. Some Palestinians have blue Israeli ID cards, that give them the "right" to live in Israel (in practice, in East Jerusalem), but not to vote in Israeli national elections or take an Israeli passport. The renewal of these Blue ID cards is a lengthy, cumbersome and at times humiliating process to be carried out every year at the East Jerusalem office of the Israeli Ministry of Interior. The remainder have green West Bank ID cards or orange Gaza ID cards, and must apply for a permit to enter East Jerusalem. Eevn for those West Bankers and Gazans regularly employed in East Jerusalem, these entry permits have to be renewed every three months. Between 1996-1999 Israel implemented a "centre of life" policy meaning that those with blue ID found living or working outside East Jerusalem, for example in Ramallah, would lose their ID. A wave of blue ID cardholders therefore quickly moved back to East Jerusalem. The residency of hundreds of Palestinians that lived for a prolonged period outside of Israel and the OTs was revoked, a policy that continues. Renewed application of this rule and the construction of the barrier around Jerusalem has led to a second wave of "immigration" of blue ID card-holders to the city. Israel has also announced that it plans to introduce biometric, machine-readable ID cards. This is of great concern to Palestinians because it would enable Israel to check if blue ID cardholders really do live and work in the city, and if not, to expel more of them. 20. Israel's main motivation is almost certainly demographic - to reduce the Palestinian population of Jerusalem, while exerting efforts to boost the number of Jewish Israelis living in the city - East and West. The Jerusalem master plan has an explicit goal to keep the proportion of Palestinian Jerusalemites at no more than 30% of the total. But the policy has severe humanitarian consequences - couples in which one spouse has a Blue ID and the other a Green ID will be forced to leave Jerusalem (Israel permits the transfer of blue ID status to spouses and children in theory but very rarely in practice). Palestinians with Israeli IDs already live in something of an identity limbo - neither Israeli Arabs, nor linked to the Palestinian Authority - and these measures can only worsen their situation. The separation of East Jerusalem from the rest of the West Bank is crippling both areas economically, and the influx of returning blue ID card-holders is exacerbating the housing crisis - property prices and rents are soaring. MUNICIPALITY POLICIES 21. The Jerusalem municipality is responsible for the majority of the house demolitions carried out in East Jerusalem (see above). It also contributes to the economic and social stagnation of East Jerusalem through other policies. The Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions claims that while Palestinians contribute 33% of the municipality's taxes, in return it spends only 8% of its budget in Palestinian areas. The exact figures are hard to assess, but discrimination in expenditure is obvious. Palestinian areas of the city are characterised by poor roads, little or no street cleaning, and an absence of well-maintained public spaces, in sharp contrast to areas where Israelis live (in both West Jerusalem and East Jerusalem settlements). Even Jewish ultra-orthodox neighbourhoods (which contribute very little in taxes, for various reasons) are far better provided for by the municipality. The provision of services in what is, according to Israeli definitions, a single municipality, is therefore subject to discriminatory practices. Palestinians regard municipal taxes as a tax on their residency rights, rather than a quid pro quo for municipal services. The high level of taxation (given that Palestinian incomes are typically much lower) and discriminatory law enforcement that appears to target Palestinians for fines for a variety of offences (traffic violations, parking offences, no TV licence etc) further worsen the economic situation of Palestinians. This makes it harder for them to maintain their residency in the city, and more vulnerable to settler groups or Palestinian collaborators offering them good money for their property or land. HUMANITARIAN AND POLITICAL CONSEQUENCES 22. Cutting the link between East Jerusalem and the West Bank: Palestinian East Jerusalem has traditionally been the centre of political, commercial, religious and cultural activities for the West Bank, with Palestinians operating as one cohesive social and economic unit. Separation from the rest of the West Bank is affecting the economy and weakening the social fabric. Since Israel's occupation of the eastern part of Jerusalem in 1967, Palestinian access to Jerusalem from the West Bank has been increasingly restricted. During the Oslo Process, in 1993, the Israeli government banned entry for all Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza without a permit. Settlements together with by-pass roads have further restricted access in Jerusalem. And the Barrier has further aggravated the situation. 