Foreword

This document is authored by the producers of Holy Land Peace*. It is an instrument inspired by the BDS Declaration of 2005** and is issued in the same spirit and for the same ultimate goal – justice, liberation from oppression, and dignity of the people of Palestine – those fortunate enough to have escaped the ethnic cleansing of 1947-1949 and later years; those internally displaced in Israel; those fortunate enough to have retained their historical/ancestral homes and lands in the illegally Occupied Palestinian Territories; those internally displaced in the illegally Occupied Palestinian Territories; and those in the near and far diaspora. The authors realize it is insufficient to merely publish and distribute this instrument. It is imperative that justice-seeking organizations worldwide adopt and support it, as well as persuade pertinent international authorities to implement it. The authors acknowledge that they are not a recognized Palestinian authority, and that such an authority must ultimately take ownership of this document. Until then, for the sake of order, please forward constructive suggestions to the authors.

Since World War I, grave injustices have befallen the Holy Land – Palestine and its people – Christians, Muslims, and Jews. This is not to say that injustice had not previously befallen the Holy Land. Injustice has been a byproduct of human nature since Cain killed Abel. Hordes of conquerors and occupiers have taken their turn in Palestine over the centuries. Since the turn of the 20th Century, humanity perceived and aggrandized itself as a species capable of wielding justice internationally, so this document addresses injustices incurred since that time.

What humans label “justice” is true justice only if applied equally and impartially. That is the purpose of the lady holding the scales of justice in wearing her blindfold. What purpose does it serve to have a “justice” system, when laws are not enforced equally? Sadly, when it comes to the Zionist state of Israel, Lady Justice has long traded her blindfold in for blinders. Our outreach is to all peace-seekers, in the hope that they embrace the above underlined postulate, giving credence and validity to this document.

The overview of injustices is outlined in two sections:

• Part I represents those injustices unwittingly adopted by the international community, whether due to its ignorance or clever Zionist manipulation.

• Part II represents those injustices rightfully condemned by the international community, but sadly, not yet corrected.

  Subsequent to the overview, the essential actions required for justice are outlined.

Injustices – Part I

• 1916: Great Britain “mandated” Palestine
  The altruistic aim of the Allies in WW-I was to liberate nation states from imperialism that they themselves may have governed. Instead, the Allies divvied up the Middle East among themselves via the secret Sykes-Picot Agreement between Britain, France and Russia.

• 1917: Balfour Declaration “promised” a national Jewish homeland in Palestine
  Influenced by European Zionists, this was an agreement by Europeans with Europeans, having never consulted the indigenous peoples of Palestine. Ironically, the declaration included language recognizing the needs and rights of the native Palestinian inhabitants. This sensitivity achieved the required perception of morality necessary to attain British support, but would be summarily dismissed upon implementation following World War II.

• 1917-1946: European Zionists illegally immigrated into Palestine
  British forces were unable to control the influx of illegal European Zionists into Palestine, as tens of thousands land-grabbed and formed illegal colonies.

• 1947: U.N. partitioned Palestine into two states
  Influenced by European Zionists, the newborn United Nations naively passed General Assembly Resolution 181, dividing Historic Palestine into Israel-55% and Palestine-45%. Highly contested, it completely ignored the indignant protests of the native Palestinians and supportive Middle Eastern nation states, themselves striving for nationalism and independence.

• 1947-1949: Zionists destroyed 500 villages and expelled 800,000 Palestinians
  No implementation plan was devised for the irresponsible U.N. Partition Plan. This empowered the Zionists to move quickly – Israel was established and recognized by the U.N., while well-funded, well-armed European Zionist forces attacked the poorly equipped Palestinian resistance. Besides the displaced refugees, this left more than a million Palestinians behind in the Palestinian territories, as well as newly-formed Israel.

• 1949: Israel aggressed to 78% of historical Palestine
  European Zionists, reacting quickly to U.N. Resolution 181, conquered and occupied 78% of the land, flouting the original allotment of 55%. This was and remains the Zionist grand design for Palestine – the ethnic cleansing of the indigenous population, along with all-out takeover of historic Palestine. The U.N. finally stepped in to protect the remaining 22% of the land via the 1949 Armistice. Ironically, the Palestinians were denied self-government – in some measure because their polity had been shattered and their population greatly scattered and in shock – and administrative control was “assigned” to Jordan and Egypt.

• 1947-Present: Zionists committed crimes against humanity
  In the name of “Israel”, Israeli, American, European, and other Zionists have committed unspeakable atrocities against the Palestinian people. For example, women and children were massacred at Deir Yassin (1948), Sabra and Shatila (1982), and Gaza (2005-present).