23. Threats to Residency Status: Palestinian Blue ID holders outside the barrier are increasingly unable to access East Jerusalem, forcing them to access educational, medical and religious services in the rest of the West Bank. This jeopardises their Jerusalem residency rights, according to the Israeli "centre of life" policy. 24. Impact on the Education and Health Care Sector: West Bankers also face increasing difficulties in accessing the major Palestinian centres of health care and education in East Jerusalem. Schools in East Jerusalem that depend on West Bank staff are at urgent risk of closure. The same applies to hospitals: in addition to the dwindling numbers of patients from the West Bank due to access problems, some Israeli insurance companies are demanding that staff must have Israeli professional qualifications and registration. According to the PA Ministry for Jerusalem Affairs, approximately 68% of medical staff working at hospitals in East Jerusalem reside outside its municipal boundaries. The lack of patients and staff will cause a decline of the number and range of services, which often are not available in the West Bank. 25. Restriction of religious freedom: Christians and Muslims living east of the Barrier already have restricted access to their holy sites. West Bankers are finding it increasingly difficult to get to the Haram al Sharif/Temple Mount compound - because of the wider system of permits to enter Jerusalem, and the barrier. No males under 45 are allowed onto the compound. The Director of the Awqaf, which controls the mosques, has complained particularly about increasing Israeli measures to dominate and control the compound. Police have been regularly patrolling the compound for a year. The Israelis say this is to ensure good settler behaviour, but the effect is that it intimidates worshippers. The Israelis have also introduced new measures over the past few weeks - cameras have been placed at every gate, outside the Haram but pointing in. Thus every entrance is tightly controlled. The Israelis have also begun erecting fences on the buildings surrounding the Haram. Muslim concerns regarding access to (and threats to) the Haram al-Sharif mosques have both security and political implications. Perceived "threats" to the mosques by Jewish groups and the denial of access to Muslims regularly spark confrontations, and motivate Palestinian extremists. 26. The wider political consequences of the above measures are of even greater concern. As outlined above, prospects for a two-state solution with east Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine are receding. The greater the level of settlement activity in and around East Jerusalem the harder it will be to say what is Palestinian, and to link this up with the rest of the West Bank. Israeli activity in E1 and the fencing off of a broad area around Ma'ale Adumim are of particular concern in this regard. Israeli policies in East Jerusalem are making proposals for a resolution of the conflict along the one developed by the Geneva Initiative in 2003, a civil society initiative which was welcomed by the EU, harder to achieve. 27. Arrangements to facilitate the PA Presidential Election in East Jerusalem in January 2005 were unsatisfactory - Israel closed down voter registration centres, candidates could not campaign freely in the city, and restrictions on the number of polling stations led to chaos on election day. The report of former Prime Minister Rocard's Elections Observation Mission sets out the problems clearly, along with recommendations for improvements ahead of the PLC elections, scheduled for 25 January 2006. NOTES [1] Israel passed the Absentee Property Law in 1950. It states that any landowner who left her/his permanent residence at any time following November 29, 1947 to any Arab State, or to any area of the Land of Israel, which is not part of the State of Israel (i.e. West Bank and Gaza) automatically forfeited any property within the State of Israel to the Absenteed Property Custodian - a public body, which subsequently transferred title to these properties to the State. Most of these lands - primarily in the Negev and the Galilee - were used to build kibbutzim, moshavim and development towns for the Jewish population. [2] Map available at: http://www.btselem.org/Downloads/Jerusalem_Separation_Barrier_Eng.PDF By: Ali Abunimah
Date: 28/11/2005
×
Did UK Foreign Secretary Jack Straw Help Sell Out Jerusalem?
DOCUMENTS OBTAINED BY EI UNDER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT: TOP UK OFFICIALS VIOLATED INTERNATIONAL LAW, HELPED BRITISH FIRM PROFIT FROM ISRAELI OCCUPATION OF JERUSALEM WHILE ASSURING PUBLIC OF OPPOSITE. PAPER TRAIL LEADS RIGHT TO FOREIGN SECRETARY JACK STRAW UK Foreign Secretary Jack Straw was asked by his officials to personally lobby the Israeli government to award a contract to a British firm which, in breach of international law and long-standing UK policy, extends Israel's administrative and legal structures into Occupied East Jerusalem, an exclusive EI investigation can reveal. lobby the Israeli government to award a contract to a British firm which, in breach of international law and long-standing UK policy, extends Israel's administrative and legal structures into Occupied East Jerusalem, an exclusive EI investigation can reveal. New documents obtained by EI under the UK's Freedom of Information Act (2000) from the Department of Trade and Industry indicate that Straw was asked to back the bid, while UK officials dismissed concerns that the company's work could violate British policy and UN resolutions on the status of Jerusalem. In fact, UK officials have repeatedly and misleadingly reassured the public they would not support any work by firms in Occupied East Jerusalem when the record shows just the opposite. The active role of British officials in helping the firm secure the contract was first revealed by EI last April. Under the contract, signed with the Israeli Ministry of Finance on 1 February 2005, Sheffield-based consulting firm A4e established an employment center in Jerusalem and operates programmes as part of the "Israel Works" welfare reform scheme. Israel Works, modeled on a programme in the American state of Wisconsin, is the brainchild of former Israeli Prime Minister and Finance Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. UK support for A4e's bid violates British policy and international law because the UK government, in compliance with UN Security Council resolutions, officially rejects Israel's claim that East Jerusalem is part of Israel. The UK recognizes de jure Israeli sovereignty over West Jerusalem, conquered by Israel in 1948, but the UK officially considers East Jerusalem, conquered by Israel in 1967, to be occupied territory subject to protections of the Fourth Geneva Convention. In deference to this policy, the British Embassy in Tel Aviv has no jurisdiction over Occupied East Jerusalem and is supposed to undertake no activities there. British interests in the Occupied Territories, including East Jerusalem, are represented by a separate Consulate-General in the Shaykh Jarrah district of East Jerusalem that maintains relations with the Palestinian Authority. The new documents reveal that in violation of the UK's own policy on Jerusalem, an official at the British Embassy in Tel Aviv emailed A4e executives that with respect to supporting the company's efforts to secure the bid, "We are the post responsible, not the BCG [British Consulate-General] in [East] Jerusalem." In other words, in every respect, British officials in Tel Aviv were treating Occupied East Jerusalem as if it were a part of sovereign Israel. British officials even moved to quash concerns among A4e executives that the July 2004 International Court of Justice (ICJ) advisory opinion reaffirming the illegality of Israel's occupation and annexation of the eastern part of the city would dampen official support for its bid. UK Ambassador to Israel, Simon McDonald, wrote a "letter of comfort" to a senior A4e executive dated 18 August 2004, assuring the executive, whose name was redacted from the letter by the British government, that, "developments such as the recent advisory opinion by the International Court of Justice on the Israel's Security barrier [sic] and related activity in the UN [...] will not affect our support for British companies who are operating in or would like to work with Israeli businesses or organisations." The letter confirmed that the Embassy "will continue to assist and support A4e's efforts to enter the Israeli market." British officials apparently attached the highest importance to securing the bid for the UK firm, even drafting in Foreign Secretary Jack Straw. On 23 November 2004, Barry Grossman, the Deputy Director of Trade & Investment at the Tel Aviv Embassy wrote to A4e executives that: "Foreign Secretary Jack Straw is due to visit Israel for a number of high level meetings. We have therefore taken the opportunity to include in his briefing material information about A4e and its bid. We hope that he will raise this issue with Israeli officials." The