• 1949-Present: Israel established and maintained Apartheid internally
  European Zionists have maintained laws within Israel discriminating against Christians, Muslims, and non-European Jews. There is also well-documented racism in medicine, business, schools, courts, government, etc. For example, Israeli Basic Law states, "…may not participate in the elections if there is in its goals or actions a denial of the existence of the State of Israel as the state of the Jewish people…”.

• 1950-Present: Israel refused right-of-return to Palestinians
  In defiance of international law, Israel has repeatedly refused displaced Palestinians their inalienable right-of-return.

• 1960-Present: Israel established and maintained undeclared nuclear arms
  In 1960, the U.S. State Department determined the existence of an Israeli secret nuclear installation. 1967-1985, Israel collaborated with South Africa – another Apartheid state at the time – in secret nuclear development. In defiance of numerous U.N. resolutions (1979-1994), Israel has repeatedly refused U.N. inspection, and remains an undeclared nuclear power in addition to maintaining chemical and biological warfare capabilities.

• 1967-Present: Israel illegally attacked and occupied the Palestinian Territories
  In defiance of international law, in what is now known as “the six day war”, Israel attacked and took control of the Palestinian Territories – the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem. In complete disregard of international law, Israel annexed East Jerusalem and has continued to illegally occupy these lands, brutalizing the residents, building illegal settlements, populating these settlements with armed settlers from around the globe, while expropriating land and water rights.

• 2002-Present: Israel built and maintained the Apartheid Wall
  In defiance of international law, Israel has built a separation wall, extending well into the illegally Occupied Palestinian Territories. Numerous analysts term the wall a physical manifestation of a system of oppression and discrimination richly fitting any accepted definition of Apartheid. Such a regime was exposed, confronted, and finally brought to an end in South Africa.

The international community regrettably acquiesced to the injustices bulleted in Part I. The result is that the official state of Israel consists of 78% of Historic Palestine. Although this fact is almost impossible for all Palestinians to digest, that is the way things are.

It is crucial to emphasize that unequivocally, Palestine should have been a united independent state to begin with. Christian, Muslim, Jewish, and other Palestinians had lived in harmony for centuries despite the many empires, conquerors, and exploitive occupiers. Palestine had frequently been a haven for Jews who were persecuted in other lands. A program could have easily been devised for controlled immigration of Jews and others seeking religious and/or social sanctuary. Such a solution would have been better accepted by native Holy Land inhabitants. However, short of an attack of conscience on the part of the Israeli government and people, there is no present remedy for the blunders documented in Part I.

Therefore at this time, only the injustices in Part II can be reasonably addressed – but addressed they must be! Israel must be stopped from operating outside of international and moral law with impunity. The international community must enforce justice universally.

Justice Essentials

• Israel must immediately, unconditionally, and completely withdraw from the illegally Occupied Palestinian Territories
  International law demands that Israel withdraw from Palestinian Territories. Reference numerous U.N. Security Council resolutions – at the minimum, Resolutions 242, 338, and 446. This withdrawal must include relinquishing all control and influence on borders and ports of Palestinian Territories.

• U.N. must sanction Israel for international laws broken during the last 65 years
  Sanctions must include compensation for property and personal damages resulting from the ethnic cleansing and illegal occupation, as well as future economic and political sanctions befitting Israel’s 65 years of ongoing international crimes.

• Israel must honor the inalienable right-of-return of displaced Palestinians
  International law demands that Israel allow displaced Palestinians their right-of-return to modern-day Israel. Although this will be logistically difficult to accomplish, an international committee must enforce this right with minimal disruption to Israeli citizens, as well as Palestinian refugees. Many U.N. resolutions guarantee this right – at the minimum, Resolution 194.

• Israel must immediately release all Administrative Detention prisoners
  International law precludes any government from detaining individuals without charge, legal counsel, or fair trial.

• Israel must allow independent review of Palestinian political prisoners
  Because of its infamous record of injustice, Israel must submit all cases of political imprisonment to international audit.

• Israel must immediately dismantle the Apartheid Wall at its own expense
  The International Court of Justice ruled on 7/9/2004 that the “Separation Wall” was illegal. This ruling must be enforced! Israel must compensate land owners and others who have suffered from this atrocity.

• Israel must amend any laws discriminating on the basis of religion or ethnicity
  In the same spirit as South Africa was “persuaded” to end its Apartheid, the same must be accomplished in Israel.

• An international War Crimes Tribunal must be held for Zionist war criminals
  In the same spirit that the Nuremberg Trials brought justice to Nazi war criminals, the same must be applied to Zionist war criminals – Israeli, European, American, or other.

• Israel must dismantle its nuclear weapons and facilities
  A host of U.N. resolutions demanded that Israel subject itself to inspection – at the minimum, Resolution 35-157. Israel must dismantle its undeclared nuclear arsenal and allow U.N. inspection. For that matter, all world powers, including the U.S., should eliminate their nuclear arsenals. Chemical and biological warfare should also be discontinued worldwide.

The countries of the Euro-Mediterranean partnership, guided by the principles and objectives of the Barcelona Declaration, are united in the struggle against terrorism. The threat that terrorism poses to the lives of our citizens remains serious and terrorist attacks seriously impair the enjoyment of human rights. We remain determined to strengthen cooperation and co-ordination to respond to this global challenge. Today, we reiterate our total condemnation of terrorism in all its forms and manifestations and our determination to eradicate it and to combat its sponsors.

We have exerted considerable effort and had significant success in combating terrorism. We must continue to prevent terrorists accessing money and weapons, to disrupt their plans and disrupt their networks and to bring them to justice, by strengthening international cooperation. Our response must remain proportionate and solidly anchored within international and domestic legal frameworks that ensure respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. We must not imperil the democratic values to which we are committed.

We confirm that we will:

• implement in full all Security Council resolutions addressing the issue of terrorism, ensuring respect for the Charter of the United Nations, international law and international humanitarian law;
• strive to achieve the ratification and implementation of all 13 UN Counter-Terrorism Conventions;
• welcome the work on the development of the UNSG’s strategy in the fight against terrorism and co-operate with UN anti terrorism bodies;
• encourage the full implementation of the standards established by the Financial Action Task Force;
• exchange information on a voluntary basis on terrorists and their support networks, in accordance with international and national law;
• work bilaterally and in accordance with national legislation to develop our effective and operational co-operation to disrupt networks and bring individuals involved in terrorist acts to justice;
• refuse asylum to terrorists and deny them safe haven in accordance with international law;
• share expertise and best practices on countering terrorism on a voluntary basis, including through technical assistance;
• ensure respect for human rights in the fight against terrorism in accordance with international law;
• Consider convening a high level conference under the auspices of the UN to formulate an international response to terrorism in all its aspects and manifestations, following agreement on a comprehensive convention on international terrorism.

Terrorism can never be justified. If we are to succeed in the long term in enabling international institutions, governments to stop terrorism we need to address all its causes. We recognise the links between peace, security, social and economic development and human rights. We will continue to do all we can to resolve conflict, end occupation, confront oppression, reduce poverty, promote good governance and human right, improve intercultural understanding and ensure respect for all religions. Such actions serve directly the interests of the people of the Euromed region and work against the interests of the terrorists and their networks.

To View the Full Document as PDF (128 KB)

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

JERUSALEM, 31 May 2006 – THE UNITED NATIONS and a number of NGOs operating in the occupied Palestinian territory today launched an emergency Appeal for additional funding in the face of a deepening humanitarian crisis.

With the Palestinian Authority operating at only a quarter of its 2005 budget, access to food, jobs and basic services are seriously under threat.

The worsening situation has prompted humanitarian agencies to revise upwards their 2006 emergency Appeal by 80 per cent – from $215million to $385 million. The bulk of the new funding will go towards boosting emergency employment programmes, expanding food aid and increasing the amount spent on essential medical supplies to cover shortages.

“We have been compelled to revise our original Appeal in the face of the desperate need. It is particularly aimed at assisting the most vulnerable Palestinians, including children who make up half the population”, said David Shearer, Head of the UN’s Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs.

“The World Food Programme warns that growing numbers of people are unable to cover their daily food needs and other agencies report basic services such as health care and education are deteriorating and set to worsen much further”, he added.

UNRWA Commissioner-General Karen Koning AbuZayd says that “the impact of the deteriorating economic conditions is becoming visible by the day.”A clear sign is the dramatic increase in demands for emergency employment under our programmes," she says. "Over 100,000 refugees are waiting in line to get short-term jobs in Gaza, and the same programme in the West Bank has seen an increase of 600% in applications compared to April last year. In the West Bank, we normally get 1,500 applications for teachers' jobs every year - this year we are already at 5,000."

Humanitarian agencies revised the emergency Appeal to international donors in the wake of:

• The non-payment of salaries since March to 152,000 Palestinian Authority workers, including hospital staff and teachers
• Shortages in basic services, including medical care
• The prospect of violence increasing as a result of factional in-fighting and growing desperation in the wake of job losses
• The increasing restrictions imposed by Israel on Palestinian movement that has stifled the economy

“The humanitarian community is not in a position to provide the full range services offered by the Palestinian Authority – and has no ambitions to do so. But we are anxious to help support those structures that have delivered services such as health and education so effectively over many years and to which donors have contributed more than $7bn,” said David Shearer.