documents released to EI under the Freedom of Information Act do not indicate whether Straw did actually raise the issue or whether such intervention contributed to the success of the A4e bid. UK officials have acknowledged that support for A4e's bid would have been improper if the proposed work covered East Jerusalem. On March 23, 2005, Peter Stephenson, the director of the UK Trade and Investment office at the Tel Aviv embassy assured EI that, "We have already advised A4e that, as British Government policy clearly states, we cannot and will not support any work emanating from this winning bid if it covers operations in East Jerusalem and the surrounding settlements that have been annexed to the city by Israel." The documents obtained by EI indicate that the same assurance was given to other groups expressing concern about UK government support for A4e's bid, including the Sheffield Palestine Solidarity Campaign. The UK government released no documents backing the claims that its officials had warned A4e that they could not support work in East Jerusalem. On the contrary, Ambassador McDonald's letter seems to show that the government went out of its way to assure A4e of its support despite the growing international concern about Israel's efforts to illegally alter the status of Jerusalem. British officials have remained silent about whether and when they knew that they were assisting A4e to profit from Israel's occupation of East Jerusalem in violation of UK policy. There is no question, however, that from the very start it was obvious that the Israeli government tender on which A4e bid included work in Occupied East Jerusalem and the surrounding settlements. It is implausible that UK officials, especially those in the Tel Aviv Embassy did not know this or would not have suspected it. Their actions raise the question as to whether they knowingly violated UK government policy and international law and then misled the public about it. The Israeli government tender sought bids for companies to operate pilot projects in four official Israeli administrative regions: Nazareth, Hadera, Ashkelon and Jerusalem. As official Israeli maps clearly show, and decades-long Israeli policy has held, Israel considers the region of Jerusalem to include all of Occupied East Jerusalem and the surrounding settlements including some of the largest of all the West Bank colonies, like Gilo, Har Homa and Ramot. Nor was Israel trying to conceal the fact that it intended the winning bidder to work in Occupied East Jerusalem. The Israeli Finance Ministry's public affairs office confirmed to EI on 24 March 2005 that the scheme to be operated by A4e "includes neighbourhoods in East Jerusalem." Separately, this was confirmed by Iris Ginsburg, an official in the budget department of the Israeli Finance Ministry. A4e has also made its intentions to work in Occupied East Jerusalem clear. The Jerusalem Post, based on an interview with A4e CEO Mark Lovell, reported that company executives "intend to open strategically-located satellite offices, allowing comfortable access to the program's services for the city's population groups, two of which - the haredi and Arab sectors - are the populations with the lowest rate of participation in the workforce." ("A British vision of the Wisconsin Plan for Jerusalem," 4 February 2005) Ironically, the new revelations of official British collaboration with the Israeli occupation of East Jerusalem come as the Israeli government accused the UK Foreign Office of being "unrelentingly pro-Palestinian" (The Guardian, 26 November 2005). The Israeli outburst followed a report in The Guardian that a leaked secret Foreign Office document prepared for EU foreign ministers says Israeli policies are designed to prevent Jerusalem from becoming a Palestinian capital, particularly settlement expansion in and around the city (25 November 2005). The document, which states "Israeli activities in Jerusalem are in violation of both its Roadmap (peace plan) obligations and international law," calls for tougher EU action to counter the Israeli campaign. According to The Guardian, the secret report was written by UK diplomats at the Consulate-General in Occupied East Jerusalem. Their well-meaning efforts to rein in Israel's aggression face an uphill struggle, not only against other EU governments like Italy's which have sought to neutralize any pressure on Israel, but apparently also from their own colleagues at the British embassy in Tel Aviv who have aided and abetted Israel's occupation of East Jerusalem while helping British firms to make money from it. Ali Abunimah is a co-founder of The Electronic Intifada
Read More...