For more information please contact

- Gina Benevento, UNRWA, 054-240-2631, 059-9-428008
- Juliette Touma, OCHA, 054-81-555-46
- Chris Gunness, UNSCO, 054-5-627-825

This paper examines the humanitarian risks in the West Bank and Gaza Strip in the coming months. It warns of an extremely bleak humanitarian situation for the Palestinian people.

The analysis has been organised according to three scenarios. Scenario 1 reflects the current situation. A more critical forecast is related to the withdrawal of funding to the Palestinian Authority (PA). This has prompted humanitarian agencies to initiate planning based on two further scenarios (2 and 3).

Scenario 1 The current situation follows patterns in recent months where restrictions on Palestinian movement and access to services continue and Israeli security measures have intensified. At the end of 2005, the UN and other humanitarian agencies launched a Consolidated Appeal for $215m to meet emergency needs arising from this situation. For the first three months of this year, this Appeal has largely been under-funded – funds received to date stand at 8%.1 Consequently agencies have not been able to implement many planned programmes.

Scenario 2 Israeli-enforced movement restrictions and security measures continue and the Palestinian Authority's (PA) budget and services are only partially funded.

Scenario 3 Continued movement restrictions and security measures and the PA budget and services are not funded at all.

To View the Full Report as PDF (140 KB)

Introduction

1. Established in 1968 by General Assembly resolution 2443 (XXIII), the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People and Other Arabs of the Occupied Territories is composed of three Member States.

2. These Member States are Sri Lanka (represented by the Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka to the United Nations, H.E. Ambassador Prasad Kariyawasam, serving as Chairperson; on 1 April 2005, he replaced the former Chairman of the Committee, H.E. Ambassador Bernard A. B. Goonetilleke); Senegal (represented by the Permanent Representative of Senegal to the United Nations Office at Geneva, H.E. Ambassador Ousmane Camara); and Malaysia (represented by the Alternate Permanent Representative of Malaysia to the United Nations, H.E. Ambassador Mohd Radzi Abdul Rahman, who, as of 25 May 2005, replaced the former member of the Committee, H.E. Ambassador Rastam Mohd Isa).

3. The Special Committee reports to the Secretary-General. Its reports are reviewed in the Special Political and Decolonization Committee (Fourth Committee) of the General Assembly.

Mandate

4. The mandate of the Special Committee, as set out in resolution 2443 (XXIII) and subsequent resolutions, is to investigate Israeli practices affecting the human rights of the population of the occupied territories. For the purposes of the present report, the occupied territories are those remaining under Israeli occupation, namely the occupied Syrian Golan, the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip. The persons covered by resolution 2443 (XXIII) and therefore the subject of the investigation of the Special Committee are the civilian population residing in the areas occupied as a result of the hostilities of June 1967 and those persons normally resident in the areas that are under occupation but who left those areas because of the hostilities.

5. The human rights of the Palestinian people and other Arabs in the occupied territories are referred to by the Security Council in its resolution 237 (1967) as “essential and inalienable human rights” and also find their legal basis in the protection afforded by international law, in particular in such circumstances as military occupation and, in the case of prisoners of war, capture. By resolution 3005 (XXVII), the General Assembly requested the Special Committee to investigate as well allegations concerning the exploitation and the looting of the resources of the occupied territories, the pillaging of its archaeological and cultural heritage and interferences in the freedom of worship in its holy places. 6. The “policies” and “practices” affecting human rights that come within the scope of investigation by the Special Committee refer, in the case of “policies”, to any course of action consciously adopted and pursued by the Government of Israel as part of its declared or undeclared intent; while “practices” refer to those actions which, irrespective of whether or not they were in implementation of a policy, reflect a pattern of behaviour on the part of the Israeli authorities towards the civilian population in the occupied areas.

7. The Special Committee bases its work on human rights standards and obligations as defined in particular by the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Geneva Convention of 12 August 1949 relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War and the Geneva Convention of 12 August 1949 relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, the Hague Convention of 14 May 1954 for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, and the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land. The Special Committee also relies on those resolutions relevant to the situation of civilians in the occupied territories adopted by the General Assembly, the Security Council, the Economic and Social Council and the Commission on Human Rights.