By: Joharah Baker for MIFTAH
Date: 27/05/2013
×
Believing in Jerusalem
Last week, Israel barred a UNESCO fact-finding mission from entering the country, charging that the Palestinians had ‘politicized’ the mission before it had even arrived. The mission was tasked with looking into conditions of historical sites in the Old City of Jerusalem, something Israel apparently found to be very threatening. Looking at the state of Jerusalem’s eastern sector today, it is understandable why Israel would not want UNESCO or anyone else walking around the Old City, especially the Palestinian-populated parts of it. Because anyone who does, will see the devastation that Israel and its settlers have wreaked on one of the oldest and most beautiful cities in the world. Excavation works are being conducted in and around the Aqsa Mosque to make way for more Jewish construction at the place where Waqf authorities say Ottoman and Abbasid artifacts have long been tucked away. A Muslim graveyard is being dug up just outside the Old City’s Jaffa Gate, to build – ironically – a museum of tolerance. Today, two stores were forcefully taken over by Jewish settlers in Al Hakari, one of the neighborhoods in the Muslim quarter and every day, it seems that more and more homes are either being demolished by Israeli municipality authorities or being taken over by Jewish settlers. The “Judiazation” of Jerusalem is a term many Palestinians and Arabs use for what Israel is doing in the city. In a nutshell, it is the long-term plan Israel is gradually carrying out to change the Arab Palestinian character of Jerusalem. This means demolishing old and historical structures, displacing Palestinians, handing over their homes to settlers and trying to erase the Palestinian or Arab history of the city. The sad truth is that, on the surface, Israel has succeeded in this to a large extent. Pockets of Jewish settlers now live in the heart of Muslim quarters and aim to take over more and more. Sheikh Jarrah, one of the more affluent Palestinian neighborhoods of Jerusalem, is now pierced with Jewish flags waving from homes that have been wrestled from their Palestinian owners, and Israel’s light rail train cuts right down through Palestinian neighborhoods outside of the city center. The train, of course, is not meant to service the Palestinian population but rather to connect Jewish neighborhoods and settlements in the city, but the area confiscated from Shufat and Beit Hanina for its construction simply fell into the plan. What the UNESCO mission would not have seen even if they made it into the Old City is the overall humiliation that the Palestinian population of Jerusalem must endure on a daily basis because of Israel’s military occupation. Trips to the Israeli ministry of interior must be made just to prove that one lives in the city for fear that their residency rights may be revoked; young Palestinian men are stopped randomly by Israeli soldiers to check their ID cards or just to harass them, and settlers are always given the luxury of maximum security whenever they walk the streets. If settlers want to march through the city, the Palestinians are told to close their shops, are barred for hours from reaching their homes if they run along the path of the march and are always the ones blamed if any kind of confrontation between the two sides breaks out. Jerusalem is being squeezed by these measures more and more each day. But there is always that glimmer of hope, that strength that shines through proving that all is not lost. On Shavuot, Israeli settlers and extremists poured into the Old City, singing loudly, banging on the shop doors and waving huge Israeli flags. The sight was disconcerting to say the least. However, the afternoon of that same day, at Damascus Gate, passersby were met with a completely different scene. Palestinian flags waved in determined Palestinian hands under the threatening eye of heavily armed Israeli police and soldiers. The youths were fearless, demanding freedom, with strong, unrelenting voices. The sight of the Palestinian flag waving at the entrance to Damascus Gate was a breath of fresh air. All is not lost and never will be because hope is eternal and determination and strength come from a never-ending spring. That day at Damascus Gate is what all Palestinians must keep in their minds’ eye in spite of the daily oppression of the occupation. No matter how many missions Israel bars from entering or how many houses it takes over, there will always be those brave souls who, despite the risks, will always raise Palestine’s flag. Joharah Baker is a Writer for the Media and Information Department at the Palestinian Initiative for the Promotion of Global Dialogue and Democracy (MIFTAH). She can be contacted at mid@miftah.org.
By: Joharah Baker for MIFTAH
Date: 20/05/2013
×
Let Mohammed rest in peace
There is no point falling into the pit of countering the claims being made about the death of Mohammed Al Durra, the 12-year old boy from Gaza whose videotaped killing was seen around the world. The boy, crouching in fear behind is equally afraid father as bullets whizzed around them, was killed admittedly by the Israeli army. Later, the army recanted after investigating the tape, saying Durra was killed by Palestinian fire instead. Well now, Israel is changing its story altogether, saying he was not killed at all. In fact, he was probably not even wounded and the French channel that broadcast the footage and brought some pretty bad rap to Israel, had most likely filmed a charade. The reason why I will not waste my time countering this claim is that even with the great lengths the Israeli government went to to prove that the boy was never killed, it could not provide any irrefutable proof that Mohammed Al Durra – who would be 25 now – is still alive. No pictures, no testimonies, no hospital or morgue officials giving statements to refute his death, have been provided. Only sketchy information about ‘poor quality footage’ and the fact that it seems as though the boy moved his arm after he had slumped over his father following the explosion. My point is this: indeed, Mohammed Durra’s death was at least one of the catalysts that fueled the second Intifada, and thus, was an important event in the history of the Palestinians. However, more importantly – most importantly to me –is the fact that this is about a boy who died in sheer terror, with his distraught father futilely trying to shelter him from the barrage of bullets coming their way. Mohammed Al Durra was a boy, with a life, a family and friends. He died a horrible death and now he is being made to die a second one. I did not know Mohammed or his family, but I can only imagine how awful it must be for them to read these claims now and feel the pain of losing their child all over again. If nothing else, this is disrespect for human life of the worst kind. Some may postulate that the rehashing of the Durra case is a personal jab at the French cameraman who shot the footage, Charles Enderlin. Perhaps. But as a Palestinian who has seen the pain endured by numerous families who receive the horrible news that their sons or daughters have been killed by the Israeli army, my concern is for his family and for his memory. He should be left to rest in peace. If Israel has axes to grind with French journalists or with the international community for holding it accountable for its actions, then so be it. Israel is not lacking in the public relations department. That being said, there is just one decent thing left to do. Leave Mohammed Al Durra and his memory alone. Joharah Baker is a Writer for the Media and Information Department at the Palestinian Initiative for the Promotion of Global Dialogue and Democracy (MIFTAH). She can be contacted at mid@miftah.org.
By: Joharah Baker for MIFTAH
Date: 13/05/2013
×
Recognition and justice is our demand
This week Palestinians will commemorate Al Nakba, the catastrophe that befell the Palestinian people when Israel was founded. Every year, Palestinians hang placards pointing to the right of return, they carry keys symbolizing the homes they were forced to leave and could not return to and remember the Palestine that was lost to them 65 years ago. This year will be no different. Every May 15, Palestinian recall their catastrophe and demand justice. They demand that they are granted the right of return for those who were made refugees virtually overnight and were then relegate to a life they did not choose. But more than anything, they demand recognition of the tragedy that befell them rather than a denial that it ever happened, or worse, that it was of their own making. It has been 65 years since Israel was established in 1948, which means those who were cast into exile are either very old or have long passed. Those who experienced the Nakba are now few and far between, clinging to those few precious memories of a small garden in front of their house in Jaffa or of the salty smell of the sea in their neighborhood in Haifa. The rest of us are either descendants of these refugees or ordinary Palestinians who feel their cause is our cause because we are one people. But the Palestinians have made one thing clear. The refugee issue will not die with the last refugee. It is felt nationwide, the loss, the injustice and the fact that those who were forced from their homes have mostly passed, longing for their beloved homes. We cannot turn back time. What was lost has been altered, destroyed, changed or taken over by Israel’s newcomers. What we can do is hold on to the right to be recognized, for the injustice to be rectified in word and deed and for Palestine to never be lost in our minds or hearts. Joharah Baker is a Writer for the Media and Information Department at the Palestinian Initiative for the Promotion of Global Dialogue and Democracy (MIFTAH). She can be contacted at mid@miftah.org.
Contact us
Rimawi Bldg, 3rd floor
14 Emil Touma Street, Al Massayef, Ramallah Postalcode P6058131
Mailing address:
P.O.Box 69647 Jerusalem
Palestine
972-2-298 9490/1 972-2-298 9492 info@miftah.org
All Rights Reserved © Copyright,MIFTAH 2023
Subscribe to MIFTAH's mailing list
|