8. As in previous years, the General Assembly, in its resolution 59/121 requested “the Special Committee, pending complete termination of the Israeli occupation, to continue to investigate Israeli policies and practices in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and other Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, especially Israeli violations of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, and to consult, as appropriate, with the International Committee of the Red Cross according to its regulations in order to ensure that the welfare and human rights of the peoples of the occupied territories are safeguarded and to report to the Secretary-General as soon as possible and whenever the need arises thereafter”. The Assembly also requested the Special Committee “to continue to investigate the treatment of prisoners and detainees in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and other Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967”.

To View the Full Report as PDF (144 KB)

Summary

During the past year, Israel’s decision to withdraw Jewish settlers and troops from Gaza has attracted the attention of the international community. This focus of attention on Gaza has allowed Israel to continue with the construction of the wall in Palestinian territory, the expansion of settlements and the de-Palestinization of Jerusalem with virtually no criticism. This report focuses principally on these matters.

Although uncertainty surrounds the full extent and consequences of Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza, it seems clear that Gaza will remain occupied territory subject to the provisions of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilians in Time of War, of 12 August 1949 (Fourth Geneva Convention) as a result of Israel’s continued control of the borders of Gaza. The withdrawal of Jewish settlers from Gaza will result in the decolonization of Palestinian territory but not result in the end of occupation.

In its advisory opinion of 9 July 2004, the International Court of Justice held that the wall currently being built by Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory is contrary to international law. It accordingly held that construction of the wall should cease and that those sections of the wall that had been completed in the Occupied Palestinian Territory should be dismantled. The Government of Israel has paid no heed to the advisory opinion and continues with the construction of the wall.

The wall has serious consequences for Palestinians living in the neighbourhood of the wall. Many thousands are separated from their agricultural lands by the wall and are denied permits to access their lands. Even those who are granted permits frequently find that gates within the wall do not open as scheduled. As a result, Palestinians are gradually leaving land and homes that they have occupied for generations.

Most Jewish settlers in the West Bank are now situated between the Green Line (the accepted border between Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory) and the wall. Moreover, existing settlements in this zone — known as the “closed zone” — are expanding and new settlements are being built. Emboldened by the support they receive from the Government and the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), settlers have become more aggressive towards Palestinians and settler violence is on the increase.

The construction of the wall, the de-Palestinization of the “closed zone” and the expansion of settlements make it abundantly clear that the wall is designed to be the border of the State of Israel and that the land of the “closed zone” is to be annexed.

Israel has embarked upon major changes in Jerusalem in order to make the city more Jewish. Jewish settlements within East Jerusalem are being expanded and plans are afoot to link Jerusalem with the settlement of Ma’aleh Adumim with a population of 35,000, which will effectively cut the West Bank in two. Palestinian contiguity in East Jerusalem is being destroyed by the presence of Jewish settlements and byhouse demolitions. Some 55,000 Palestinians presently resident in the municipal area of East Jerusalem have been transferred to the West Bank by the construction of the wall. The clear purpose of these changes is to remove any suggestion that East Jerusalem is a Palestinian entity capable of becoming the capital of a Palestinian State.

The international community has proclaimed the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and the need to create a Palestinian State living side by side in peace and security with Israel. This vision is unattainable without a viable Palestinian territory. The construction of the wall, the expansion of settlements and the de-Palestinization of Jerusalem threaten the viability of a Palestinian State.

The occupation of the Occupied Palestinian Territory continues to result in major violations of human rights. There are some 8,000 Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails, whose treatment is alleged to fall well below internationally accepted standards. Freedom of movement is radically undermined by over 600 military checkpoints. Social and economic rights are violated. A quarter of the Palestinian population is unemployed and half the population lives below the official poverty line. Health and education services suffer and Palestinians have severe difficulties in accessing safe water. Housing remains a serious problem as a result of house demolitions conducted by the IDF in previous years. Women suffer disproportionately from these violations of human rights.

In 2004 the International Court of Justice handed down an advisory opinion in which it condemned as illegal not only the construction of the wall but many features of the Israeli administration of the Occupied Palestinian Territory. The advisory opinion was endorsed by the General Assembly on 20 July 2004 in resolution ES- 10/15. Since then little effort has been made by the international community to compel Israel to comply with its legal obligations as expounded by the International Court. The Quartet, comprising the United Nations, the European Union, the United States of America and the Russian Federation, appears to prefer to conduct its negotiations with Israel in terms of the so-called road map with no regard to the advisory opinion. The road map seems to contemplate the acceptance of certain sections of the wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and the inclusion of major Jewish settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory in Israeli territory. This process places the United Nations in an awkward situation as it clearly cannot be a party to negotiations that ignore the advisory opinion of its own judicial organ.

To view the Full Report as PDF (96 KB)